RE: Whitehead on Deduction (fwd)

[xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

>Reference please,

>JML

oh! of course...actually, I was making a general statement about the
possible abuses of "deductionist" and "inductionist" methods of reasoning.
Morever,I was saying that this distinction is not even clear in natural
sciences as it is traditionally assumed to be by "social" scientists...
There is no reason to romanticize the ontological superiority of social
sciences. Since somebody mentioned economics as a "special science", i
raised the issue. More or less every science deals with human
beings, or species broadly defined, to begin with..

here are some dabates in biology, which are very similar to the dabates
we have in social sciences.

Richard DAwkins, _Selfish Gene_ (he is a  prof of Zoology at Oxford and
a socio-biologist)

See the response to him by Richard Lewontin (prof of genetics at Harvard)
and Steven Rose (prof. of radiology at UC Sandiago), _Not in Our Genes:
Biology, Human Nature and Ideology_ Random House 1984.

See also Richard Levins and Richard Lewontin's _The Dialectical Biologist_
Harvard University Press, 1985.


bye,


Mine


> -----Original Message (part)-----
> From: owner-pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> for
> example, most of the assumptions of socio-biologists, such as "selfish
> gene" and "gene selection", are found by "biologists" and
> "geneticists" unscientific and largely false! (besides other things)
>