Re: Nancy P is not perfect

On 7/26/05, Terry M. Gray <grayt@lamar.colostate.edu> wrote:
>
> Glenn, Bob, George, James, ...
>
> In general I loathe the fallacious connections between Darwin and the
> evils of the world as much as anyone. However, I think that it's fair
> to say that if an individual, after reflecting on his/her own
> intellectual development attributes to some author some impact on his/
> her own thinking, we ought to recognize that. If Stalin says that he
> was moved to atheism or Marxism or genocide or whatever because of
> his reading of Darwin, isn't that a legitimate connection to note?
> Stalin is responsible for his own intellectual development and the
> consequences of his thought.

 Ideas do have consequences and intellectual history is a legitimate
academic discourse. The question I have for those who have read Nancy P is
what is the depth of her analysis? Does she merely say Stalin said I got my
ideas from Darwin? Or, does she compare and contrast Stalin with Darwin to
see the extent of the influence? Much of what goes for "worldview analysis"
I have found to be the former where everything is reduced to shibboleths.
Hopefully, it is more on the order of the latter more serious intellectual
histories like Alistair McGrath writes.
Received on Tue Jul 26 14:09:38 2005