Mind and Cosmos: Why the Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False by Thomas Nagel

The subtitle of this surprisingly brief volume by Thomas Nagel presages something more, and something less, than what at a glance it may seem to promise. In such a confined space as a mere 128 pages, coming from such a noted philosopher, one might expect that Nagel has consolidated and refined a hi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Stan V. McDaniel
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SSE 2013-06-01
Series:Journal of Scientific Exploration
Online Access:http://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/article/view/643
id doaj-5bbe8f9a2b5a446fbbbbbf7d3685ff32
record_format Article
spelling doaj-5bbe8f9a2b5a446fbbbbbf7d3685ff322020-11-25T03:20:36ZengSSEJournal of Scientific Exploration0892-33102013-06-01272Mind and Cosmos: Why the Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False by Thomas NagelStan V. McDaniel The subtitle of this surprisingly brief volume by Thomas Nagel presages something more, and something less, than what at a glance it may seem to promise. In such a confined space as a mere 128 pages, coming from such a noted philosopher, one might expect that Nagel has consolidated and refined a highly focused, decisive argument against the prevalent materialist–reductionist account of mind and its place in nature. Those of a materialist view will not likely be concerned, since philosophical objections seldom seem to have much effect on that paradigm. On the other hand, those who feel deeply that something is amiss in the reductionist account might be a bit disturbed when they realize the import of the word almost in the subtitle. Is Nagel hedging his bets? That puzzling “almost” is easier to understand, however, when we reach the concluding summary, which might better have been placed right up front on page 1: "Philosophy has to proceed comparatively. The best we can do is to develop the rival alternative conceptions in each important domain as fully and carefully as possible, depending on our antecedent sympathies, and see how they measure up. That is a more credible form of progress than decisive proof or refutation." (p. 127) http://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/article/view/643
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Stan V. McDaniel
spellingShingle Stan V. McDaniel
Mind and Cosmos: Why the Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False by Thomas Nagel
Journal of Scientific Exploration
author_facet Stan V. McDaniel
author_sort Stan V. McDaniel
title Mind and Cosmos: Why the Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False by Thomas Nagel
title_short Mind and Cosmos: Why the Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False by Thomas Nagel
title_full Mind and Cosmos: Why the Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False by Thomas Nagel
title_fullStr Mind and Cosmos: Why the Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False by Thomas Nagel
title_full_unstemmed Mind and Cosmos: Why the Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False by Thomas Nagel
title_sort mind and cosmos: why the neo-darwinian conception of nature is almost certainly false by thomas nagel
publisher SSE
series Journal of Scientific Exploration
issn 0892-3310
publishDate 2013-06-01
description The subtitle of this surprisingly brief volume by Thomas Nagel presages something more, and something less, than what at a glance it may seem to promise. In such a confined space as a mere 128 pages, coming from such a noted philosopher, one might expect that Nagel has consolidated and refined a highly focused, decisive argument against the prevalent materialist–reductionist account of mind and its place in nature. Those of a materialist view will not likely be concerned, since philosophical objections seldom seem to have much effect on that paradigm. On the other hand, those who feel deeply that something is amiss in the reductionist account might be a bit disturbed when they realize the import of the word almost in the subtitle. Is Nagel hedging his bets? That puzzling “almost” is easier to understand, however, when we reach the concluding summary, which might better have been placed right up front on page 1: "Philosophy has to proceed comparatively. The best we can do is to develop the rival alternative conceptions in each important domain as fully and carefully as possible, depending on our antecedent sympathies, and see how they measure up. That is a more credible form of progress than decisive proof or refutation." (p. 127)
url http://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/article/view/643
work_keys_str_mv AT stanvmcdaniel mindandcosmoswhytheneodarwinianconceptionofnatureisalmostcertainlyfalsebythomasnagel
_version_ 1724617788235972608