Customer Reviews

Darwinian Fairytales: Selfish Genes, Errors of Heredity and Other Fables of Evolution

5 star:		(22)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

Many scientists and laypersons, sadly, never read philosophy of science. Though informal and humorous, this is a fine introduction to the genre. Those who grasp its importance may also enjoy Midgley's "Darwinism as a Religion" and Polanyi's "Science, Faith, and Society." Like Stove, but with less humour, they harangue those (such as Dawkins and Sagan) who publish popular propaganda or religion disguised as science.

Stove highlights how illogical science can be silly or, in the case of neo-Darwinism applied to humankind, insulting. Midgley does that and more--especially by showing how Darwinism's core tenets are held by faith. Polanyi, though, is the scariest of the lot, for he describes (from his experiences of Nazism and Stalinism) how pop evolution has led to the inhumanities of abortion, euthanasia, eugenics and genocide.

When Stove attacks neo-Darwinians' use of purposive language (for, in order to, plan, strategy, etc.), and especially, when he compares it to the language of Intelligent Design, he is very, very good. I've long wondered how unguided natural forces, without the benefits of intent, are supposed to "adapt for" anything. Perhaps most delightful is Stove's description of how the anti-religious Dawkins has ordained himself the high priest of gene worship. At times, Stove takes too long (by, say, 20-30%) saying what he says. His prose is so delightful, though, that I forgive (even welcome) his verbosity.

Reviewers read books. Since "reviewer" John's last sentence points out that he has not read this one, I'm not sure what he was reviewing. If, however, he's looking for "real scientists" (i.e. not philosophers or Christians!) who question neo-Darwinism, he'll find plenty, of all faiths or none, among the hundreds of credentialed academics at [...].

My field (linguistics) intersects with and draws upon acoustics, anatomy, anthropology, cognitive science, evolutionary biology, information theory, literature, physics, statistics, and yes, logic and philosophy, to name just a few. All sciences (which used to be called "natural philosophies") in fact, depend upon philosophy--esp. logic--for their foundational procedures: falsifiability, inference, proof, etc. Stove's arguments and examples show what happens when scientists do without logic: they write hilarious fairytales about selfish genes or flirtatious cabbages. Read Stove, but don't stop there (and don't miss Polanyi or Midgley).

"[Stove] is particularly good at exposing the `amazingly arrogant habit of Darwinians' of `blaming the fact, instead of blaming their theory' when they encounter contrary biological facts. Doctrinaire Darwinists have an answer for everything, always a bad sign in science, since it means that mere facts can never prove them wrong." - from Roger Kimball's Introduction

It is not at all the case that Stove objects to Darwinism on religious grounds, in fact he believes that present life has by some means evolved from earlier forms; however he is quite certain that "Darwin's explanation of evolution, even though it is . . . still the best one available, is not true." Stove would object, and strongly so, to having his essays cast as being sympathetic to `creationism' or, so far as I can tell, `intelligent design', as he defines himself as a man "of no religion." His knowledge and scholarship of Darwinian theory is self-evidently vast; he suggests that he has "wasted" his time reading hundreds of Darwinism's books and `Darwinian Fairytales' makes it quite evident that he has indeed studied every prominent Darwinian "from 1859 to the present hour."

I had just begun reading Richard Dawkins' `The Blind Watchmaker' when I noticed that David Stove's `Darwinian Fairytales' had been reprinted. While reading them both it quickly seemed imperative that I read Dawkins' `The Selfish Gene' before proceeding with either TBW or DF. So that is what I did. Reading the three books in close conjunction was quite a fascinating experience, and, as I have indicated elsewhere (my review of TSG), Dawkins didn't fare to well.

Stove, the late Australian philosopher of science, effectively skewers Dawkins (especially TSG, but, to a lesser extent, TBW as well), Stove nails E.O. Wilson too, in fact he takes a troupe of Darwinian champions to the woodshed -- T.H. Huxley, R.D. Alexander, R. Trivers, R.A. Fisher, among many others. A skeptic in Hume's mold, Stove has acerbically critiqued various iconic founts of Western thought, some more effectively than others, so Darwinians need not feel singled out (but of course they probably will). This book was his last, completed not long before his death in 1994.

