Now, in doing this Hone endorses the new techniques of "cladistic analysis" [p. And, of course, it would be nice to see the traditional ranks, originally with no more than subjective motivations, brought up to date with more rigorous definitions, as in percentages of common DNA or in terms of time lapsed since a common ancestor as in the diagram below. But completely erasing the traditional ranks has a taste both of nihilism and of the kind of arrogance that summarily tossed out Brontosaurus from the taxonomy -- a sin that is all too evident in Hone himself, who refers to "famous names such as Diplodocus, Stegosaurus, Allosaurus, and Apatosaurus " [pp. Late in his book, Hone does work Brontosaurus into a list of Sauropods, without comment, perhaps because he has become aware that the name has returned to the favored graces of paleontology.
Let us face facts: Bei allem Werthe, der dem Wahren, dem Wahrhaftigen, dem Selbstlosen zukommen mag: Admitting all the value accorded to the true, the truthful, the selfless, it is nonetheless possible that a higher value should be ascribed to illusion, to the will to deception, to self-interestto greed -- a higher and more fundamental value for all life.
We imagine that hardness, violence, slavery, peril in the street and in the heart, concealment, Stoicism, temptation, and deviltry of every Bully for brontosaurus essay, everything evil, frightful, tyrannical, brutal, and snake-like in man, serves as well for the advancement of the species "man" as their opposite.
Men are qualified for civil liberties, in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their appetities: Edmund Burke Nietzsche was the child of Darwin and the brother of Bismark. It does not matter that he ridiculed the English evolutionists and the German nationalists: The ethical philosophy of Spencer was not the most natural corollary of the theory of evolution.
If life is a struggle for existence in which the fittest survive, then strength is the ultimate virtue, and weakness the only fault. Good is that which survives, which wins; bad is that which gives way and fails.
Only the mid-Victorian cowardice of the English Darwinians, and the bourgeois respectability of French positivists and German socialists, could conceal the inevitableness of this conclusion. These men were brave enough to reject Christian theology, but they did not dare to be logical, to reject the moral ideas, the worship of meekness and gentleness and altruism, which had grown out of that theology.
They ceased to be Anglicans, or Catholics, or Lutherans; but they did not dare cease to be Christians. The greatest irony of the post-modern Left is not just their incoherent marriage of Nihilism with intense moral indignation and self-righteousness, but their habit of hanging this mess on Nietzsche and Marx -- Nietzsche, who saw Nihilism as the greatest danger and challenge of the age and who dismissed "that cheapest of propaganda tricks, a moral attitude," and Marx, for whom moral scruples were artifacts of bourgeois consciousness and who would have despised the sneering bureaucratic elitism of the privileged and parasitic academic class that most assiduously promotes Marxism -- on top of Nietzsche again, who disparaged "the commune, the most primitive of all social forms.
A command economy appeals to those who believe they should govern everyone and everything with absolute power, who can then also say anything, however absurd or self-contradictory, and then simply require, by law and force, in the purest Orwellian fashion, as we already see nascent at American universities, that everyone believe it.
Enklinobarangus Will the progress of research prove that justice is worthless and mercy hateful?
Calvin Coolidgeas Governor of Massachusetts There is no answer to the question, "Why not be cruel? He modestly added that, at the age of fifty-five, he was too old to change would remain an immoralist.
He spoke in German, his voice loud and clear: All that heightens the feeling of power in man, the will to power, power itself. There is no good and evil, there is only power, and those too weak to seek it.
A more general treatment, however, is in order. The discussion of Existentialism treated Nietzsche as an Existentialist before his time, with the death of God producing the kind of nihilism characteristic of that movement.
And, Nietzsche, for all his warnings about nihilism, does in the end seem to exemplify just the kind of nihilism that concerned him -- a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.
Yet Nietzsche thought he was offering an answer to nihilism. It is just that the cure is worse than the disease, and it gave far more comfort to nihilists in their nihilism than it did to anyone actually looking for a way out. But Nietzsche, as it happens, rather than an full-bodied nihilist, is a kind of positivist instead -- that certain actual events and practices are the root of genuine value.
This very often sounds good, since Nietzsche sees himself, and can easily impress others, as simply making a healthy affirmation of life. Life for Nietzsche, however, is red in tooth and claw, and the most admirable and interesting form of life is the triumphant Darwinian predator, who in general is paradigmatic of beauty, grace, strength, intelligence, and activity, while living off of the less intelligent herds of herbivores, i.
In other words, this is "Social Darwinism," otherwise used as a stick to beat capitalism with. Instead, they ironically take heart from the very nihilism described with horror by Nietzsche. This nihilism is then used in the service of many other things that Nietzsche despised, like socialism, democracy, and the valorization of the common man.
Of course, when the Left demands "true" democracy, what they really want is a political dictatorship run by themselves -- which is why Fidel Castro is still their idol.
Nietzsche would not have been displeased with the naked power of a Stalin, and possibly even would have admired the cynicism of the empty Leftist rhetoric that he used to seize power.'Bully for Brontosaurus' is not a book dealing only with dinosaurs, this even if Gould was first and above all a paleontologist.
In fact we have here a collection of essays (about 40) ranging from paleontology and biology to astronomy and planetology (he is for instance reacting to the discoveries of Voyager)/5. The world as depicted by Gould in the thirty-five essays of BULLY FOR BRONTOSAURUS is a complex and wonderful place.
It is populated not only by small kiwi birds laying gigantic eggs and. Bully for Brontosaurus and bully for Gould too.” — Kirkus Reviews “May be Gould's finest to date Whether his topic is typewriter design, thetechnical triumph of Voyager or Joe DiMaggio's hitting streak, Gould holds our attention.
His essays are illuminating, instructive, and fun to read.”. Bully for Brontosaurus () is the fifth volume of collected essays by the Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould.
The essays were culled from his monthly column "This View of Life" in Natural History magazine, to which Gould contributed for 27 alphabetnyc.com: Stephen Jay Gould. The “debate” over evolution between T. H. Huxley and Bishop Samuel Wilberforce at the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in Oxford is an iconic story in the history of evolution and, indeed, in the history of the conflict between science and religion, second only to Galileo’s troubles with the Vatican.
What motivated Gould to write this essay was a publicationby L. L. Cavalli -Sforza, et al in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that suggests .