"Scientific" position on philosophical questions

Bertvan@aol.com
Fri, 9 Jul 1999 12:12:51 EDT

Steve said:
Why don't you look at all sides of the issue. While I have run into
colleagues who IMO hold too strongly to the tenants of evolution, I find
that most of my colleagues (at least those faculty and students I have
conversed with) are not such passionate defenders of evolution. I just
finished teaching a philosophy of science class to PhD students and one
assignment I gave was to have the class write a letter to a hypothetical
school board that was considering teaching creation science along with
evolution. 80% of the class supported teaching both. So, instead of being
skeptical of biologists in general for our over-hyped passion for
evolution, why not be supportive of biologists because of those who are
interested in truth whatever it may be.

SOME advocates of neoDarwinian evolution believe in this "sociobiology",
but the field is not looked upon favorably by most "hard" scientists in
other biological disciplines. To say MOST evolutionists believe in what
the sociobiologists tout is grossly misleading. Please don't paint us all
with such a broad brush.

Hi Steve,

I do applaud you biologists who are breaking the mold and questioning the
rigid orthodoxy of neo Darwinism. It must have taken some courage, at least
at first. I advocate tolerance of all opinions, including those of young
earth creationists, and am confident that out of this diversity of beliefs a
good approximation of the truth will emerge. I suspect one gets a one sided
view on the internet, and am happy to know progress is being made. I
apologize to all those biologists offended by any generalizations I make,
and wish you could be as vocal as Dawkins and his supporters.

Bertvan