1. Darwin presents a theory of change. Is it teleological?
(Does it imply an endpoint towards which it is tending which might be thought
of as a ‘purpose’?)
2. Compare ‘natural selection’ and ‘selection under
domestication’. In what ways are they the same, in what ways different?
3. Darwin’s theory obviously conflicts with the first verses
of Genesis, and one could expect that it
upset those who wished to take them literally (and it did). But for those –
many – who treated those verses more as metaphors, why would Darwin’s theory
upset them (and it did)?
4. Darwin’s theories, when translated into the
socio-political world (which he didn’t) were said to inspire some of the most
racist and ethnocentric ideologies. How is that possible? Can evolution be used
for social questions at all?
5. Darwin's theory and Adam Smith's (in Wealth of Nations)
both concerned analyzing the outcome of many actions undertaken by individuals
with no thought of the outcome for the group as a whole. Compare the two
theories. Why does Darwin's bother the religiously minded more than Smith's?
Application 1: In
what sense is the history of an organization, a business, the Post Office, or a
sports team describable as an evolution in Darwin’s sense?
Application 2: Does
evolutionary thinking provide a way to analyze something like climate change.
No comments:
Post a Comment