Although he presents a few other criticisms, Stove relentlessly targets (1) Darwinism's ideological death-struggle with "altruism" -- that it must deny is actually altruism, and (2) Darwinism's non-falsifiable teleological doctrine: the immutable Lordship of "the selfish gene" -- a doggedly fideistic article of simple faith. Darwinism's teachings on altruism are easily sacked, both by clear logic and by mere empirical evidence; its supposedly anti-teleological teleology of itself qualifies Darwinism as being a religion.

If there is something to be faulted in Stove's book (a collection of 11 essays), it is the repetitiveness (not surprising as this is usually a problem in works of argumentation, witness especially Dawkins, for example). Long after Stove has illustrated the teleological confusions and defeated the "altruism" defamations demanded by Dawkins, Wilson, and the like, he is still throwing the badly bloodied doctrines to the ground. Because of this, and because each of the essays can more or less stand on its own, I recommend reading the first essay (Darwin's Dilemma), the second and the last (eleventh) before heading into the others. If the essay (#4) treating the influence of Malthus' population dynamics on Darwin's thought becomes dry or uninteresting, then skip it, perhaps moving to essays #9 (A New Religion) or 10 (Paley's Revenge, or Purpose Regained).

David Stove is one of the great underappreciated writers of the late 20th century. He's also dead, which doesn't generally do much for one's ability to slay dragons. It is fortunate the good people at the New Criterion have more or less sponsored his revival; he deserves to be much more widely known. Stove was an Australian academic philosopher who became embroiled in a university in-fight against what I like to call, the "know nothing academics" who came to prominence in the 1960s. Know nothings essentially make their livings making raspberry sounds at Western civilization. Stove was outraged such people could be taken seriously by anyone, and so he devoted a large amount of his considerable remaining wit and energy making such people miserable. This book represents one of his efforts in that direction. Contrary to what many people are saying in the reviews, Stove explicitly believes in Darwinian evolution, "more or less." I.e. he states that he believes in the broad strokes of evolutionary theory. He is, as others have stated, an atheist (as am I, if that matters to anyone).

He very specifically doesn't believe in nonsense views of evolution; in particular, the "hard man" view of Herbert Spencer or its intellectual descendant, the "selfish gene" view of Dawkins and company. Stove ruthlessly mocks the preposterous premises of these ideas (which even a 'good' Popperian would instantly recognize as non-falsifiable piffle), simply by examining them for what they really are. He also points out numerous giant conceptual lacunae, counterfactuals and the examples of flat out nonsense that make up the evidence for sociobiological "theory." Why does Stove do this? Apparently, he was ahead of his time. People like Dawkins have become pervasive pests; insisting that everyone think as he does, or risk being labeled, "unbright." Sociobiological 'theoretical' deconstructings of literature have become all the rage. Dawkins and his unseemly ilk need to be put in their place, along with other pseudo-scientific charlatans like Lysenko or the Phrenologists. Sociobiology is a shabby set of shaggy dog stories; Stove shows us how funny and absurd they really are. I rather wish Stove was a statistician as well; that would be the final cherry on top of the sociobiological humble pie, but I suppose one must leave work for future thinkers.

Modern "scientists" have elevated evolution to a cult. Enter intelligent design (ID) critics, whacked on by their roots with creationists (their own pre-Socratics), and you have one helluva fight. With these ideologues migrating to extremism and away from reason as understood by both scientific method and Aristotelian logic you are bound to have very murky waters indeed. The debate becomes unrecognizable to the classically educated.

