in summary, ralph fiennes is hot.

[lauralh]

we saw The Constant Gardener. I'm not sure how much I liked it but the structure and cinematography were excellent. Pretty movies with pretty people are always recommendable. I just hate UNCOMFORTABLE. Even though it resolved in the end somewhat positively, it was still tragic.

In happier news, I'm reading Darwin's Dangerous Idea and I just finished the chapter where he lambasts Stephen Jay Gould. It was truly a thing of beauty. He's not sure why Gould pretends to be anti-Darwinist but suspects it has something to do with Marxism. edit: arachnophiliac says it probably has more to do with paleontology.

It's hard not to draw that conclusion though when Gould was so ardent a Marxist that he was pro-revolutions and anti-reforms. This viewpoint is amazingly bizarre to me, but most of the leftists I know are pacifists.

Comments

[candid.livejournal.com]

If you get really into the Gould / Dawkins / Dennett debate, this book is really excellent.

[victory-goddess.livejournal.com]

A.fuckin.men.

[sisyphus.livejournal.com]

Daniel Dennett is a fucking douchebag, and most of his philosophy is shit.

The idea that punctuated equilibrium came from a Marxist background is just stupid. It's science, not the humanities, you can't just make shit up and expect it to be accepted because it sounds good.

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

Fortunately that's not what Dennett said.

[langston.livejournal.com]

I liked The Constant Gardener as well. I found the depictions of the local peopels heart wrenching, Ralph's emotional struggles nearly unbearable and that scene near the end where they run for the plane? Right at my tear ducts.


As for Dawkins, et al; I really liked "The Blind Watchmaker" or whatever it was called. Nearly compelling argument.

[sisyphus.livejournal.com]

"Apparently Gould was so ardent a Marxist that he was pro-revolutions and anti-reforms, even in biology."

What does this mean then? It sounds exactly like the standard genetic fallacy used to critique punctuated equilibrium.

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

Edited for clarity.

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

does that mean you're a creationist?

[langston.livejournal.com]

no, but I always can appreciate and enjoy a eloquent, in depth argument.

My own belief system fluxuates, my best guess is that what we know of life is an evolution and diversification of chemical/biological processes imported from space but I counter myself by not being able to rationalize away the deeply moving and powerful unknown energy present in such abundance wherever there is life