Regarding the topic of design and in particular design, as a term in evolutionary biology, see "The "design" mistake" at Evolving Thoughts.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
As T. Ryan Gregory recently pointed out in his paper "Evolution as Fact, Theory, and Path," it is a shame that the English language is so impoverished as to cause the concept of evolution to be so controversial. Within the evolutionary lexicon, "theory," "saltation," " macroevolution," "direction…
Ken Miller thinks that life scientists should reclaim the word design.
I was going to write the followup to "How to think about biology" post, but instead I'll pick up on the ideas being floated by Miller that scientists should take back the word design from pseudoscientists (discussed at…
Ken Miller makes an interesting proposal to James Randerson: he thinks we ought to reclaim the word "design," and apply it to evolution. Not in the sense that the Intelligent Designists use it, as a proxy to imply a divine being, but because he says "design" is an emergent property of evolution. It…
PZ Myers notes that Ken Miller is making a case for the term design in evolutionary biology. Miller simply claims that "design" comes from the usual, expected evolutionary processes (Natural Selection, etc.). PZ is not buying this bill of goods, and neither am I. One way to address this question…