While I for years have read Richard Dawkins for his world view perspectives, I have also for years read Prof. Brands, initially for American historical perspectives, but now for Big History perspectives. And today for business school management analysis and political science insight, with some theology thrown in.
Truth be told, Brands is easier to read than Dawkins and more pleasing to my eye and ear. This is important since our brains have evolved in such a way that stories and the construction of stories therein are essential to our ability to store and recall facts for future action and to pass on to others and later generations learning from experience in a way that is faster and more broadly disseminated than genetic mutations can and may ever will. Others have written on this as an explanation for the rise of human civilization and our specie’s dominance over others. And Brands is the better story teller.
This essay is one of my favorites and its reading a refreshing way to start the day. (But I acknowledge that some of my refreshment this morning may be from the cool front that has come through.)
Illuminating contrast. It reminds me of the theories for the failure of Chinese technical advancement after the 15C, one of which blames the intense centralization of government -- if the emperor is wrong, everybody's wrong . . .
Dr. Brands, given that Darwin recanted his evolution theory for internment in the Catholic faith, do you think that the constant clash between the two has more to do with the, for lack of a better term, disciple of the discipline engaged in the clash rather than an overall stance? I think to Henry Drummond in Inherit The Wind.
Darwin never recanted his scientific views. That is a tattered old fabrication.
While I for years have read Richard Dawkins for his world view perspectives, I have also for years read Prof. Brands, initially for American historical perspectives, but now for Big History perspectives. And today for business school management analysis and political science insight, with some theology thrown in.
Truth be told, Brands is easier to read than Dawkins and more pleasing to my eye and ear. This is important since our brains have evolved in such a way that stories and the construction of stories therein are essential to our ability to store and recall facts for future action and to pass on to others and later generations learning from experience in a way that is faster and more broadly disseminated than genetic mutations can and may ever will. Others have written on this as an explanation for the rise of human civilization and our specie’s dominance over others. And Brands is the better story teller.
This essay is one of my favorites and its reading a refreshing way to start the day. (But I acknowledge that some of my refreshment this morning may be from the cool front that has come through.)
Illuminating contrast. It reminds me of the theories for the failure of Chinese technical advancement after the 15C, one of which blames the intense centralization of government -- if the emperor is wrong, everybody's wrong . . .
Dr. Brands, given that Darwin recanted his evolution theory for internment in the Catholic faith, do you think that the constant clash between the two has more to do with the, for lack of a better term, disciple of the discipline engaged in the clash rather than an overall stance? I think to Henry Drummond in Inherit The Wind.