Consilience has ratings and reviews. Manny said: At first, I wasn’t sure I liked Consilience. E.O. Wilson is frank about his disdain for philos. Wilson was excoriated for his knowledge claims, for his logic, for his intentions, and for his conclusions. Consilience was truly judged to be a. “A dazzling journey across the sciences and humanities in search of deep laws to unite them.” –The Wall Street Journal One of our greatest.
|Published (Last):||21 April 2004|
|PDF File Size:||20.15 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.11 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Jerry Fodor reviews ‘Consilience’ by Edward O. Wilson · LRB 29 October
Once we get over the shock of discovering that the universe was not made with us in mind, all the meaning the brain can master, and all the emotions it can bear, and all the shared adventure we might wish to enjoy, can be found by deciphering the hereditary orderliness that has borne our species through geological time and stamped it with the residues of deep history. If you want to go after the details, then you can criticize Wilson, without end, in almost every place.
Almost all scientific truths take the form of universal propositions reached by induction and are therefore permanently subject to doubt. Ethicists if there are any in America should know more about Physics.
I find it difficult to make up my mind about Consilience. For Wilson, if we lived in a world of plastic, then we would quite literally wither and die.
Culture forms from this, and also controls which genes survive in a kind of feedback loop. It did not evolve to believe in biology. Where are our deepest roots?
Using a Morselike code of staccato firing, the cell sends its own message outward to others. I found myself laughing out loud at several of his jokes. Not only is a majority of xonsilience concerned with mental abstractions, metaphysical paradox, and unsolvable ethical dilemmas, which sounds like enough of a waste of time.
I performed this exercise before reading Wilson’s book, with the following results: Looking for More Great Reads?
First, there was the review of Consilience in Science: The summer before my freshman year at SMU, the required reading list included C. It is not suitable to isolate yourself in one narrow field. He’ll do it effortlessly too because he isn’t very bright, but he’s confusing an artistic temperament with a desire to exercise serious critical thinking in order to solve incredibly ornate social issues, so he’ll probably do just fine in the philosophy department.
Ultimately, there may be an additional explanatory discipline more fundamental than physics. The entire thesis of Consilience is one so shockingly obvious that I was astounded to discover that true controversy surrounded it.
An organism that’s six feet tall is unlikely to build cathedrals that are six inches tall. I thought I came close to understanding Zizek. The author defines Consilience as the unity of the sciences, in fact, all human knowledge linked together by a reduced and simple logic. If I believe biology will shed light on creativity plausible but that it will make negligible contributions to art interpretation more plausibleam I a consilience fan?
Book Review: “Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge,” Edward O. Wilson
Time for economists to worry about the biology of behavior and for biologists to worry about the origins of art. For some reason though, I found the book to drag and had to struggle through the final chapters.
In other words, life is too short to be a douchebag. All students were required to take an ambitious program of arts, sciences, humanities, and mathematics that included required courses for all in “The Nature of Man,” “Twentieth Century Arts, Institutions, and Ideas,” and two courses in “The Development of Western Civilization.
This book was the first of his that I came across almost 20 years ago now. Obvious that you can think it wise to incorporate measures of environmental health into traditional economic indices without thinking this involves the collapse of a social science into a natural one.
It seems to me that scientific Realism is quite compatible with the view that events fall into revealing and reliable patterns not just at the level of microstructure but at many different orders of aggregation of matter. More important, consilience might provide the sort of big-picture wisdom that’s needed to save both liberal education and the planet. I’m not really big on giving book ei in general, only because I’ve had nothing but miserable experiences with customers and the act of offering my own intellectual honesty regarding what they should read.
And none of this goes away no matter how well you understand the hypothalamus. The hard problem is much harder: There is a huge amount of literature on the subject, starting with Consiliene. First The Insect Societieshis classic look at the evolutionary forces shaping the baroque social lives of insects.
I thought that all of these ideas and tidbits of information were practical and useful knowledge that I would eventually be payed to write about. Indeed its great beauty lies in the fact that it is gloriously independent of such details.
I suspect, but obviously don’t know, that Wilson would argue that science has thankfully always turned a deaf ear to such defeatist worries consilienve that it would be both foolish and irresponsible for scientists to give up the good fight. When Wilson “predicts,” for example, that ethical phenomena will also turn out to be neural, it’s unclear what interesting conclusion he thinks follows from this fact.
He typically holds his approach up as an unapologetically reductionist one. For this is just a high-tech version of what ordinary language does. The most mind-blowing part of the whole book for me was his dismissal with a “it’s not so bad” of Michel Foucault’s analyses of the diffuse nature of power and its evolution in the west. Basically, Consilience is a well-written manifesto in favor consileince inter-disciplinary studies.