Why don't you look at all sides of the issue. While I have run into
colleagues who IMO hold too strongly to the tenants of evolution, I find
that most of my colleagues (at least those faculty and students I have
conversed with) are not such passionate defenders of evolution. I just
finished teaching a philosophy of science class to PhD students and one
assignment I gave was to have the class write a letter to a hypothetical
school board that was considering teaching creation science along with
evolution. 80% of the class supported teaching both. So, instead of being
skeptical of biologists in general for our over-hyped passion for
evolution, why not be supportive of biologists because of those who are
interested in truth whatever it may be.
>I would be grateful if you
>could answer some questions to help me understand your philosophy and
beliefs.
>
> Most advocates of "random mutation and natural selection" believe such
>things as altruism, love and emotions are also the result of "random
mutation
>and natural selection". Is that part of your belief?
SOME advocates of neoDarwinian evolution believe in this "sociobiology",
but the field is not looked upon favorably by most "hard" scientists in
other biological disciplines. To say MOST evolutionists believe in what
the sociobiologists tout is grossly misleading. Please don't paint us all
with such a broad brush.
Cheers,
Steve
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Steven S. Clark, Ph.D. Ph: 608-263-9137
Associate Professor FAX: 263-4226
Dept. of Human Oncology ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin
School of Medicine
600 Highland Ave
Madison, WI 53792