Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Dogma and developmental studies
Continuing in this post of the IPS real false reason thread, in reading Sattler's Integral World article on scientific dogma he provides an example from his own research in plant morphology. He, like most other scientists, was inculcated into an Aristotelian logic of strict, well-defined categories. But his empirical research was showing that some plants just didn't fit into one or the other accepted category. He came to accept fuzzy logic in developing a continuum morphology for those plants that were somewhere in between. Dogma refused to accept this but he said evo-devo has since proved his hypothesis.
He links to his paper on this. Therein he makes a connection between classical Aristotelian categories and essentialist thinking. (Sound familiar?) While both have been surpassed in many other fields, from pomo to evo-devo, its remnants still remain in some scientific fields. Per my effusive ruminations in the thread above, fuzzy logic has yet to make its way into some human developmental studies. At least of the kind so criticized therein. Others are indeed evolving due to these empirical evo-devo developments.