On the alleged need to define one’s terms

Vilayanur Ramachandran described the alleged need to define one's terms carefully by telling the following story:

After his triumph with heredity, [Francis] Crick turned to what he called the "second great riddle" in biology—consciousness. There were many skeptics. I remember a seminar he was giving on consciousness at the Salk Institute here in La Jolla. He'd barely started when a gentleman in attendance raised a hand and said, "But Doctor Crick, you haven't even bothered to define the word consciousness before embarking on this." Crick's response was memorable: "I'd remind you that there was never a time in the history of biology when a bunch of us sat around the table and said, 'Let's first define what we mean by life.' We just went out there and discovered what it was—a double helix. We leave matters of semantic hygiene to you philosophers."

Continue ReadingOn the alleged need to define one’s terms

Richard Dawkins discusses The God Delusion on Minnesota Public Radio

Richard Dawkins, the evolutionary biologist and author of The God Delusion, has spent countless hours defending his positions before lay audiences. What’s really impressive about Dawkins is the way he keeps his cool under fire (I was first impressed with Dawkins' composure when I viewed this episode, involving Dawkins' interview of the gay-bashing hypocrite, Ted Haggard). Consider this condescending interview conducted 3/4/09 by Kerri Miller of Minnesota Public Radio. You can listen to the entire one-hour interview here. At the beginning of this interview, Miller could barely hide her disdain for Dawkins. Many of the people calling the show to ask questions were much more open-minded than the host--they certainly didn't pick up the host's mocking tone. Miller began the interview by branding Dawkins a failure because people weren’t running to convert to atheism, despite Dawkins’ hope (expressed in The God Delusion) that people reading his book would be caused to rethink their beliefs in religion. Dawkins explained that he did hope that people would rethink their beliefs, but that his book didn’t fail merely because people didn’t abruptly quit their religious affiliations. Here's the hope Dawkins expressed when he wrote The God Delusion:

I hope to persuade . . . a substantial number of middle of the road people that there’s nothing wrong with a disbelief in God … there’s nothing outlandish about it. It’s probably what they’re like anyway, whether or not they admit it to themselves.

Miller then worked to corner Dawkins with a belief expressed by theist John Polkinghorne that there are no hard and fasts truths. Dawkins agreed with Polkinghorne on this general point, but advised Miller that this doesn’t mean that we have no understanding of anything.

Continue ReadingRichard Dawkins discusses The God Delusion on Minnesota Public Radio

The language of science is always so amazingly precise . . . except when it isn’t

The language of science is always so amazingly precise . . . except when it isn't. Consider, for example, the word "life." Scientists have long struggled to determine exactly what qualifies as "life." For instance, are viruses “alive?” In the October 23, 2008 edition of Nature (available only to subscribers online), an article titled "Disputed Definitions" considers other often-used disputed terms. The article is divided into sections written by specialists from the relevant disciplines. The subtitle of the article is "Nature goes in search of the terms that get scientists most worked up." Consider how often you encounter the following disputed terms. Consider "paradigm shift," made popular by Thomas Kuhn in his often-cited 1962 book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Kuhn argued against the then-popular view that science marched incrementally toward the truth. Sometimes, "normal science" doesn't explain all of the phenomenon, straining a prevailing scientific theory. If the strain of accommodating evidence is great enough "eventually some new science comes along and overturns the previous consensus. Voila, a ‘paradigm shift.’" The often-used term "paradigm shift" is used in at least two ways, however. In its broad sense it encompasses the "entire constellation of beliefs, values, techniques and so on shared by the members of a given community." In the narrow sense, it refers to "concrete puzzle-solutions." Another often-debated (and currently fashionable) term is "epigenetic."

Continue ReadingThe language of science is always so amazingly precise . . . except when it isn’t

It’s like trying to explain how you can get “numbers from biscuits” or “ethics from rhubarb.”

What is the "it" referenced above?  "It" is the rich subjective experience of consciousness.  There's nothing else quite like consciousness, right?   Writing in Seed Magazine, Nicholas Humphrey suggests that, perhaps, consciousness is "not such a big deal." OK, but what is consciousness?  Why do we see the vivid redness of…

Continue ReadingIt’s like trying to explain how you can get “numbers from biscuits” or “ethics from rhubarb.”