Example of replacing Newtonian thinking with Darwinian

From NYMag Science of Us:

Happiness vs Emotional Diversity 

We already know that stress is bad for our health, and in recent years, a growing collection of research has taken things a step further, suggesting that beyond a simple lack of stress, it’s happiness that holds the key to health. The emotion doesn’t just make life more pleasant, studies have found; happier people feel better and live longer, too. ... Lead author Anthony Ong, professor of human development in the College of Human Ecology and professor of geriatrics and palliative medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine, compares our emotional landscape to an ecosystem: “Emodiversity draws from research in the natural sciences on the benefits of biodiversity,” he says. An environment is healthier when various species all serve their own functional roles, and suffers when any one species is depleted or becomes overabundant, throwing off the balance. Similarly, he explains, emotions serve functional roles for people, helping them prioritize and regulate behavior to adapt to a given situation.

Pragmatic Approach to Morality

I agree with this from Dan Little. Putting it here to save and come to. 

Moral progress and critical realism. 

This impulse towards moral realism is a problem. Moral realism and scientific realism are not analogous. There is no philosophical or theological method that will resolve moral questions into an unquestionable foundation or set of universal moral truths. Neither Kantianism, nor Aristotelianism, nor utilitarianism, nor traditional religious systems have the capacity to establish universal and unquestionable moral conclusions. The impulse towards moral realism has the perilous possibility of morphing into a dogmatic view of morality that substitutes one's own convictions for eternal moral truths. In my view, this is farfetched and ultimately implies an unreflective dogmatism about values. Fortunately there is a better and more modest position available that derives from the same pragmatist origins that are inspiring other advances in critical realism.

The better approach is based on a coherence epistemology. This approach is explicitly anti-realist when it comes to moral values. Ethical reasoning always has to do with conversation, disagreement, and sometimes progress. Moral practices have social reality, to be sure; but there are no "moral facts" consisting of moral principles and values that are beyond the possibility of further rational debate. This approach to moral theory emphasizes corrigibility and pragmatic debate about ends, means, and values. It converges with coherence epistemology along the lines of Quine and Rawls; it deliberately replaces a foundationalist approach to moral thinking with a corrigible ongoing series of discussions by moral equals. This allows for an epistemology based on dialogue, and it comes out of the pragmatist tradition.

Because John McCain Does Not Exist

Who's the hero now?

So how do you tell a good story when all the protagonists from one side are gone? When men like Ted Kennedy and Paul Wellstone--Camelot and the common touch--stand out on the Democratic side, who is the hero that provides the balance needed for "good journalism"?

Enter John McCain.

Voltaire said:

"Si Dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer."

Translation: If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.

Read More

Who wouldn't love a separate but equal system of education?

This wasn't a big problem when a high school diploma qualified students for a career. But today, when post-secondary education is essential to secure employment, our system of providing it is separate but equal. If you didn't go to college, you still pay state taxes and fund State U, but your kids won't go there. Instead, they are left to fend for themselves in the jungle of trade schools, community colleges, and for-profits.

Read More