Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:24:19Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2011-09-02Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T18:52:11Z : No. of bitstreams: 1 mottola_n_me_rcla.pdf: 359757 bytes, checksum: 647c20048f335ae16df7f299898b7f99 (MD5) / Analisou-se aqui o modo como o conceito de evolução, elaborado por Lamarck e Darwin, é apresentado nos livros didáticos de Biologia, selecionados pelo Programa Nacional do Livro Didático para o Ensino Médio (PNLEM), distribuídos em 2007 para todas as escolas da rede pública do Brasil. Para essa análise, foram consideradas as cinco teorias de Charles Robert Darwin (1809-1882), presente em sua obra A Origem das Espécies, a saber: a evolução propriamente dita, a ancestralidade comum, o gradualismo, a multiplicação das espécies e a seleção natural. E, também, as quatro leis da transformação dos animais, de Jean Baptiste Antoine de Monet de Lamarck (1744-1829). Utilizamos os procedimentos de coleta e análise de dados com base em abordagens de natureza qualitativa. Como principais resultados encontramos uma visão reducionista da teoria transformista de Lamarck, limitada a duas leis não centrais em sua obra nem de sua autoria, bem como a presença, em algumas obras, de um antagonismo entre o lamarckismo e fundamentação científica. Com relação à obra darwiniana, constatou-se que na maioria dos livros didáticos está ausente uma referência às idéias relativas à ancestralidade comum, ao gradualismo e à multiplicação das espécies. Também foi possível observar que, em alguns manuais didáticos, há uma visão a - histórica da ciência, a falta de uma contextualização sociocultural e uma carência em relação à história e à filosofia da biologia. Nesse sentido, há um prejuízo na compreensão das idéias contidas nas obras de Lamarck e Darwin, acarretando uma limitação no entendimento do conceito de evolução / We analyzed here how the concept of evolution, developed by Lamarck and Darwin, is presented in textbooks of Biology, selected by the National Textbook Program for high school (PNLEM), selected in 2007 for all public schools in the Brazil. For this analysis, we considered the five theories of Charles Robert Darwin (1809-1882), present in his work The Origin of Species, namely: the actual evolution, the common descent, the gradualism, the multiplication of species and the natural selection. Also, the four laws of transformation of animals, Jean Baptiste Antoine de Monet de Lamarck (1744-1829). We use the data collection and analysis of data based on qualitative approaches. The main results, we find a reductionist view of Lamarck's theory transvestite, limited to two laws do not even central in his work of his own, as well as the presence, in some works, an antagonism between Lamarckism and scientific reasoning. With reference to the work Darwinian, it was found that in most textbooks is missing a reference to the ideas on common ancestry, the gradualism, and the multiplication of species. Was also observed that in some textbooks, there is a vision – of historical science, the lack of a socio-cultural context and a lack in relation to history and philosophy of biology. In this sense, there is a loss to understand the ideas embodied in works of Lamarck and Darwin, leading to a limitation in understanding of the concept of evolution

This dissertation reveals that the American reception of evolution often hinged on the theory's implications for gender and that Darwinian ideas significantly shaped feminist thought in the U.S. While the impact of evolution on American culture has been widely studied, few scholars have done so using gender as a category of analysis. Similarly, evolutionary theory is largely absent from histories of American feminist thought. Yet, Darwin's ideas, specifically those in The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (1871), had profound ramifications for gender and sex. Nineteenth century scientists and laypeople alike eagerly applied Darwin's theories to the "woman question," generally to the detriment of women. At the same time, key female activists embraced evolution as an appealing alternative to biblical gender strictures (namely the story of Adam and Eve) and enthusiastically incorporated it into their speeches and writings. My work describes how women including Antoinette Brown Blackwell, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Charlotte Perkins Gilman utilized Darwinian principles to challenge traditional justifications for female subordination and bolster their arguments for women's rights. Furthermore, my research demonstrates that gender roles, particularly those pertaining to courtship, marriage, and reproduction, were reformulated in accordance with Darwin's theory of sexual selection, altering popular ideas about motherhood and paving the way for eugenics and birth control. My interdisciplinary project draws on scientific and mainstream publications, the feminist press, prescriptive literature, fiction, popular culture, and archival materials, and it explores both intellectual developments and their impact on people's daily lives. I argue that evolution shifted the terms of debate from women's souls to women's bodies, encouraged feminists to claim "equivalence" rather than "equality," inspired opponents and proponents of women's rights to ground their arguments in science (most frequently biology and zoology), destigmatized sex as a topic of scientific inquiry, and galvanized support for greater female autonomy in reproductive decisions. Looking at gender, religion, and evolutionary theory in concert not only helps us more fully comprehend the construction of gender and the development of American feminism, especially its troubled relationships with religion and science, it also enriches our understanding of the American reception of Darwin. / text

