Re: [asa] Re: Campolo gets it wrong

From: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue Mar 03 2009 - 16:43:44 EST

Chuck

I absolutely agree with your criticism of Campolo. Darwin on the extermination of certain races as you say was descriptive not prescriptive as this is what he observed on his voyage especially in Tasmania and parts of the South Seas.

Neither Campolo nor Sandstrom have read The Descent of Man with any care and take one possible interpretation of one passage as if it were the only one. It does not fit with the rest of Darwin as we know him from his anti-slavery and concern for the needy

No further discussion needed.

Michael
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Austerberry, Charles
  To: gregoryarago@yahoo.ca ; asa@lists.calvin.edu
  Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 9:27 PM
  Subject: RE: [asa] Re: Campolo gets it wrong

  Dear Gregory:

  Thank you for taking the time to articulate your concerns. You raise many important issues. In my opinion, however, they are not the issues I raised in my criticism of Campolo's essay. I hope others on the list can and will engage in fruitful dialogue concerning the issues you raised.

  Best wishes,

  Chuck

  Charles (Chuck) F. Austerberry, Ph.D.
  Assistant Professor of Biology
  Hixson-Lied Room 438
  Creighton University
  2500 California Plaza
  Omaha, NE 68178
  Phone: 402-280-2154
  Fax: 402-280-5595
  e-mail: cfauster@creighton.edu
  http://groups.creighton.edu/premedsociety/

  Nebraska Religious Coalition for Science Education
  http://nrcse.creighton.edu

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: Gregory Arago [mailto:gregoryarago@yahoo.ca]
    Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 2:33 PM
    To: asa@lists.calvin.edu; Austerberry, Charles
    Subject: RE: [asa] Re: Campolo gets it wrong

          Hi Charles, I covered that in my rebuttle. Speculative suspicions of CT's audience interpretation aside, if you adjust your own interpretation of Campolo's words, based on our shared knowledge, as suggesting that Darwin's 'proposal' was a mere 'description' rather than a 'prescription' of the 'invevitable extermination [i.e. genocide] of races based on Darwin's struggle narrative' then you should have no problem accepting his language. There are many other things in your 'criticism' of his essay besides that one, which you have little to stand on and perhaps you should rather whole-heartedly support Campolo's challenge to Darwinism. But this would involve confronting the criticism of your criticism heart-on and seeing the importance of Campolo's sociological (in contrast to merely a biological) imploration. - G.A.

          --- On Tue, 3/3/09, Austerberry, Charles <cfauster@creighton.edu> wrote:

            From: Austerberry, Charles <cfauster@creighton.edu>
            Subject: RE: [asa] Re: Campolo gets it wrong
            To: gregoryarago@yahoo.ca, asa@lists.calvin.edu
            Received: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 10:08 PM

            Campolo claims that Darwin proposed the extermination of certain races. I think it likely that many people reading that CT essay will interpret "extermination" to mean genocide. I stand by my criticism of Campolo's essay.

            Cheers!

            Chuck

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Now with a new friend-happy design! Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Mar 3 16:45:03 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 03 2009 - 16:45:03 EST