From: zatavu-AT-excite.com
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 18:33:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: VS: PLC: Marxist Propaganda



On Wed, 12 Jul 2000 15:04:28 +0200, phillitcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
wrote:

>  
>  
>  zatavu-AT-excite.com wrote: It would
>  
>  > be enough proof to get it published (and what he claims was proof
enough to
>  > get him published).
>  
>      Almost.  Wilson, a biogeneticist, made a bid name for himself back in
the
>  1970's for coming up with an explanation of phenomena previously
troubling to
>  evolutionists, like altruism.  Wilson claimed that if you look at the
passing on
>  of genes (that's what 'fitness' is) from a communal, tribe, or larger
unit
>  perspective than the individual, then you can explain altruism -- I
sacrifice my
>  life so that bit of genetic material that I have in common with my fellow
>  Americans will be passed on.

Actually, he said altruism is based on selfishness, and that there are two
forms of selfishness, hard and soft, and that hard altruism is rare and is
usually based on some irrational belief, but that ultimately leads back to
selfishness (Mother Theresa was selfish because she believed helping people
would get her in heaven, and that it was her duty as a Christian to help
people and get them to heaven), while soft altruism is based on the family,
and does lead to the passing on of your genetic material because you are
protecting it through your altruism.
>  
>      Having written something like that that stirred up the biologists,
and seems
>  to involve 'society,' any publisher will subsequently publish pretty much
any
>  drivel he writes, *especially* if its not dry DNA stuff, but sexy-social
stuff.
>  Even his very bad poetry.  Once you got a name, you got a name that
sells,
>  quality (or lack thereof) notwithstanding.

Actually, he is known as one of the founders of sociobiology, which has led
to a lot of academic discussion and his inclusion in a textbook I will be
teaching from this fall, Donald Abel's "Theories of Human Nature." I can
tell you, as someone trained in molecular biology (I have a BS and two years
of grad school in molecular biology) that Wilson is right about what he says
about genetics, natural selection, and biology in general and that his
subsequent sociological, psychological, and philosophical views are
well-founded on that basis and on the basis of those fields as well (which I
base on my subsequent education in philosophy, psychology (what I have read
myself) and literature).

And personally, I don't find that DNA stuff so dry. I still find it sexy,
even if I have abandoned it for writing. :)

Troy Camplin
>  
>  
>  Ciao,
>  Reg
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>       --- from list phillitcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---





_______________________________________________________
Say Bye to Slow Internet!
http://www.home.com/xinbox/signup.html



     --- from list phillitcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---