 |
GetTextbooks.com
Compare Prices & Save up to 90% |
|
|
|
| Login | Sign up | My Wish List |
 | | The Philosophy of Biology (Oxford Readings in Philosophy) by David L. Hull (Editor), Michael Ruse (Editor) ISBN-10: 9780198752134 ISBN-10: 0-19-875213-X ISBN-13: 9780198752134 ISBN-13: 978-0-19-875213-4 Hardcover 1998-06-04 Oxford University Press, USA Find Lowest Price |
Editorials | ||
Product Description The aim of this series is to bring together important recent writings in major areas of philosophical inquiry, selected from a variety of sources, mostly periodicals, which may not be conveniently available to the university student or the general reader. The editors of each volume contribute an introductory essay on the items chosen and on the questions with which they deal. A selective bibliography is appended as a guide to further reading. The philosophy of biology today is one of the most exciting areas in philosophical inquiry. Drawing on work of the past decade, this volume brings together articles from the philosophy, history, and sociology of science, as well as many branches of the biological sciences, to consider issues including the nature of evolutionary theory, biology and ethics, the challenge from religion, and the social implications of biology today (in particular the Human Genome Project). The 36 articles in this collection are divided into 10 parts, each with an introduction by the editors. Spanning issues from epistemology across to ethics, the volume delves into the latest theoretical controversies as well as burning questions of contemporary social importance. Throughout the volume an attempt is made to offer positions from different perspectives, so that the reader will be challenged as well as informed. The Philosophy of Biology will be essential and fascinating reading for students of philosophy and biology as well as the general reader with an interest in the natural sciences and evolution. | ||
Reviews | ||
Another Ruse From the choice of a vague title to the choice of materials, the content of this book is really a subtle attack on science. I describe the attack as subtle because this book, read superficially, makes an attempt to appear as an impartial and an open-minded study of the merits of science as oppose to a theory of supernatural creation. Read it if you like but scrutinize it carefully. It omits the strongest material in favour of science, and pasted sections of the more amenable scientists such as Stephen Gould and Ernst Mayr, and slants them towards the ultimate proposition: Science has not disproved intelligent design 100% and so a supernatural creator remains a viable possibility. It does include a chapter that advocates the depoliticising of the stem cell debate. To that credit must be given. It is not clear how that can be achieved, given that many opponents of stem cell research oppose it on philosophical or medical and ethical grounds when they really oppose them on religious grounds. "Philosophy of Biology" is also subtle in giving Richard Dawkins a couple of chapters, and so create the impression that both sides are covered; but the chapters for Dawkin were chosen so that they could be criticized, mainly in the Introduction and the other parts of the book. The use of both "philosophy" and "biology" as part of its title is probably intended to create the subtle message that this book is to be taken seriously because it is about philosophy and science, when in fact, it is about casting doubt on science. Yet, in the Introduction chapter the editor accuses Dawkins of being subtle. The reader has to judge for himself whether it was Dawkins or the editor that was being "subtle" in the sense of not openly declaring the real motives and intention of their work.This book seems to be designed to shoring up the intelligent designers knocked wobbly by science and needed a crutch to keep them on their feet, hoping to be saved by the bell. It is also to shore up the editor's own book, "Darwin and Design - Does Evolution Have a Purpose?". I would have given the book more than one star because many of the chapters written by the original writers were were well written, but since they were taken out of context, I thought that the book should not be given credit on that account. The reader best reads those books in their entirety. | ||