Evolutionary biologists such as Richard Dawkins1 , Paul Meyers2, and Jerry Coyne3, and philosophers of science such as Daniel Dennett4, Micheal Ruse5, and Peter Singer6 have produced differing defences and explanations of Darwinism, its roots, and its various implications within a Neo-Darwinian framework. In many cases, these have been intended for wider consumption beyond academia and have incorporated the promotion of Darwin as a unique historical agent, with Dawkins arguably leading the pack in public presence. These select commentators can be described as the scientific and philosophical nucleus of public Neo-Darwinism, providing academic validity as well as a factual backing of sorts to historical narrative. As well as this certain outside
…show more content…
For example, William “Bill” Nye (a mechanical engineer by precise qualification11) has lately provided mainstream cultural promotion within America. This has taken place through summarising and advocating Neo-Darwinian arguments in an understandable way12, using his pre-existing profile as a trusted scientific communicator to bolster the Neo-Darwinian case rather than any solid credentials in evolutionary research13. There has also been significant overlap, due to the complex nature of public and political engagement. The prolific Dawkins and Myers easily fit into multiple categories.
The main focus of public of Neo-Darwinism (outside of academic lobbying and taking the Darwinian argument into the realms of materialism and humanism) has been on providing a type of historical education as an anticipatory polemic against potential criticism. Opinions obviously vary significantly amongst commentators, as do objectives. But the main crux of the Neo-Darwinian perspective on how Darwin 's place in biology and history should be perceived can be surmised …show more content…
Dawkins left no room in his base historical narrative for opposing or augmented viewpoints, in particular earlier Christian apologetics focusing on the complexity of nature as evidence for God such as that of William Paley. Micheal Shermer similarly outlined the emphasis Neo-Darwinism placed on constant reiteration of the importance of Darwin 's “idea”, defined as a singular, revolutionary entity within the history of science that was first exclusively formed in 1837 and confirmed by others21 in the progressive vein of Thomas S.
For example, William “Bill” Nye (a mechanical engineer by precise qualification11) has lately provided mainstream cultural promotion within America. This has taken place through summarising and advocating Neo-Darwinian arguments in an understandable way12, using his pre-existing profile as a trusted scientific communicator to bolster the Neo-Darwinian case rather than any solid credentials in evolutionary research13. There has also been significant overlap, due to the complex nature of public and political engagement. The prolific Dawkins and Myers easily fit into multiple categories.
The main focus of public of Neo-Darwinism (outside of academic lobbying and taking the Darwinian argument into the realms of materialism and humanism) has been on providing a type of historical education as an anticipatory polemic against potential criticism. Opinions obviously vary significantly amongst commentators, as do objectives. But the main crux of the Neo-Darwinian perspective on how Darwin 's place in biology and history should be perceived can be surmised …show more content…
Dawkins left no room in his base historical narrative for opposing or augmented viewpoints, in particular earlier Christian apologetics focusing on the complexity of nature as evidence for God such as that of William Paley. Micheal Shermer similarly outlined the emphasis Neo-Darwinism placed on constant reiteration of the importance of Darwin 's “idea”, defined as a singular, revolutionary entity within the history of science that was first exclusively formed in 1837 and confirmed by others21 in the progressive vein of Thomas S.