"John Wilkins"  wrote in message
news:cbivm1$1dcq$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org...
> Michael Ragland  wrote:
>
> > I disagree with Mr. Buck who is not a scientist but I like his spirit.
> > (his brief article is below) He is a socialist and of course if one does
> > subscribe to biological determinism then the idea of socialism is
> > shattered. [snip]

> Assuming you meant aspect of our *psychology* I am a strong determinist
> - nothing we do or say is not strongly biased by our biological nature.
> But biological natures have a norm of reaction and a normal distribution
> (or a skewed one, but that is evidence in a largish population of some
> selective pressure). In short, there are a wide range of states that our
> biological natures can attain, and they very much depend on contingent
> effects of the developmental environments, social, and ecological.
>
> It is not a widely accepted viewpoint, I know.

John has recently directed me to the writings of Susan Oyama and the
"Developmental Systems Theory" school.  You, Michael, may also be
interested.  This movement (primarily one of the political left) rejects
the conventional dichotomy between nature and nurture.  It endorses
both biological AND cultural determinism - we are, say, 90%
determined by each - that is, many things are jointly determined.

I would recommend her book "Evolution's Eye: A Systems View of
the Biology-Culture Divide".  It has a good chapter on aggression,
which, to my mind, hits the nail squarely on the head.  And I'm
not even a leftist.
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 6/26/04 10:13:04 PM