Re: Race: real or imagined? (fwd)

Boris, please give some examples or specific names. only then,
can we clarify this problem. I have not met a progressive socio-biologist
yet. may be, you can help me find one. In fact, critics of socio-biology
dicipline are associated with biologists like Richard Lewontin and Stephen
Gould. ONE DOES NOT NEED TO BE ANTI-SCIENCE TO BE AGAINST SOCIO-BIOLOGY.

you seem to suggest that socio-biology is not inherently ideological. are
you sure about this? Are Wilson, Peterson, Dawkins, Rushton, Levin the
accidental products of socio-biology dicipline? or is there a problem with
the assumptions of the dicipline itself? how do you draw the line
between ideology and science ("emprical confirmation") in socio-biology?
Unfortunately, it seems very hard, me thinks. 

good night,

Mine


>It is testament to the high level of this debate that people first pick
>fights in order to then regurgitate past profundities.  What we have here
>is a persistent failure to distinguish between disciplinary entities with
>an explicit political agenda and individual theories which receive
>empirical confirmation.  To say a rejection of sociobiology
>necessarily constitutes a rejection of all research by sociobiologists is
>the same as saying that an anti-Darwinist rejects the theory of evolution
>(A.R. Wallace, a cofounder of said theory, was an anti-Darwinist).

-- 
Boris Stremlin
bc70219@binghamton.edu