Re: [xmca] Lamarckian

I don't know how I got the name of the book wrong in my previous e-
mail, but here is the correct title:

Ever Since Darwin (Gould, 1979) and the quotes mentioned are on page
214 in Chapter 27 (Race and Recapitulation).

I did order myself a copy of Merlin's book, thanks Andy.

Mark

On Oct 26, 19 Heisei, at 20:51, David Cross wrote:

> Merlin's book is terrific. I am now finishing Steve Taylor's "The
> Fall" ... has anyone read it? I find it extraordinary, and relevant
> to MCA.
>
> David
>
> "What sad times we are living in!
> It is easier to disintegrate an atom than a prejudice".
>
> Albert Einstein
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 26, 2007, at 3:58 AM, <mark@ias-group.com> wrote:
>
>> I will look this one up!
>>
>> Thanks Andy
>>
>> Mark
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Blunden" <ablunden@mira.net>
>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 5:10 PM
>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Lamarckian
>>
>>
>>> Mark, have a read of Merlin Donald's "Origins of the Modern Mind"
>>> for thoughts on the place of tools in Darwinism.
>>> Andy
>>> At 03:55 PM 26/10/2007 +0900, you wrote:
>>>> I discovered a very small yet, very enlightening piece of
>>>> information today while reading Cultural Psychology A Once and
>>>> Future Discipline. In Chapter 7 p. 178 part 2, Cole writes that
>>>> Phylogenetic (Darwinism) change and cultural-historical
>>>> (Lamarckian) change occur at different rates.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I graduated from York University in Toronto, Canada with two
>>>> degrees, in Chemistry and in Biology, specializing in genetics
>>>> and biochemistry. I am no stranger to Darwinism, and I was not a
>>>> fan of Lamarckian. My thinking at that time was that natural
>>>> selection 'survival of the fittest' or as Gould wrote, 'the
>>>> survival of the most adapted' was based on Darwin's theory of
>>>> evolution and our creation of tools such as computers was to
>>>> compensate for our own inability to genetically pass on our own
>>>> acquired knowledge. Lamarckian theories to us geneticists was
>>>> nothing more to us than a disproved theory that acquired
>>>> knowledge could be passed on genetically. We all knew that the
>>>> study of our ancestry through genetics could be done by examining
>>>> the development of the fetus as it passes through the various
>>>> stages of growth. Each stage of growth represented the past of
>>>> our genetics.
>>>>
>>>> This of course brings into arguments such as the recent comments
>>>> from the discoverer of the DNA helix, as Gould points out in his
>>>> book Before Darwin (sorry the date of that book escapes me at
>>>> this point), one of the quotes is in Cole's book p.18. There were
>>>> actually 2 quotes in Gould's book about the genetic history of
>>>> the races and they were both on opposite ends of the spectrum.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My initial reaction to Cole's comment on p. 179 was one of
>>>> surprise, since I had never thought that of Lamarck in that
>>>> light. It cleared up the cultural-historical picture for me. But
>>>> on the other hand, that the change between genetic and cultural-
>>>> historical occur at different rates is of course true, but unlike
>>>> other species, we can produce the tools to genetically share our
>>>> DNA's information (i.e. our research, our thinking). It's hard to
>>>> imagine if one influences the other vs if one is a result of the
>>>> other. I would think that the sum of the genetic make up of our
>>>> being - influences the tools we make to extend our DNA outward in
>>>> the Lamarckian sense. How we use those tools culturally I don't
>>>> think has any bearing on our genetic development (at least not in
>>>> the short term). Phylogenetic change has directly influenced our
>>>> cultural-historical changes, but I think the tools that have had
>>>> the most effect on our development are the ones which have
>>>> allowed collaboration to occur. I think Lamarckian may have more
>>>> influence on what happens next culturally. And at a much faster
>>>> rate. Our external DNA is becoming more complicated!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am I on the right track here? If so, I think I'm beginning to
>>>> understand Vygotsky just a little bit more.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>
>>> Andy Blunden : http://home.mira.net/~andy/ tel (H) +61 3 9380
>>> 9435, mobile 0409 358 651
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Sun Oct 28 19:04 PDT 2007