NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #1/NN_1993_1.iso/spool/sci/bio/4795

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-06 | 1.6 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!bnr.co.uk!uknet!reading!djd
From: [e-mail] (David J Dawkins)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: Gould versus Dawkins
Message-ID: <djd.726334585@reading>
Date: 6 Jan 93 15:36:25 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Reading
Lines: 28
Nntp-Posting-Host: asgard

[e-mail] (Michael Siemon) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Marvin Minsky) writes:

>>I don't think this makes sense, at least for anyone who has read
>>Dawkins' book, The Extended Phenotype -- because Dawkins would be the
>>first to agree that it is not at all a matter of "simple summations".

>I would note that _The Extended Phenotype_ opens with a preface in
>which Dawkins is at pains to deny/disclaim meaning what many readers
>(both careful and careless, biologically educated and generalists)
>have read _The Selfish Gene_ to mean (and which is the target of
>Gould's animus in the review.)  Given the crude way in which one
>sees Dawkins clever phrases used on the net, I am with Gould in my
>animus, even though much of TEP (and indeed TSG, when rendered of
>its rather high polemic content) has interesting and intelligent
>things to say.  I think that Dawkins is either disingenuous or a
>totally negligent author.

WOW! Is disingenuous good?  Wait 'til I tell Ma!

-Dave Dawkins "What the hell's a Phenotype, and who'd want to extend it
               anyway?"

--
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]