Gerhard Adam

One of the problems that gave rise to the gene-centric view is the prevalence of the notion that individuals tended to evolve for the "good of the species".  In essence the gene-centric view argued that natural selection operated for the "good of the individual" and specifically for the genes that would be capable of transmitting information to future generations. Therefore if the genes are the information carriers, then they would represent the only means by which future generations could carry on from previous successes.

It is interesting how often and freely we use these three elements of thought processing and presume that what we are expressing is being legitimately represented.  Beliefs are readily interpreted as knowledge, and knowledge is often characterized as being true to lend it weight.However, for the purposes of this discussion let's consider some definitions for these terms so that we can distinguish how these elements are actually used.

Usually when the word "belief" comes up, the first thought is religion, but the general occurrence of beliefs is actually a much broader concept. Beliefs may be religious, supernatural, philosophical, etc.  In short, we all have beliefs that define how we think the world works and how we should interact with it.  Beliefs bridge the gap between what we "know" and what we "assume" in order to function in the world and make decisions.    

There is a presumption among many people that extraterrestrial life is a foregone conclusion and that it is only awaiting our discovery.  The Drake equation is usually highlighted as many astronomers suggest that with the billions of worlds available, that life is all but inevitable1.Equally there is a sense that life couldn't possibly be unique to a single planet, so there is a strong belief that there must be other planets on which life flourishes.  However, we need to consider what the basis for these assumptions actually is.

As addressed in other posts, there is a significant difference between "selfishness" and "self-interest".  However, it seems that there is still a general insistence on perpetuating the selfishness perspective.

Here is an article relating to a discussion about the qualifications of mental health professionals in assessing the long-term effects of torture.There is extensive research, they argue, that torture causes long-termmental health problems. However, "we do not yet have the scientificknowledge to predict with any precision what the psychological outcomewill be for an individual."

As expected, this last round of information that corrected an error regarding the demise of the Himalayan Glaciers is now being touted as the latest evidence of the lies surrounding global warming.  Of course, the global warming "deniers" want to use this as evidence of deception, instead of acknowledging it as an error.Instead of considering that it is the publication of such corrections which demonstrates how science works to resolve its mistakes and to validate its data, the global warming "deniers" just want to continue on their way with no more evidence than their beliefs.

It's interesting that in reading this review the first thing one is struck by is that Sowell is guilty of the very thing he's railing against.  Setting himself up as a individual intellectual with "ideas" to tell others how things should work.I'm sure readers of this post may argue that I'm doing the same thing and they would be correct.  Therein is Sowell's fatal flaw, because anyone with an idea can be labeled an "intellectual" and be subject to the criticism that he levels.  It is noteworthy that apparently, in his view, the only "intellectuals" worth criticizing are liberals, but that's just his bias showing I suspect.

A recent article entitled "Risk of blood clot after surgery higher and lasts longer than previously thought" raises an interesting point especially in light of recent discussions about public perceptions regarding medical care.  The risk of venous thromboembolism (a collective term for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) is known to increase after surgery, particularly after major orthopaedic (joint) surgery. The risk is thought to be highest during the first few weeks after an operation but little is known about the exact pattern and scale of this increased risk.

In today's political hotbed of ideological divisions there seems to be no end to the catch phrases that are used to convey some sentiment regarding the evils of government.  A popular bumper-sticker notes "I love my country, but I fear my government".What does that even mean?  What is a country without a government?  It certainly can't be so trivial as to pronounce a love for the square of dirt someone is standing on, so what is this statement supposed to represent?  

A story in the local newspaper related how a pit bull was turned into the animal shelter after having been found abandoned in a ditch with all of its teeth filed down to the exposed roots, emaciated by starvation (weighing less than 40 pounds), and having just given birth to 9 puppies that morning.  The mother also had a few pressure sores from where bones rubbed against skin.  All the puppies still had the umbilical cords attached and were wet.This level of human cruelty and stupidity is beyond understanding and one wonders what could be done to bring such behaviors under control.

One of the key points that perpetually surfaces in the Intelligent Design debate is comparing animate with inanimate objects and attempting to draw comparisons or conclusions1.  This becomes more pronounced when we begin to consider the role of less tangible elements, like intelligence, and begin considering how such a thing would manifest in a machine.  In effect, it's the problem of determining what life is and how does it differ from everything else. Often we look at complex machinery and associate meanings or parallels to biological systems, however this is an incorrect perspective.  No matter how sophisticated the machine is, it is invariably only a tool and as such needs to be examined from that viewpoint.