authors:
- Ruse, Michael
content: "Michael Ruse is an old hand in the philosophy of biology. He is eminently\
\ qualified to write this short book. An important attraction of it is the account\
\ of the history of the idea of natural selection. He argues that even though Darwin\
\ was clear about the importance of natural selection in accounting for evolution,\
\ many others, both in the 19th century and later, have construed its role differently.\
\ \n\nUnfortunately, the book leans too heavily on explicating the history of ideas\
\ in general, and Darwin's account in particular. It spends less effort on giving\
\ an overall picture of the current state of knowledge. Also, the text should have\
\ been edited more thoroughly. I am also somewhat puzzled that some of the quotes\
\ Ruse uses do not really illustrate what he claims that they do. I do not think\
\ he fundamentally misrepresents the arguments of the authors he criticizes, it's\
\ just that the quotes he uses in some cases simply do not seem relevant to the\
\ argument he makes.\n\nThe discussion about the rival \"root\" (!) metaphors of\
\ mechanism and organicism is very clear, and is by itself as good reason to read\
\ the book."
date: '2024-06-18'
edition:
published: '2023'
publisher: Cambridge University Press
goodreads: '117422846'
html: '<p>Michael Ruse is an old hand in the philosophy of biology. He is eminently
qualified to write this short book. An important attraction of it is the account
of the history of the idea of natural selection. He argues that even though Darwin
was clear about the importance of natural selection in accounting for evolution,
many others, both in the 19th century and later, have construed its role differently.
</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the book leans too heavily on explicating the history of ideas
in general, and Darwin''s account in particular. It spends less effort on giving
an overall picture of the current state of knowledge. Also, the text should have
been edited more thoroughly. I am also somewhat puzzled that some of the quotes
Ruse uses do not really illustrate what he claims that they do. I do not think he
fundamentally misrepresents the arguments of the authors he criticizes, it''s just
that the quotes he uses in some cases simply do not seem relevant to the argument
he makes.</p>
<p>The discussion about the rival "root" (!) metaphors of mechanism and
organicism is very clear, and is by itself as good reason to read the book.</p>
'
isbn: '9781009088329'
language: en
lastmod: '2024-06-18'
path: /library/ruse-2023.html
published: '2023'
rating: 3
reference: Ruse 2023
reviewed: '2024-06-18'
subjects:
- evolution
- philosophy
- science
title: Understanding Natural Selection
type: book
year: 2023