Enter the reasonable atheist apologist for no side with whom people of faith (like myself) and no faith (like my friends) can wholeheartedly cheer on by anchoring the conversation in reason once again. The late David Stove does just that, with precision, wit, logic, clarity, and joy. Reading this book is like a breath of fresh air, and restores faith in human reason and the ability of thinkers to expose unsupportable extremes cloaked in unearned authority, whether it is "science" or "religion." A marvellous book which will have ideologues steaming and truth lovers and sideline quarterbacks enjoying the game.

The argument offered in this book is that the Darwinian theory of evolution does not apply to us --- that it does not apply to modern man, citizens of Cupertino, Manchester, and Kyoto. And I must admit that, when the question is put that way, it gives one pause. After all, Darwinian evolution is a nasty, fierce struggle for the survival of the fittest. Stove mentions, just for starters, the universal human institutions of soldiers, doctors, and priests. Every one of these special professions is altruistic, culminating perhaps in the Chief Matron of the Maternity Ward in any large hospital: she gets a huge amount of respect because she saves lives on a daily basis, altruistically helping unrelated women and children to get through the ordeal of birth --- and she does it every day.

When you think about it, such phenomena contradict the Darwinian theory completely, as does another strange phenomenon: "baby-stealing." Some mothers lose their babies very early, and a few of THOSE will go and steal another woman's baby. As Stove points out, most of us can get to a point where we "understand" this crime, and the enormous pain which caused it. The reaction of Darwinians (such as Dawkins) is dumbfounding: they claim that the mother whose baby has been stolen should be GLAD, because her little DNA-package is going to be raised at no cost by someone else. And they completely fail to understand the thief ("Why would anyone devote her life to rearing someone not related to them?")

Well, I imagine such titanic geniuses would also fail to understand adoption, huh.

Stove pushes things a bit farther when he states that, since Darwinian evolution is false for US, it it therefore a false theory because it CLAIMS to be about all living things. At the same time, Stove has no real problem with accepting the vast explanatory scope of evolution, so he seems to be suggesting that we have not yet got the theory down.

I have to mention the extraordinary writing skills of this man. Many of his essays are as tasty as mint fudge sundaes; they leave you wanting MORE.

This review is of the Kindle edition, which is very easy to read.

Stove argues against the Darwinian theory of evolution, in both its original and sociobiological forms. His concern is not so much with traditional difficulties like gaps in the fossil record, as with larger logical questions about how evolutionary theory gives a false view of human life, especially altruism. Stove argues that the complexity of evolutionary theory hides its logical flabbiness.

This is a neglected but important book. No doubt the reason for the neglect is that it has been caught in the crossfire of the culture wars, for it is too quickly assumed that any attack on any aspect of current Darwinism is support for the Creationists. In fact, Stove has even less patience for Creationism or religion in general than he does for the neo-Darwinists; for him, religion isn't even worth the time and bother of dismissing. Nor is this an attack on evolution in general; it is a very specific criticism of the extreme and implausible claims being made by contemporary Darwinists about its relevance to human behavior.

Stove has (had) a keen and powerful mind and an ability to digest an enormous amount of material (he says he read hundreds of books on evolution for this work). Though he is not a scientist, he brings the scientist's virtues of a skeptical and open-minded way of thinking to the issue, and he has a nose for ideologies and their pernicious effects. And in contemporary sociobiology he recognizes an ideology at work. The main thesis of the book is that the Darwinian claim about human nature - in Darwin's words, that any variation in the least degree injurious to our reproductive capacities would be rigidly destroyed - is simply false as applied to us. Humans do not seek to reproduce up to the maximum possible number of offspring, and any attempt to `explain' all of our behavior as actually governed by this reproductive imperative is simply misguided.

It is too bad this book has not gotten the attention it deserves, especially from biologists, who naturally resent a non-scientist and especially a philosopher daring to criticize their field (this does not stop them of course from repeatedly criticizing what philosophers do). But this is mere tribalism, and one hopes openness to criticism is part of the scientific ideal. Stove makes some important points here, including the question of the role of teleology in current biology. Not all of Stove's criticisms hit home; sometimes they are rather nitpicky. Nonetheless this is an outstanding book by a thinker who is extremely well-informed, an incisive critic, and a fine and witty writer in addition. Anyone interested in the topic of evolution ought to read this book.

