Paul Griffiths on Human Nature 6 Aug 200922 Jun 2018 Below the fold is a notice for a lecture by my friend and colleague Paul Griffiths that anyone in Sydney ought to go to. Sydney, Australia, not Sydney in any other country that seems to use all other countries’ placenames… The Sydney University Arts Association presents The Inaugural Lecture of Professor Paul E. Griffiths, Department of Philosophy and Sydney Centre for the Foundations of Science Reconstructing Human Nature: Tuesday 11th August 2009 at 6:00pm Refreshments in the Woolley Common Room from 5:30pm. Lecture in the Woolley Theatre N395 Woolley Building, University of Sydney. The Common Room is on the first floor of the Woolley Building. The Lecture Theatre is on the right hand side of the entrance lobby. The idea of human nature is the locus of longstanding disputes about the relevance of the biological sciences to the humanities and social sciences. But the ideas of “human nature”, “instinct”, and “innateness” are not derived from the biological sciences. They originate in intuitive, pre-scientific thought about living things, sometimes known as “folkbiology”. In this lecture Professor Griffiths will present a model of the folkbiological understanding of human nature, based on empirical research conducted with biologically naive subjects in Australia and North America. This folkbiological understanding of human nature is fundamentally inconsistent with current biology. This raises the pressing issue of what a biologically credible account of human nature would look like, and he will try to address this question. A philosopher of science with a focus on biology and psychology, Paul was educated at Cambridge and the Australian National University. He taught at Otago University inNew Zealand and was later Director of the Unit for History and Philosophy of Science at The University of Sydney, before taking up a Professorship in Department of History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Pittsburgh. He returned to Australia in 2004, first as an Australian Research Council Federation Fellow and then as University Professorial Research Fellow at the University of Sydney <http://www.usyd.edu.au> . He spends part of each year at the University of Exeter in the ESRC Centre for Genomics in Society. He is a Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities, an adjunct member of the Pittsburgh HPS faculty, and a member of the Australian Health Ethics Committee <http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/ethics/human/ahec/> of NHMRC. Biology Epistemology Evolution Philosophy Science
Biology On borders and boundaries 30 Jun 2010 Thos who focus on differences often tend to look more closely at boundaries than at the core of the phenomenon, whether it is social, biological or conceptual. So I was pleased to read this comment by Will Thomas regarding boundaries in social and historical contexts: However, I want to finish… Read More
Book Book review 27 Jun 2009 A guest review by Richard Harter, a member of the Talk.Origins Old Ones… The Medea Hypothesis, Is Life on Earth Ultimately Self-Destructive?, Peter Ward, 2009, Princeton University Press, Princeton New Jersey, ISBN-13: 978-0-691-13075-0 Read More
Evolution The new Darwin film 6 Sep 2009 From this review and several other things I have seen of it, The Creation looks to be a pretty sympathetic treatment of Darwin’s life and work. It’s a pity it’s based on a false premise: that Darwin was motivated by the death of his daughter Annie to become irreligious, or… Read More
Damn, I’m stuck in Canberra that day. Do you know if this will be posted on the net anywhere? I did some study on this area uni in my undergraduate, and it is a fascinating topic.
Well, since I live in Brazil I will not be able to watch that lecture. That’s sad, there is a big ocean between me and the discussion of such a interesting topic. Unfortunately, I’ve got used to that feeling. Soon I will write on my blog about a false generalization based on folk biology: that every man cheats on his partner in romantic relationships, and that such behavior is caused by some ‘natural trait’ or ‘instinct’. Lots of people make this generalization around here. Men trying to justify their behavior, women trying to justify their incredulity about relationships. Well, certainly not with the competence of professor Griffiths, but with some effort, I’m also trying show the inconsistencies of folk biology around here.
…naive subjects in Australia… Isn’t qualifying the concept ‘Australian’ with the adjective ‘naïve’ a tautology?
Thanks — I came as a result of this post and it was great. Just posted on some tangential impressions from the talk: http://anadder.com/the-problem-of-innateness