Notes

  1. . Ralph WendellBurhoe, “The Human Prospect and the ‘Lord of History,” Zygon  10(1975): 299–375.
  2. . Donald T.Campbell, “On the Conflicts between Biological and Social Evolution and between Psychology and Moral Tradition,” American Psychologist  30 (1975): 1103–26 reprinted in Zygon 11 (1976):167 208.
  3. . Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species, facsimile of 1st ed. (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1966), p. 43. Page numbers in parentheses refer to this source.
  4. . Ralph WendellBurhoe, “The Civilization of the Future: Ideals and Possibility,” Philosophy Forum  13 (1973): 157.
  5. . Ibid.
  6. . Ibid., p. 313. Burhoe actually qualifies this attribute of human choice “for certain very long‐range and complex problems,” but I frankly do not see what difference that makes.
  7. . C. H. Waddington, The Ethical Animal (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967).
  8. . Arnold W.Ravin, “Science, Values and Human Evolution,” Zygon  11 (1976): 138–54.
  9. . StephenCotgrove, “Objections to Science,” Nature  250 (1974): 764–67.
  10. . Ibid., p. 764. The quotation from E. J. Dijksterhuis is from his The Mechanization of the World Picture (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961).
  11. . See, e.g., Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962); A. C. Crombie, ed., Scientific Change (New York: Basic Books, 1963).
  12. . For a clear perception of this limitation, we owe much, of course, to Karl R. Popper as exemplified in his Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge (New York: Basic Books, 1962).
  13. . Donald T. Campbell, “Variation and Selective Retention in Sociocultural Evolution,” in Social Change in Developing Areas, ed. H. R. Barringer, G. L. Blanksten, and R. W. Mack (Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman Publishing Co., 1965); “On the Genetics of Altruism and the Counter‐hedonic Components in Human Culture,” Journal of Social Issues 28 (1972): 21–37; and n. 2 above.
  14. . Burhoe, “Civilization,” p. 159.
  15. . Burhoe, “Human Prospect,” p. 314.
  16. . Ibid., p. 337.
  17. . For a representative “dialogue” between the two sides of the sociobiological debate, see the critique, “Sociobiology: Another Biological Determinism,” by the Sociobiology Study Group of Science for the People, and the response, “Academic Vigilantism and the Political Significance of Sociobiology,” byE. O.Wilson, in BioScience  26(1976): 182–90.
  18. . Burhoe, “Human Prospect,” p. 339.
  19. . Ibid., p. 359.
  20. . Ibid., p. 363.
  21. . Ibid.
  22. . Ibid., p. 364.
  23. . Ibid.
  24. . Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Man's Place in Nature (New York: Harper & Row, 1966).
  25. . Burhoe, “Civilization,” p. 365.
  26. . Julian Huxley, Evolution in Action (New York: Harper & Bros., 1953); Wadding‐ton (n. 7 above).
  27. . Burhoe, “Civilization,” p. 151. He defines the human brain as the “central locus of organization” of society or civilization, “the key and dynamic source of information that informs or shapes society.“
  28. . For a good discussion of genetic polymorphism, see Richard C. Lewontin, The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change (New York: Columbia University Press, 1974).
  29. . Burhoe, “Human Prospect,” p. 315.
  30. . Ibid., p. 343.
  31. . Ibid., pp. 356–57.