Pluralism with Multiple Methods of Adaptation Gould and Lewontin present an argument criticizing the way evolutionary science solely relies on adaptations in the current environment. Their argument, known as pluralism, asserts that evolutionary biology continues on the path adaptationism without ever exploring other methods. Gould and Lewontin propose several alternative approaches, the fourth of which states that an identical trade into different organisms of the same species can be led to in different ways that have the same result. They assert that organisms that do this are a product of selection even though they used one method instead of another does not enhance the fitness of the organism. To demonstrate this, suppose there are two foxes. The first is able to dig the burrow using its front paws and snout while the second uses its hind legs followed by the front paws. In this scenario both of these foxes dig equally sufficient burrows at the same speed and both are able to remain and live comfortably inside of them. The foxes come to the same result by utilizing different meth...
America is full and rich with diverse people, religions and values; they make America great. Just look at Riverside, California, there are over fifty churches of different denominations of Christianity, three synagogues, two temples, and one mosque; all coinciding peacefully in the city (Yellow Pages). Because Riverside is so diverse, religious pluralism and religious tolerance are two steps in making Riverside more connected. The first step is tolerance, a reflex that acknowledges a person will come across people of a different faith. The second step is pluralism, which is a better understanding of a person’s religion as well as the other religions around them. Many believe pluralism is the better of the two, because of the interaction involved and the creation of harmony, but pluralism’s faults are greater than the benefits. Currently religious pluralism is quality America should strive for, but America is not ready for pluralism yet, so religious tolerance is best for the diverse population of America today.
Darwin: A Norton Critical Edition, Second Edition ; ed. by Philip Appleman; copyright 1979, 1970 by W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
In Mivart’s Genesis of Species, the author highlights the inconsistencies of Darwin’s natural selection theory. He supports his assertion by emphasizing how species placed in similar environments acquire different traits, questioning the long-term advantages of these evolved traits, and noting the logical inconsistencies of how traits can span in all directions.
The second of Tinbergen’s questions Phylogeny looks at the evolutionary explanations of development, as opposed to just how behaviour has adapted, including mutations in response to environmental changes. Some of these mutations remain in species even after necessity has gone, and can influence future characteristics of that species. The third of Tinbergen’s questions looks at Causation,...
Anyone with even a moderate background in science has heard of Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution. Since the publishing of his book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection in 1859, Darwin’s ideas have been debated by everyone from scientists to theologians to ordinary lay-people. Today, though there is still severe opposition, evolution is regarded as fact by most of the scientific community and Darwin’s book remains one of the most influential ever written.
For Dawkins, evolution of a species is dependent upon the transmittance of this information to the next generation; the individual species is irrelevant (2). This theory is a departure from Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, which concentrates on the species. Species, to Dawkins, are "survival machines" whose purpose is to host these genes, as species are mortals and fleeting, whereas genes are not (2).
In Federalist No. 10, James Madison stresses that “measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.” Madison philosophized that a large republic, composed of numerous factions capable of competing with each other and the majority must exist in order to avoid tyranny of majority rule.# When Federalist No. 10 was published, the concept of pluralism was not widely used. However, the political theory that is the foundation for United States government was the influential force behind pluralism and its doctrines.
Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection explains the general laws by which any given species transforms into other varieties and species. Darwin extends the application of his theory to the entire hierarchy of classification and states that all forms of life have descended from one incredibly remote ancestor. The process of natural selection entails the divergence of character of specific varieties and the subsequent classification of once-related living forms as distinct entities on one or many levels of classification. The process occurs as a species varies slightly over the course of numerous generations. Through inheritance, natural selection preserves each variation that proves advantageous to that species in its present circumstances of living, which include its interaction with closely related species in the “struggle for existence” (Darwin 62).