Richard Rorty found Friedrich Nietzsche’s critique of epistemology (perspectivism) to be a helpful tool in getting us to stop thinking of knowledge as something we find, and instead as something that we create. He also found perspectivism to be a helpful tool in that of the private sphere, of private self-creation. The Nietzsche that provides perspectivism is “The Good Nietzsche”. Rorty, however, conceived of Nietzsche’s ideas as being absolutely useless when it comes to politics, along with his ideas regarding morality, the Will to Power, and the Übermensch. These are the ideas of “The Bad Nietzsche”. Rorty’s actual usage of Nietzsche’s ideas, however, defies such easy, self-defined categorization, because these ideas extend outside of their spheres into the realm of politics in Rorty’s own writings. Most traditional analyses of the relationship between Nietzsche and Rorty as it regards politics tend to focus on Nietzsche. By focusing on Rorty’s appropriation of Nietzsche, through looking at his extensive writings and interviews, a more subtle, and complex relationship between Nietzsche’s various ideas and Rorty’s politics is seen to exist.

No description available.

The thesis is that contrary to the received popular wisdom, the combination of David Hume's sceptical enquiry and Charles Darwin's provision of an alternative theoretical framework to the then current paradigm of natural theology did not succeed in defeating the design argument. I argue that William Paley's work best represented the status quo in the philosophy of biology circa 1800 and that with the logical mechanisms provided us by William Dembski in his seminal work on probability, there is a strong argument for thr work of Michael Behe to stand in a similar position today to that of Paley two centuries ago. The argument runs as follows: In Sections 1 and 2 of Chapter 1 I introduce the issues. In Section 3 I argue that William Paley's exposition of the design argument was archetypical of the natural theology school and that given Hume's already published criticism of the argument, Paley for one did not feel the design argument to be done for. I further argue in Section 4 that Hume in fact did no such thing and that neither did he see himself as having done so, but that the design argument was weak rather than fallacious. In Section 5 I outline the demise of natural theology as the dominant school of thought in the philosophy of biology, ascribing this to the rise of Darwinism and subsequently neo-Darwinism. I argue that design arguments were again not defeated but went into abeyance with the rise of a new paradigm associated with Darwinism, namely methodological naturalism. In Chapter 2 I advance the project by a discussion of William Dembski's formulation of design inferences, demonstrating their value in both everyday and technical usage. This is stated in Section 1. In Sections 2 and 3 I discuss Dembski's treatment of probability, whilst in Section 4 I examine Dembski's tying of different levels of probability to different mechanisms of explanation used in explicating the world. Section 5 is my analysis of the logic of the formal statement of the design argument according to Dembski. In Section 6 I encapsulate objections to Dembski. I conclude the chapter (with Section 7) by claiming that Dembski forwards a coherent model of design inferences that can be used in demonstrating that there is little difference between the way that Paley came to his conclusions two centuries ago and how modem philosophers of biology (such as I take Michael Behe to be, albeit that by profession he is a scientist) come to theirs when offering design explanations. Inference to the best explanation is demonstrated as lying at the crux of design arguments. In Chapter 3 I draw together the work of Michael Behe and Paley, showing through the mechanism of Dembski's work that they are closely related in many respects and that neither position is to be lightly dismissed. Section 1 introduces this. In Section 2 I introduce Behe's concept of irreducible complexity in the light of (functional) explanation. Section 3 is a detailed analysis of irreducible complexity. Section 4 raises and covers objections to Behe with the general theme being that (neo-) Darwinians beg the question against him. In Section 4 I apply the Dembskian mechanic directly to Behe's work. I argue that Behe does not quite meet the Dembskian criteria he needs to in order for his argument to stand as anything other than defeasible. However, in Section 5 I conclude by arguing that this is exactly what we are to expect from Behe's and similar theories, even within competing paradigms, in the philosophy of biology, given that inference to the best explanation is the logical lever therein at work. / KMBT_363 / Adobe Acrobat 9.54 Paper Capture Plug-in