An unusual book. He likes evolution, but thinks the currently accepted scientific explanation for it is bunk. He thinks Darwin was a genius, but thinks Darwinism is retarded. Obviously, this attitude is not going to please anybody at either end of the evolutionism/creationism spectrum. However, I think he raises many powerful points that strike at the heart of Darwinism, and that need to be addressed by its proponents. I am reasonably well-read in this area, and have not seen these issues raised before either in popular books or in college textbooks. Perhaps these points are being (or have been) addressed somewhere in the scholarly literature. If so, somebody needs to get the word out. If not, somebody needs to get on the stick. Stove is dead, so he can't be debated. But he deserves an answer.

Stove begins his relentless critique of Darwinism by noting, "If Darwin's theory of evolution were true, there would be be in every species a constant and ruthless competition to survive: a competition in which only a few in any generation could survive. But it is perfectly obvious that human life is not like that, however it may be with other species. This inconsistency, between Darwin's theory and the facts of human life, is what I mean by Darwinism's dilemma." It is hard to think of a more obvious (once pointed to) yet devastating criticism of Darwin's theory, and there is nothing complex or esoteric in the observation. Stove's book is like this, and a reminder that the many complexities of evolutionary theory are also often dust thrown in the face of non-specialists. You can walk away from Darwinism after Stove's first paragraph. Stove's book is a strange balance of philosophic equipoise and near savagery, such is the scalding tone of this new epitaph for a theory. This penetrating study by David Stove is one of the most caustic, yet insightful, critiques of Darwinism. It's clarity springs in part from a philosopher's thumbing his nose at theoretical complications that ensare many critics and simply looking at the most obvious discrepancy between the theory and real life. This should not excuse refusal to look at details, but it is easily forgotten how many contradictions creep into what has always been a partly speculative extrapolation about unseen events in deep time. As this passage shows, Stove looks closely at the Malthusian confusions and ideological factors of the post-revolutionary era that haunt Darwinism, and proceeds to a general attack on sociobiology, and other aspects of the theory. It is unfortunate once again: a penetrating book on Darwinism is out of print without reaching paperback, and left to lurk in the stacks of (very) large libraries, where this reader found it, as usual by chance, and where a host of other anti-Darwin books are buried lest they disturb the brainwashed views of the general public.

Darwinian Fairytales is a collection of essays by the late David Stove on Darwinism and mainly the inability of Darwinism to even come close to describing nature's most strange animal: man.

Written in the early 90's, before the Intelligent Design movement became of age, Stove offers criticisms of Darwinism that are not in the least religiously based as most criticisms have been. In fact Stove is an agnostic and does not spare barbs against religion throughout his essays. Despite his book, Stove apparently believes Darwinism is still the best explanation we have for life but after reading his essays one wonders how serious he is.

Stove's attack is on Darwinism's and Neodarwinism's pitiful attempts to explain human life and behaviour. Especially victim is the so-called discipline of Evolutionary Psychology and Dawkin's selfish genes. The simple fact of the matter is, which Stove repeatedly points out, is that humans are not like Darwin says they should be like: we are altruistic, we have religious beliefs, we do things diametrically opposed to prolonging our lives etc.

Some of his essays overlap considerably and things get repetetive. Here are the essays I found most worthwhile: 1. Darwinism's Dilemma 2. Where Darwin First Went Wrong about Man 3. But What about War, Pestilence, and All That? 4. Population Privelege, and Malthus' Retreat 5. A Horse in the Bathroom, and the Struggle for Life 6. Tax and the Selfish Girl, or Does "Altruism" need Inverted Commas 11. Errors of Heredity, or Irrelevance of Darwinism to Human life.

The critic of Darwin would do well to read this book to see some interesting arguments that the ID and the Creationists have not pushed as far as they could. The Darwinist should also read this book to answer the embarrassing gaps in evolutionary theory.