Darwin in the NYT

Carl Safina has a singularly obtuse essay in the NYT today: Darwinism Must Die So That Evolution May Live. As a title: cute but dumb. As an idea: huh?

He seems to be under the impression that identification of evolution with Darwin is some kind of dangerous cult. He argues nonsensically, for example, that Darwin created Creationism.

Into the breach: intelligent design. I am not quite saying Darwinism gave rise to creationism, though the “isms” imply equivalence. But the term “Darwinian” built a stage upon which “intelligent” could share the spotlight.


He notes that the idea of evolution came before Darwin. Quite so. So did the idea of intelligent design.

He trivializes Darwin's real idea, natural selection, while ignoring it's central role in explaining everything about evolution. No, Darwin didn't understand everything about biology, nor did he understand the genetic mechanism through which natural selection did its work. It was characteristic of his genius, though, that he understood what it was that he didn't understand.

Safina's remarks reveal at every point his ignorance of the history and historical importance of Darwin's dangerous idea, as Daniel Dennett described it.

Safina's final paragragh encapsulates his misunderstandings:

.

But our understanding of how life works since Darwin won’t swim in the public pool of ideas until we kill the cult of Darwinism. Only when we fully acknowledge the subsequent century and a half of value added can we really appreciate both Darwin’s genius and the fact that evolution is life’s driving force, with or without Darwin.


The first sentence wouldn't make sense even if there really was a "cult of Darwinism," which there isn't. The final sentence is even stupider. Who does he think is in this mysterious cult of Darwin worshipers is that doesn't acknowledge the subsequent 150 years of progress in biology? The cult doesn't exist, and the advance of biology since Darwin is universally acknowledged. Evolution is not "life's driving force," it's an explanation of why life is the way it is. Darwin's natural selection, though, is what drives evolution.

Safina is apparently a MacArthur fellow. He is also an idiot.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anti-Libertarian: re-post

The most pointed critique of social security and liberalism in general is the libertarian critique. The problem with libertarians, for a liberal, is that we have too much in common. We both believe in individual rights, tolerance of individual differences, and dislike government prescription of religion. The basic difference, it seems to me, is the different answers we give to Cain's (with thanks to the Captain - my original version had the corpse asking the question!) famous question: "Am I my brother's keeper?" That's not really my basic bitch against the libertarians though. My real complaint is the same as my complaint against most religion - its premise is a fraud. For those who can't stand to wait for the punchline, I believe that trying to implement libertarian principles leads to tyranny or social disintegration. Demonstrating that takes some historical (and pre-historical) context. For all but the last 15,000 or so of the 100,000 years the human spec...
Read more

Uneasy Lies The Head

Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown ........... Shakespeare Henry IV, Part II. So it is with us and our slightly distant primate cousins , so it seems. A 9-year study of wild baboons in Kenya by Princeton University and the Institute of Primate Research may turn conventional assumptions of alphas males upside down. The study found that alpha males have high testosterone levels, which allows them to dominate other baboons, get access to more food, and attract better mates. This is expected. Surprisingly, though, the alpha males also have high levels of stress hormone glucocorticoid, which scientists measured from their feces samples. In fact, the stress of alpha baboons was on par with low-ranking baboons. The convention wisdom is that access to food and females provides life security and thus less stress for dominant males. Conversely, weak males who are constantly threatened by starvation and physical violence from stronger males are thought to be more stressed. The st...
Read more

We Call it Soccer

The US played its best, and maybe only good game of World Cup, but lost thanks to brilliant goalkeeping by the Swedish keeper and the bizarre method soccer uses to settle ties when three US stars could not put the ball on frame from the 12 yard spot.  At the end it came down to a blocked shot that spun in by maybe a couple of centimeters. Well, that's football - too much like life.   Which brings me to a modest proposal.  Replace the thirty minute overtimes with as many 7-player 15 minute periods as needed to settle it.  Scoring should be much easier with fewer players.
Read more