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-28T14:16:36Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Enezio Eugenio de Almeida Filho.pdf: 4288341 bytes, checksum: 6d7c3e5e0f23728ac321058b96f617c8 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-10-17 / Discovery Institute - Center for Science and Culture / This research follows the line of History and Theory of Science that has as a goal to explain the construction of scientific thought by discussing the foundation of hypotheses and theories within their historical contexts. The goal of this thesis is to analyze Mivart´s critiques and Darwin´s answers, and to verify if they were scientifically well formulated and based considering the scientific context of that time. The reason for writing this work is an attempt to fill a gap in the History of Science about the scientific controversy between Mivart and Darwin on the role of natural selection in the origin of species. This work´s hypotheses are two: that Mivart´s critiques, despite being religiously motivated, were plausible scientifically, and that Darwin answered them fully. This research analyzes the primary sources of Mivart (Genesis of species) and Darwin's Origin of Species, and other secondary sources. The result reached was that Mivart´s critiques were indeed scientific, and that Darwin answered them according to the evidences and scientific knowledge then available / Esta pesquisa segue a linha de História e Teoria da Ciência que objetiva trazer esclarecimentos sobre a construção do pensamento científico através da discussão da fundamentação de hipóteses e teorias dentro do seu contexto histórico. O objetivo desta dissertação é analisar as críticas de Mivart e as respostas dadas por Darwin, e verificar se elas estavam bem formuladas e fundamentadas cientificamente considerando-se o contexto científico daquela época. A justificativa para a realização desta trabalho é tentar preencher uma lacuna em História da Ciência sobre a controvérsia científica entre Mivart e Darwin sobre o papel da seleção natural na origem das espécies. As hipóteses deste trabalho são duas: as críticas de Mivart, apesar de terem sido religiosamente fundamentadas, eram cientificamente plausíveis, e Darwin as respondeu satisfatoriamente. O aspecto teórico-metodológico foi a análise das fontes primárias de Mivart (Genesis of species) e de Darwin (Origin of species), e outras fontes secundárias. O resultado obtido foi que as críticas de Mivart eram científicas, e que Darwin respondeu-as conforme as evidências e o conhecimento científico da época

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-28T14:16:39Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Andreza Polizello.pdf: 806973 bytes, checksum: 2f1d51dd54a25808c194bffdd9f6ab2c (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-05-14 / Secretaria da Educação do Estado de São Paulo / Francis Galton (1822-1911) made important contributions in several fields of science. Among other things, he was the founder of the Biometric School developed by Karl Pearson and Walter Frank Raphael Weldon. The aim of this dissertation is to discuss Galton s ideas on inheritance developed during the period between 1855 (when he published his first works on the subject) and 1889 (when he published the book Natural inheritance), especially focusing his theory of stirps (1872), taking into account the other microscopic models of inheritance proposed in the 19th century. Besides that, it will compare Galton s theory of stirps to Darwin s hypothesis of pangenesis. Moreover, it will try to detect if there were significant changes in Galton s thought concerning the subject during this period. It will also try to elucidate if the low impact received by the theory of stirps was due to a weak foundation. This dissertation contains an introduction and five chapters. Chapter 1 presents some microscopic models of inheritance which were proposed during the 19th century. Chapter 2 discusses Darwin s hypothesis of pangenesis and its test made by Galton. Chapter 3 analyses Galton s theory of stirps. Chapter 4 discusses about the development of Galton s theory of heredity from 1865 to 1892. Chapter 5 provides some final remarks on the subject. This study led to the conclusion that Galton s proposal presented some peculiarities which differentiated it from the other ones of his time such as the experimental test of pangenesis, the performance of several experiments with peas, dogs and the study of genealogies and in addition to this, his concern in giving a statistical treatment to the data. A comparison between his several works showed a continuity of his thoughts on heredity with no significant changes / Francis Galton (1822-1911) trouxe importantes contribuições para diversos campos da ciência. Entre outras coisas, ele foi o fundador da Escola biometricista desenvolvida por Karl Pearson e Walter Frank Raphael Weldon. O objetivo desta dissertação é discutir as idéias de Galton acerca da herança desenvolvidas durante o período compreendido entre 1855 (quando ele publicou seus primeiros trabalhos sobre o assunto) e 1889 (quando ele publicou seu livro Natural inheritance), focalizando especialmente sua teoria das estirpes (1872), levando em conta os outros modelos microscópicos de herança propostos durante o século XIX. Além disso, comparará a teoria das estirpes de Galton com a hipótese da pangênese de Darwin. Procurará detectar se houve mudanças significativas no pensamento de Galton em relação ao assunto tratado durante esse período. Procurará também elucidar se o baixo impacto recebido pela teoria das estirpes se deveu a uma fundamentação fraca. Esta dissertação contém uma introdução e cinco capítulos. O Capítulo 1 apresenta alguns modelos microscópicos de herança que foram propostos durante o século XIX. O Capítulo 2 discute a hipótese da pangênese de Darwin e seu teste feito por Galton. O Capítulo 3 analisa a teoria das estirpes de Galton. O Capítulo 4 comenta sobre o desenvolvimento da teoria da hereditariedade de Galton de 1865 a 1892. O Capítulo 5 apresenta algumas considerações finais sobre o assunto. Este estudo levou à conclusão de que a proposta de Galton apresentou algumas peculiaridades que a diferenciavam das outras propostas de sua época tais como o teste experimental da pangênese, a realização de vários experimentos com ervilhas, cachorros e o estudo de genealogias e, além disso, sua preocupação em dar um tratamento estatístico aos dados. Uma comparação entre seus diversos trabalhos mostrou a existência de uma continuidade em seus pensamentos sobre hereditariedade e a ausência de mudanças significativas. Além disso, parece que o baixo impacto recebido pela teoria das estirpes de Galton não se deveu a uma fundamentação deficiente

