Notes

1. . Robert L. Heilbroner, An Inquiry into the Human Prospect (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1974).
2. . Alfred North Whitehead, Science and the Modern World (New York: Macmillan Co., 1925) and Process and Reality (New York: Macmillan Co., 1929).
3. . By the fallacy of misplaced concreteness Whitehead means generally mistaking abstractions for concrete realities. The principal example he cites–and the one against which his argument is directed–is the notion of matter as an isolated event, a simple location in space and time, as developed mainly by Isaac Newton. Because this idea was successful in resolving problems of force, motion, and gravitation it rather dogmatically was extended and accepted as concrete fact, despite its deficiencies in accounting for the phenomena of living things; mental events were attributed to a separate abstraction, mind, establishing a basic dualism. In place of both matter and mind Whitehead puts the notion of organism, which he thinks points more directly to the actual processes of the world as the true concrete realities (see Whitehead, Science and the Modern World, chaps. 3–4).
4. . Ibid., pp. 106, 115.
5. . D. C. Clayton, Principles of Stettar Evolution and Nucleosynthesis (New York: McGraw‐Hill Book Co., 1968).
6. . Whitehead, Science and the Modern World, p. 135.
7. . B. J.Carr and M. J.Rees, “The Anthropic Principle and the Structure of the Physical World,” Nature  278 (1979): 605.
8. . Theodosius Dobshansky et al., Evolution (San Francisco: W. H. Freeman & Co., 1977).
9. . C. D. Darlington; “A Diagram of Evolution,” Nature 276 (1978): 447.
10. . E. Jantsch and C. H. Waddington, eds., Evolution and Consciousness (Reading, Mass.: Addison Wesley Publishing Co., 1976).