HomeGroupsTalkMoreZeitgeist
Search Site
This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.

Results from Google Books

Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.

Loading...

Explore Evolution: The Arguments For and Against Neo-Darwinism

by Stephen C. Meyer

MembersReviewsPopularityAverage ratingConversations
511500,771 (3.3)None
None
Loading...

Sign up for LibraryThing to find out whether you'll like this book.

No current Talk conversations about this book.

Honest, balanced arguments for and against evolution. No straw-man arguments. ( )
  Steve777 | Dec 27, 2008 |
There's an interesting debate going on within the scientific community regarding the degree to which evolution is constrained by functional and morphological limits. It's possible that only a limited set of configurations, such as potential enzyme structures, are compatible with function, and EE mentions this. But, once again, inflation sets in, and this very real debate is used to raise the possibility that structural similarities can never be used to infer common descent; nobody in the scientific community is making that argument.

This is pretty typical of all the scientific material in the book. Even when it has its facts right, they're embedded in interpretations that none of the actual scientists cited are likely to recognize. The mere presence of actual science does nothing to outweigh the general morass of errors, distortions, and faulty logic that comprise the bulk of the book. The book as a whole acts like a funhouse mirror, distorting and removing the context from the bits of science that do appear.

Collectively, these problems ensure that anyone using this as a source of information about science in the classroom will leave their students with a picture of modern biology that is essentially unrelated to the way that science is actually practiced within the biological science community. More generally, the logical inconsistencies will leave students bewildered about the nature of scientific reasoning.

In this sense, the book's claim that it represents an attempt at inquiry-based learning is a sham. The process of IBL requires both an accurate presentation of information and an effort to lead students through scientific reasoning based on it. EE not only skips the accuracy requirement, but it abdicates the responsibility for reasoning entirely.
added by jimroberts | editArs Technica, John Timmer (Sep 25, 2008)
 
You must log in to edit Common Knowledge data.
For more help see the Common Knowledge help page.
Canonical title
Original title
Alternative titles
Original publication date
People/Characters
Important places
Important events
Related movies
Epigraph
Dedication
First words
Quotations
Last words
Disambiguation notice
Publisher's editors
Blurbers
Original language
Canonical DDC/MDS
Canonical LCC

References to this work on external resources.

Wikipedia in English (3)

No library descriptions found.

Book description
Haiku summary

Current Discussions

None

Popular covers

Quick Links

Rating

Average: (3.3)
0.5 1
1
1.5
2 1
2.5
3
3.5
4 1
4.5
5 2

Is this you?

Become a LibraryThing Author.

 

About | Contact | Privacy/Terms | Help/FAQs | Blog | Store | APIs | TinyCat | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | Common Knowledge | 203,242,276 books! | Top bar: Always visible