tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post7380033558753340993..comments2023-10-03T07:38:34.367-04:00Comments on The Evilutionary Biologist: This Week's Citation ClassicJohn Dennehyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02522347714772131441noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-27681756381335622512007-10-08T14:36:00.000-04:002007-10-08T14:36:00.000-04:00What controversy are you talking about? P.eq. is n...What controversy are you talking about? P.eq. is not about saltationism vs. gradualism. <BR/>And what do you mean, it "fails to make predictions"? There are many well-established facts that "fail to make predictions" or have great "explanatory power"<BR/><BR/>P. Eq adresses the fact that species in the fossil record are observed to be for very long periods in stasis, whereas the periods of time in which new species originate are comparatively much shorter.<BR/><BR/>I think stasis may not have "explanatory power" but ratherm it is a remarkable fact that opens important, profound questions.<BR/> Stasis was truly neglected before Gould put it back on the table...<BR/>Sadly, it STILL is neglected by many.A. Vargashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04876504431768677209noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-89548232922909937422007-10-08T14:03:00.000-04:002007-10-08T14:03:00.000-04:00It's not that I disagree with Punk Eek, but rather...It's not that I disagree with Punk Eek, but rather that I think its importance is substantially exaggerated. The theory purported to solve a critical controversy; it did not. The gradualism v. saltationism conflict is terribly overblown. Moreover, the theory does not possess any great explanatory power, fails to make good predictions, and is basically a descriptive metaphor of the fossil record.John Dennehyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02522347714772131441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-33113201036388035582007-10-08T13:52:00.000-04:002007-10-08T13:52:00.000-04:00"Spandrels, like every text, can only be fully und..."Spandrels, like every text, can only be fully understood within its political-cultural context. In the case of Spandrels, the context was the attempted intellectual lynching of a young science, sociobiology, which at its most uppity claimed to account for human nature in ways that were distasteful to many, not the least those with Marxist inclinations." (Q. Rev. Biol. 70:485) The part about hypotheses is good, too.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-91524790224694233742007-10-08T12:47:00.000-04:002007-10-08T12:47:00.000-04:00I agree that the punc.eq. part is the most boring ...I agree that the punc.eq. part is the most boring of gould's fat book. But being his most paleontological, personal achievement, I forgive him.<BR/>I just wander what indeed does John have against P. eq... what is so "terrible"?A. Vargashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04876504431768677209noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-33160144026014718732007-10-07T20:41:00.000-04:002007-10-07T20:41:00.000-04:00I'll have to finish reading The Worderful Life one...I'll have to finish reading The Worderful Life one day. I have read the summary of Gould's argument on rapid evolution and I have been skeptical of this. I am more in favor of Richard Dawkins' explanations. I do have a lot respect for Gould.Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10787987986606248260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-63265985340148336162007-10-07T18:41:00.000-04:002007-10-07T18:41:00.000-04:00Since I have read The Brick, I felt no need to buy...Since I have read The Brick, I felt no need to buy the PunkEek excerpt separately. But the rest of the book is most definitely not about PunkEek - it is about other areas which I find much more interesting than PunkEek, e.g., levels and units of selection, evo-devo, developmental constraints. I actually found the PunkEek section least interesting part of the book.Bora Zivkovichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10763808287050592569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-47188350772487832262007-10-07T09:25:00.000-04:002007-10-07T09:25:00.000-04:00I love the line from the Amazon's review of Punctu...I love the line from the Amazon's review of Punctuated Equilibria: <I>"It's a testimony to the density of the work that a single chapter is sufficient to make a complete and thorough book on its own. The publisher has simply cut away the first 745 pages and the last 318 of the original."</I><BR/><BR/>Part of my reluctance to tackle TSOET is that it is so dense.<BR/><BR/>Here's a quote from the Mark Ridley's NYT Book Review, <I>"But there is no disguising that it is a heavyweight work. The style ranges from verbosity to almost pathological logorrhea."</I><BR/><BR/>Barash also wrote a few choice lines about it in Human Nature Review 2002 Volume 2: 283-292, including: <I>"billowing clouds of verbal flatulence",</I> but you have to wonder about his objectivity.<BR/><BR/>Maybe I will read <I>Biased Embryos and Evolution </I>instead. <I>Understanding Scientific Prose </I>sounds interesting too. <BR/><BR/>Mike, you've captured Cretinist logic quite well...John Dennehyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02522347714772131441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-7857569369495908892007-10-07T01:35:00.000-04:002007-10-07T01:35:00.000-04:00"Take the belly button. Maybe it evolved to collec...<I>"Take the belly button. Maybe it evolved to collect lint so that cavemen would have a source of fiber for their diets!"</I><BR/><BR/>Nonsense. Belly button lint fibre is indigestible by human beings (it requires a capacious gut like that of a gorilla, which is therefor lintivorous). The belly button evolved so that cavemen would have a source of lint to use as tinder. Obviously, this means the belly button didn't evolve in humans until after we'd invented fire. This is confirmed by the fact no human belly button so far discovered pre-dates the discovery of fire.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-10896101396083534792007-10-06T21:00:00.000-04:002007-10-06T21:00:00.000-04:00For a quite alien perspecitve on this paper, peopl...For a quite alien perspecitve on this paper, people might be interested in the book called "Understanding Scientific Prose", by Jack Selzer. It's a collection of chapters by various 'Science Studies' scholars. These are people in the humanities who study how science works and what scientists do. <BR/><BR/>In this book they've all taken the Spandrels paper as their object of study. They discuss the use of citations (nifty!), the role of gender (??), narration and modernity. They subject it to deconstruction, rhetorical analysis, and structural analysis (does this undo the deconstruction?). Altogether a very alien perspective.<BR/><BR/>Amazon has it but for a high price - you can probably get it from your university library for free.Rosie Redfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06807912674127645263noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-73162159106160928882007-10-06T19:57:00.000-04:002007-10-06T19:57:00.000-04:00The Readers Digest version was not written by Goul...The Readers Digest version was not written by Gould, it was written by <A HREF="http://scienceblogs.com/clock/2007/07/books_biased_embryos_and_evolu_1.php" REL="nofollow">Wallace Arthur</A>.Bora Zivkovichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10763808287050592569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-70696067952618784152007-10-06T19:53:00.000-04:002007-10-06T19:53:00.000-04:00The "Reader's Digest" version is available. It's t...The "Reader's Digest" version is available. It's the relevant chapter on Punk Eek from <I><A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/Structure-Evolutionary-Theory-Stephen-Gould/dp/0674006135/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-1713889-8783132?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191714699&sr=8-1" REL="nofollow">The Structure of Evolutionary Theory</A></I>, and is simply entitled <I><A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/Punctuated-Equilibrium-Stephen-Jay-Gould/dp/0674024443/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-1713889-8783132?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191714729&sr=8-1" REL="nofollow">Punctuated Equilibrum</A></I>.T Ryan Gregoryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17028390880937952573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8317659032924518627.post-6702117382916132522007-10-06T19:50:00.000-04:002007-10-06T19:50:00.000-04:00I attended a great conference dedicated to this pa...I attended a great <A HREF="http://www.duke.edu/philosophy/bio/conference2003.html" REL="nofollow">conference</A> dedicated to this paper a few years back. It is to this day one of the most important papers in all of biology, if anything, getting more and more important with time.Bora Zivkovichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10763808287050592569noreply@blogger.com