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-28T14:16:46Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Fernando Moreno Castilho.pdf: 1212881 bytes, checksum: 82b2800cd48eb04a8d3b3f4663ac6d69 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-05-21 / Secretaria da Educação do Estado de São Paulo / Among the books written by Charles Robert Darwin (1809-1882) the Origin of species (1859) is the best known. However, in such book he did not deal with man. He had dealt with this subject in two books which were published later: The expression of emotions in man and animals (1872) and The descent of man (1871). This dissertation aims to elucidate if Darwin had presented the same ways of modification of the species in The origin of species and The expression of emotions in man and animals. It will be also taken into account some conceptions presented by him in The descent of man. This study contains an introduction and three chapters. Chapter 1 deals with some of Darwin s contributions offering an overview of the main ways of modification found in the Origin of species. Chapter 2 analyses the ways of modification of species found in The expression of emotions in man and animals. Chapter 3 offers a comparison between the conceptions found in both books as well as providing some final remarks on the subject. This study led to the conclusion that the ways of modification of species proposed in both books are the same: natural selection, sexual selection, inheritance of acquired characteristics. Besides that, it may be found an analogy between natural and artificial selection in both of them. However, in The expression of emotions in man and animals Darwin stressed the role of the inheritance of acquired characteristics in order to explain some patterns of behaviour in man and other animals. It can also be pointed out that several conceptions found in The Expression had inspired some more recent works contributing for the building of the discipline Ethology, in the 1960 s / Dentre os livros escritos por Charles Robert Darwin (1809-1882), o Origem das espécies (1859) é o mais conhecido. Entretanto, nesta obra ele não lidou com o homem. Ele tratou deste assunto em duas obras que publicou posteriormente: na Expressão das emoções no homem e nos animais (1872) e na Origem do homem (1871). O objetivo desta dissertação é elucidar se Darwin apresentou os mesmos meios de modificação das espécies nessas duas obras. Serão também consideradas as concepções apresentadas na Origem do homem. Esta dissertação contém uma introdução e três capítulos. O capítulo 1 trata de algumas contribuições de Darwin oferecendo uma visão geral dos principais meios de modificação das espécies encontrados no Origem das espécies. O capítulo 2 analisa os meios de modificação das espécies encontrados no livro Expressão das emoções no homem e nos animais. O capítulo 3 apresenta uma comparação das concepções encontradas nos dois livros bem como algumas considerações finais sobre o assunto. Este estudo levou à conclusão de que os meios de modificação das espécies apresentados nas duas obras consideradas são os mesmos: seleção natural, seleção sexual, herança de caracteres adquiridos pelo uso e desuso. Entretanto, na Expressão das emoções no homem e nos animais, Darwin enfatizou o papel da herança de caracteres adquiridos para explicar alguns padrões de comportamento no homem e em outros animais. Pode ser também apontado que diversas concepções encontradas no livro Expressão das emoções no homem e nos animais serviram de inspiração para trabalhos mais recentes contribuindo para a construção da disciplina Etologia, na década de 1960

The worlds of Dickens's novels and of Darwin's science reveal striking similarity in spite of their involvement in different areas. The similarity comes from the fact that they shared the ethos of Victorian society: laissez-faire capitalism. In The Origin of Species, which was published on 1859, Charles Darwin theorizes that nature has evolved through the rules of natural selection, survival of the fittest, and the struggle for existence. Although his conclusion comes from the scientific evidence that was acquired from his five-year voyage, it is clear that Dawinian nature is reflected in cruel Victorian capitalism. Three novels of Charles Dickens which were published around 1859, Bleak House, Hard Times, and Our Mutual Friend, share Darwinian aspects in their fictional worlds. In Bleak House, the central image, the Court of Chancery as the background of the novel, resembles Darwinian nature which is anti-Platonic in essence. The characters in Hard Times are divided into two groups: the winners and the losers in the arena of survival. The winners survive in Coketown, and the losers disappear from the city. The rules controlling the fates of Coketown people are the same as the rules of Darwinian nature. Our Mutual Friend can be interpreted as a matter of money. In the novel, everything is connected with money, and the relationship among people is predation to get money. Money is the central metaphor of the novel and around the money, the characters kill and are killed like the nature of Darwin in which animals kill each other. When a dominant ideology of a particular period permeates ingredients of the society, nobody can escape the controlling power of the ideology. Darwin and Dickens, although they worked in different areas, give evidence that their works are products of the ethos of Victorian England.