HUMAN beings, EVOLUTIONARY theories, SPECIES, and EARTH (Planet)
In this article, the author discusses the concept of humans and human transformation. It mentions the argument by evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould regarding the evolution of species, and states the position and role of humans on the earth. It also mentions the improvement in important biological traits for better information-processing abilities.
Natural history., Evolution (Biology), Natural history -- Philosophy., Evolution (Biology) -- Philosophy., Paleontologists -- United States -- Biography., Naturalists -- United States -- Biography., Biologists -- United States -- Biography., and Geologists -- United States -- Biography.
Philosophy of Science. Jan2015, Vol. 82 Issue 1, p1-20. 20p.
EVOLUTION (Biology), PALEONTOLOGY, PHILOSOPHY of science, and NATURAL law
Much of Stephen Jay Gould's legacy is dominated by his views on the contingency of evolutionary history expressed in his classic Wonderful Life. However, Gould also campaigned relentlessly for a "nomothetic" paleontology. How do these commitments hang together? I argue that Gould's conception of science and natural law combined with his commitment to contingency to produce an evolutionary science centered around the formulation of higher-level evolutionary laws. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
NATURAL selection, EVOLUTION (Biology), and EVOLUTIONARY theories
The article presents information on the book "The Structure of Evolutionary Theory," by Stephen Jay Gould. This book is about Darwinism and theory of evolution. Famous scientist Charles Darwin is often thought to have rescued the history of life from the superstitious fantasies of religion, by basing his theory on good, solid, empirical evidence. But, as Gould and noticed, the empirical evidence does not indicate that evolution proceeds by incremental, incessant natural selection, as Darwin claimed.
SUMMARY Samuel George Morton (1799-1851) was the most highly regarded American scientist of the early and middle 19th century. Thanks largely to Stephen Jay Gould's book The Mismeasure of Man, Morton's cranial capacity measurements of different races is now held up as a prime example of and cautionary tale against scientific racism. A team of anthropologists recently reevaluated Morton's work and argued that it was Gould, not Morton, who was biased in his analysis. This article is a reexamination of the Morton and Gould controversy. It argues that most of Gould's arguments against Morton are sound. Although Gould made some errors and overstated his case in a number of places, he provided prima facia evidence, as yet unrefuted, that Morton did indeed mismeasure his skulls in ways that conformed to 19th century racial biases. Gould's critique of Morton ought to remain as an illustration of implicit bias in science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]