- Natural Kinds: William Whewell and John Stuart Mill
The nature of classification [Book with Malte Ebach] Essentialism in Biology [Of course, I shall do more on this later]
- Cognitive Science Accounts of Religion [Book]
- Can religion accommodate science? [Book, under review]
- The Evolution of Religions
- Social dominance hierarchies in human society
- Hybridism and Species Concepts
- Secularism in Australia
Evolutionary Debunking Arguments of Religion (with Paul Griffiths)
- Evolved to Know: Evolutionary epistemology and the naturalisation of cognition [A book I might one day write; some papers with Paul Griffiths are downloadable from PhilPapers]
A Justification of Theistic Evolutionism Elliot Sober’s Modus Darwin
- A review of Sober’s Evidence and Evolution
- The Tautology Problem
- Sundry other reviews
As of 16 May 2014
“The Evolution of Religions,” is one of the above articles I would really like to read.
When I write it, I’ll let you know 😉 Actually it’s a long term research program, part of what I am being covered for in my present grant.
Funny. I just started reading a book called Evolution of God. See here http://amzn.to/IIPlOx. The writing style is a bit dry, but lots of pretty interesting material in there.
I added a paper on this at my Academia.edu site.
Would it be incorrect to suggest that religion may have evolved throughout history so as to suit an evolving discourse of truth itself? That’s going to be an interesting paper – sounds like you’ll require a research assistant though!
Trip sounds fantastic can’t wait to hear about it over coffee when you return.
– Just watched a program on SBS ‘Darwin’s Dangerous Idea’ – sounds confronting! Lots of comments on the website, didn’t realise people are so passionate about this subject!
How much of your work still employs systems since your days at Sante Fe? Please check out my blog, orgcomplexity.wordpress.com. Need some encouragement in complexity. Thanks!
Wrong Wilkins. You want the young handsome guy:
But you are also super awesome! Sorry! ….Do you work in complexity most generally or would you define yourself as an analyst?
I’m a philosopher, so analyst. Science proposes, philosophy disposes…
Correction to above comment—delete Sante Fe part….Thanks!