Chris writes:
> Allen Esterson wrote:
> 
> >Chris cites his letter in "American Psychologist" in which he quotes 
> >favourably the sociologist Steve Fuller:
> >http://www.yorku.ca/christo/papers/Kuhn.Driver-Linn.comment.htm
> >
> >Much of Fuller's writing is in the field of "science studies". Where his 
> >specific analysis of science as practiced leads is indicated by the fact 
> >that he is now appearing as a witness on behalf of those advocating the 
> >teaching of Intelligent Design as science in Harrisburg,
> >
> I was not aware that Fuller was defending intelligent design. While I 
> find that disturbing, it has little to do with his reassessment of Kuhn
> and Popper. And (as you must know, if you read my comment) I brought up
> Fuller in the context of a number of recent reassessments of Kuhn, 
> Popper, and logical positivists which Driver-Linn failed to discuss in 
> her article.


As a generality, as I've said before on this list, the views of an
individual on one topic is not necessarily a pointer to his/her view on an
entirely different topic. However, in the present case of Fuller the
subject matter is within the same sphere in the two instances under
consideration.

Chris writes: "I was not aware that Fuller was defending intelligent
design. While I find that disturbing, it has little to do with his
reassessment of Kuhn."

I agree that Fuller's reassessment of Kuhn's ideas on the philosophy of
science (which have been subject to a variety or interpretations) may well
have valuable aspects independent of his view of science as a social
endeavour. (I have not read his book on Kuhn.) However in Chris's letter
Fuller's views are cited on the Kuhn vs Popper dispute on the nature of
scientific development. My view is that I would not take as a reliable
guide the contentions on that particular topic of a sociologist whose
notion of science is such that he believes that the Intelligent Design
thesis is worthy of the description "scientific".

http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2005/10/24/expert_testifies_on_intelligent_design/


http://www.yorku.ca/christo/papers/Kuhn.Driver-Linn.comment.htm

Reference
*Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge*, eds. I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave.
Contributions from Kuhn, Popper, et al. Cambridge University Press, 1970.

Allen Esterson
Former lecturer, Science Department
Southwark College, London
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.human-nature.com/esterson/index.html
http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/articleprint.php?num=10
http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/articleprint.php?num=57
http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/articleprint.php?num=58
http://www.srmhp.org/0202/review-01.html

----------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:52:54 -0400
Author: Christopher Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OOOPS! (Was Re: help with learning class)

> Allen Esterson wrote:
> 
> >Chris cites his letter in "American Psychologist" in which he quotes 
> >favourably the sociologist Steve Fuller:
> >http://www.yorku.ca/christo/papers/Kuhn.Driver-Linn.comment.htm
> >
> >Much of Fuller's writing is in the field of "science studies". Where his 
> >specific analysis of science as practiced leads is indicated by the fact 
> >that he is now appearing as a witness on behalf of those advocating the 
> >teaching of Intelligent Design as science in Harrisburg,
> >
> I was not aware that Fuller was defending intelligent design. While I 
> find that disturbing, it has little to do with his reassessment of Kuhn
> and Popper. And (as you must know, if you read my comment) I brought up
> Fuller in the context of a number of recent reassessments of Kuhn, 
> Popper, and logical positivists which Driver-Linn failed to discuss in 
> her article.
> 
> Regards,
> -- 
> Christopher D. Green
> Department of Psychology
> York University
> Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.yorku.ca/christo
> Office: 416-736-5115 ext. 66164
> Fax: 416-736-5814

---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to