They suggest adaptationists “atomize” organism's traits to natural selection and can be viewed as a separate adaptation to act as a non-mutually exclusive function (Gould and Lewontin, p. 585). Gould and Lewontin say instead, that natural selection works on organisms as a whole and not trait-by-trait. In other words, natural selection does not look at individual traits; rather it actually focuses only on the total organism, which Gould and Lewontin were correct about. Additionally, all that natural selection focuses on is an organism’s fitness. Fitness is also relative to other individuals of the population; therefore, there is no direct number for ‘good’ fitness. Natural selection indirectly affects other trait because the genes are correlated. Lastly, the authors provide a great authoritative voice by stating “In natural history, all possible things happen sometimes; you general not support your favored phenomenon by declaring rivals impossible in theory” (Gould and Lewontin, p. 585). This shows a talking with attitude instead of a talking at attitude in this
In Dawkins’ novel, he aims to prove how the explanation is not a religious answer but a biological and cumulative natural selection. According to Dawkins, the theory of Darwinism is what changed the mystery of our...
If our “nation adopts purely assimilation approach” there would be no diversity between us. America is composed of many varieties of race, religion and beliefs. There are to many diverse cultures to look past them. Every person has their own belief of what being an American means to them. For America to become one nation, we all need to see beyond each others uniqueness and unite respectively with one other. The fact remains, we all live in America, we all are Americans no matter our diversity and we all have freedom. As the old saying goes “Variety is the spice of life”. If our “nation adopts a purely pluralist approach” it possibly could work since there is great diversity in races, religions and cultures that makes up our civilization.
This paper therefore discusses the similarities and differences between their works while building upon the presentation by Susan Blackmore on meme. The works of Richard Dawkins and Charles Darwin has numerous ideological similarities. In Richards Gene-centered view of evolution, he states that competition for survival among genes determines how adaptive evolution occurs. Similarly, Charles Darwin also holds that the different species in existence come from common ancestor hence leading to the process of evolution through natural selection (Cartwright, 2016).
Whilst pluralism and Marxism are said to have developed from liberalism and socialism respectively (through criticising or expanding on those ideologies) thereby both appearing on the left of the left-right economic scale, a great part of their theories are indeed notably different, if not completely in contrast with each other. However, if we look closely at these theories, the one similarity, often overlooked by critics, is the fact that both offer a critique of the state despite the fact that their views are opposing. In order to understand these views of state, it is important to first understand the fundamental views of both pluralism and Marxism. Only then can these views be assessed and finally compared with each other, thereby ascertaining which view is more apt within modern society.
What makes Dawkins’ novel truly special is the logical progression in his arguments, making them clearer and more convincing than its predecessors. Moreover, even readers without any prior scientific knowledge can fully comprehend his arguments because of this progression. Dawkins begins with real-life examples that ordinary people understand. For example, Dawkins uses the familiar concept of selective breeding in dogs in his second chapter, Dogs, Cows, and Cabbages. He then uses an analogy to show the core similarities between his everyday example and the evolutionary concept he seeks to explain: “Another familiar example is the sculpting of the wolf, Canis lupus, into the two hundred or so breeds of dogs” (Dawkins, 2009, p.27). In this line, Dawkins compares sculptors to breeders to expose the role of genes in artificial selection, providing a pathway to the concept of natural selection. Finally, Dawkins bolsters his points with scientific evidence, which the audience can readily accept due to his use of analogies and real-world
Social Democracy Pluralism By definition - A system of government that allows and encourages public participation, particularly through the activities of pressure groups seeking to influence the government. Traditional socialism has always been associated with an analysis of society that class differences are crucial, in particular the middle classes - those who have gained to the working classes expense - summarised, the two classes interests are in conflict. Social democrats believe society is far more complex than a class interest struggle, and this concept becomes outdated in a pluralist society - a community of individuals and varied interests. Traditional Socialism is arguably intolerant in its outlook with 1) A reluctance to accept that there may be other ways to achieve socialist goals (equality of opportunity, welfare provision etc) 2) Assumptions that all people will benefit from these goals.