Survival of the Fittess/Fitter

[Ophiolite]

Well, it certainly wouldn't be the last one. The thoughts of creationists bear no importance to increasing scientific understanding, and certain avenues of investigation shouldn't be limited just because it might increase tensions with those who are anti-science.

OK. I'm not making myself clear. (Look at my signature to see who is responsible for that.) Let me try again.

• The "Survival of the Fittest" sound bite is a cute, but inaccurate rendering of Darwinian theory.
• It is arguably more at odds with any reasonable reading of the Modern Synthesis and the more recent additions and proposed additions to that ensemble.
• Nothing I have said should in even a loose implicit way suggest that investigation of evolutionary competition should be constrained, or modified in any manner.
• The thoughts and consequent actions of Creationists have a massive impact upon the teaching of science in several countries, or regions and thus reduce the communication of scientific findings, and ultimately have the potential to reduce funding for research.
• Therefore it is irresponsible to unnecessarily sustain a useful piece of Creationist armament by continued use of the meme and/or the mental attitude that gives it unwarranted significance.

I hope that is clearer.

 

[That Guy 11200]

OK. I'm not making myself clear. (Look at my signature to see who is responsible for that.) Let me try again.

• The "Survival of the Fittest" sound bite is a cute, but inaccurate rendering of Darwinian theory.
• It is arguably more at odds with any reasonable reading of the Modern Synthesis and the more recent additions and proposed additions to that ensemble.
• Nothing I have said should in even a loose implicit way suggest that investigation of evolutionary competition should be constrained, or modified in any manner.
• The thoughts and consequent actions of Creationists have a massive impact upon the teaching of science in several countries, or regions and thus reduce the communication of scientific findings, and ultimately have the potential to reduce funding for research.
• Therefore it is irresponsible to unnecessarily sustain a useful piece of Creationist armament by continued use of the meme and/or the mental attitude that gives it unwarranted significance.

I hope that is clearer.

It is clearer. The first post I responded to made it seem like you had a problem with investigating the possibility in the first place:

"I suppose I'll just focus my ire on Dawkins for sustaining the meme with his selfish gene."

"His selfish gene" was an actual hypothesis that needed to be tested. So it shouldn't matter that he was "sustaining the meme".

 

[Ophiolite]

It is clearer. The first post I responded to made it seem like you had a problem with investigating the possibility in the first place:

"I suppose I'll just focus my ire on Dawkins for sustaining the meme with his selfish gene."

"His selfish gene" was an actual hypothesis that needed to be tested. So it shouldn't matter that he was "sustaining the meme".

I dislike Dawkins' approach. I was disappointed by passages in The Selfish Gene where he made inappropriately absolute statements - a personal bugbear for me. I find his emotional attacks on Creationists counterproductive, though his The Ancestor's Tale did lead me to forgive him for most of his other transgressions.

But, as you now understand, I have no opposition to investigating the extent of either competition, or cooperation. I just want it to be sure it is done rationally, not with an anticipated outcome. I think such bias would be a minority occurence, but even one incident has no place in science.

 

[sfs]

What did you find most striking about the article?

I thought the brief treatment of survival of the fittest as a tautology was bad. If they're going to mention that idea, they should explain why it's mistaken.