D'Abrera on Science and Philosophy

[Chris Raper]

On 26 Jul 1998 02:39:49 -0700, jfhanlo at ibm.net (James F Hanlon) wrote:

[snip]

Hi Jim,

It is nice to see that someone else enjoys those segments of the books
as much as I do. 

>To sum it up, I guess D'Abrera is saying that science can not and should not
>vainly think that it can explain everything, 

As a confirmed 'evolutionist' (but willing to be pursuaded otherwise
by a better theory) I am rather disheartened by the 'blind faith'
arguments that many religeous groups (and dictators) say that 'the
masses' should follow.

I would agree that it is folly to think that science could explain
_everything_ but it is a greater folly to think that we shouldn't at
least try to explain something. 

>but I am particularly interested to know what you think [snip]
>"one of the logical consequences of the phenomenon of Infinitely Dichotomous
>Variety is that both divergence and convergence of form are not only
>possible, but necessary". 

I would guess here that his choice of the word 'necessary' is a
mistake on his part. I have always thought that he is just saying that
if things vary infinitely then the patterns will always either look
more or less like another pattern and this is to be expected. To use
the word 'necessary' would imply that there is an end purpose to this
process - an evolution - which, as a 'creationist', he would have to
disagree with.

I met Bernard D'Abrera a few years back in the Neotropical lepidoptera
section of the British Museum Natural History. I, rather naively,
raised the subject of mimicry rings in Heliconius spp. and this
resulted in a very interesting conversation on the failings of
evolutionism and the merits on creationism. He ended by giving me a
paper on the subject and crushing 2 or 3 of my specimens under a
post-it note! In hindsight I should have asked him for a few books to
make up for the damage! ;-)

Just my 2c  :-)
Chris R.