[lit-ideas] Re: Grice on Darwin (Was: Popper on Darwin)

  • From: Adriano Palma <Palma@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 15:39:32 +0000

no rush, it is abductive
________________________________
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf 
of Donal McEvoy [donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 28 May 2013 17:14
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Grice on Darwin (Was: Popper on Darwin)



________________________________
From: "Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx" <Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx>


>It is an unfortunate  fact that Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution by
natural selection is  typically discussed either as a speculative leap of
genius or as the  inevitable product of various sorts of religious,
political, scientific and  philosophical influences on him. In this
lecture I will present Darwin’s  discoveries in a very different light,
as the product of Darwin constantly  asking questions and pursuing long
and complex chain of inductive reasoning  in which his ability to
integrate apparently unrelated abstractions —“large  classes of facts” as
he sometimes refers to them in On the Origin of  Species—plays the key
role. To explore these aspects of Darwin’s research I  rely on the large
mass of unpublished notes, notebooks and correspondence  (now available
online) for it is here that one sees Darwin’s uncommon powers  of
inductive reasoning at work.>

Perhaps someone might care to flesh out this claimed "inductive reasoning" so 
we can see how "inductive" it really is - or reveal whether this is just yet 
another of those traditional but fraudulent claims made as to the role of 
"inductive reasoning" in science by people who really should better by now?

Donal
======= Please find our Email Disclaimer here-->: 
http://www.ukzn.ac.za/disclaimer =======

Other related posts: