02.23.08
The d-word bugaboo
The Language of Evolution: Do we want to use the d-word?
Posted on: February 23, 2008 9:52 AM, by Greg Laden
PZ Myers notes that Ken Miller is making a case for the term “design” in evolutionary biology. Miller simply claims that “design” comes from the usual, expected evolutionary processes (Natural Selection, etc.). PZ is not buying this bill of goods, and neither am I. One way to address this question might be to ask: “What would Darwin do?”
As pointed out here ad infinitum we need the ‘design’ word in a naturalistic sense, as with the distinction of G-design, N-design. And concepts of evo-dynamics that are different from selectionist explanation, natural teleology.
Facebook » The d-word bugaboo said,
February 23, 2008 at 4:55 pm
[…] http://darwiniana.com wrote an interesting post today on The d-word bugabooHere’s a quick excerptThe Language of Evolution: Do we want to use the d-word? Posted on: February 23, 2008 9:52 AM, by Greg Laden PZ Myers notes that Ken Miller is making a case for the term “design” in evolutionary biology. Miller simply claims that “design” comes from the usual, expected evolutionary processes (Natural Selection, etc.). PZ is not buying this bill of goods, and neither am I. One way to address this question might be to ask: “What would Darwin do?” As pointed out here ad infinitum we need the ‘d […]
Greg Laden said,
February 24, 2008 at 10:58 am
What do you mean by this:
“And concepts of evo-dynamics that are different from selectionist explanation, natural teleology.”
Stephen P. Smith said,
February 24, 2008 at 5:41 pm
I think that word “design” can be changed with “contrivance”. Note that life depends on contrivance, otherwise it would be unable to recognize its own affirmation found as a sense-certainty. Therefore, design (or contrivance) is fundamental in both evolution and development. We may say N-design, or G-design, but both of these versions come with contrived attachments that generate friction. It is better to use just design alone, or contrivanve alone, to find the better sense-certainty that does not carry the unwanted friction.
What is it about this that is so hard to understand?
nemo said,
February 24, 2008 at 6:28 pm
I comment on all this at
http://darwiniana.com/2008/02/24/more-on-the-d-word-bugaboo/