History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Beyond the Synthesis…and no new Synthesis

September 29th, 2008 · No Comments

We cited Cosmic Ancestry today on the Altenberg Conference. On the same page there is a quote from Massimo Pigliucci:

If there is one thing we don’t want it’s that there’s a bunch of theories out there, and they’re all equal
Massimo Pigliucci

I fear that it has already happened, and about to get worse. In fact it was always that way. The Altenberg conference is showing us how the Paradigm is starting to erode rapidly, but it is hard to see a new consensus arising in the way the Synthesis did, and somehow got ‘enforced’ for so long with so much obstruction of innovative thinking.
In a way it is better to do without an enforced evoluton Paradigm: it stultifies thought, and corrupts science with ideology. Historians don’t have a master paradigm for historical theory, why should evolution be any different?
The fact remains that the Darwinian Synthesis was bogus from beginning to end. Even on its own terms as biology it was false. Beyond the biology its misapplication to culture has been horrendous, and has discredited science.
Darwinism claimed a kind of metaphysical hegemony over reality, and that claim has always been laughable. There are so many things missing one has to wonder how the smartest scientists could be so naive. The problem has been extensively studied, in the context of Positivism. But somehow this never applied to biological positivism.
In the meantime, an entire generation of students raised in the style of arrogant Dawkins/Talk.origins Darwin jargon is at risk of being a cadre of reactionary deadbeats, as the world attempts to move.

Instead of a chaos of rival theories, I can recommend the method and conclusions of the study of the eonic effect, where the question of theory shows a connection to the noumenal/phenomenal issue, which amounts to saying that there are limits to our knowledge. This Kantian limit should be the referee for the rival fanaticisms, Darwinian and design, by reminding us that when these debates arise they are prima facie evidence of reaching Kantian metaphysical limits.

So there’s no next Synthesis. Nor will scientists be able to play priesthood on universal questions of reality.
Best to get used to it.

Tags: Evolution

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment