Sunday, November 21, 2004

Some words about thoughts and some thoughts about words.

"It is perfectly safe to attribute [innate mental structures] to 'natura lselection', so long as we realize that there is no substance to this assertion, that it amounts to nothing more than a belief that there is some naturalistic explanation for these phenomena. . . .
In the case of such systems as language. . . . it is not easy even to imagine a course of selection that might havegiven rise to them."
--Noam Chomsky, notable Leftist

"Teleological thinking has been steadfastly resisted by modern biology. And yet, in nearly every area of research biologists are hard pressed to find language that does not impute purposiveness to living forms."
--Timothy Lenior, science historian

If you talk to some biologists it is interesting to watch their language. Just wait, they will use language that imputes purpose, one way or another. Then it is time to give their inner child a richly deserved spanking.

Even the term natural "selection" itself tells the same story because a selection is made by intelligence. Natural accident, natural happenstance, natural occurence or recurrence, etc., would be in line with the philosophy that most biologists believe that their field has to exist in and support. So as biologists, they are always supposed to talk that way. I.e., they have to try to talk dehumanized, which is hard for humans to do. Journalists are similar, with their notion of objectivity as being like a dead, inanimate object.

Compared to other sciences biology seems to be the embattled hold out for the grand ol' mythological narratives of naturalism.

So you mainly have the journalists, biologists, National Geographic and PBS....but who believes PBS anymore?

Just keep in the back of your mind as you listen to these grand ol' mythological narratives of naturalism told by the journalists and biologists things like the existence of thought, language, information and mind. Keep in mind the bird's wing, the fish's gill, the Earth-Moon system, a field of grass, down to the irreducible complexity of biochemical machines....and the list goes on.

Maybe I will cite a biochemist on that last one sometime.


No comments: