Download UN1001 Discussion Questions

UN1001 Discussion Questions
9/4/03: Futuyma, prefaces, chapter 1
1. Why does Futuyma title his 1st chapter “Reason Under Fire”? Who is reason under fire from,
according to Futuyma? In what ways is reason under fire? Do you agree with him?
2. What is Futuyma’s main purpose in chapter 1? What are the main things he is trying to
accomplish?
3. What is “scientific creationism,” according to Futuyma? How is it different from ordinary
creationism? What does he say is the strategy behind scientific creationism?
4. According to Futuyma, there can be no scientific evidence for “supernatural special creation.”
(p. 18) Why does he believe this? Do you agree with him? Why or why not?
5. According to Futuyma, what are the connections among (1) opposition to evolution and (2)
authoritarianism, anti-intellectualism, and Christian fundamentalism? Is he right about those
connections, in your view? Why or why not?
6. What is Futuyma’s explanation for the fact that creationism appeals to so many people? Do you
agree with his explanation? Why or why not?
7. In your opinion, does Futuyma respect the creationist point of view? Why or why not?
9/9/03: Futuyma, chapter 2
1. What is Futuyma’s main purpose for chapter 2? How does it fit in with the overall plan of the
book?
2. Explain the following terms: final cause, efficient cause, argument from design, catastrophism,
uniformitarianism? What do they have to do with the evolution–creation debate?
3. According to Futuyma, what distinguishes science from theology? How did Darwin bring
“biology out of the realm of theology and into the realm of science”? In Futuyma’s view what
sorts of explanations qualify as scientific explanations? Do you agree? Why or why not?
4. What is the “New Synthesis”? What is a “neo-Darwinian theory of evolution”? How does it
differ from the standard Darwinian theory? Why was the neo-Darwinian theory needed?
5. What is genetic drift? How does it differ from natural selection?
6. According to Futuyma, what questions are still be debated among evolutionary biologists?
Why, in his view, does the fact that such debates are occurring not call evolution itself into
question? Do you agree with Futuyma? Why or why not?
7. According to Futuyma, how well does neo-Darwinism explain the fossil record? (What is the
fossil record?) How well does neo-Darwinism explain the similarities and differences among
living species, in his view?
9/11/03: Futuyma, chapter 3
1. What is Futuyma’s main purpose in chapter 3? What does he mean by “legacy of the taxonomists”?
2. According to Futuyma, what sorts of “puzzles that had troubled anatomists and other comparative
biologists” does “the hypothesis of evolution” solve better than creationist points of view?
3. According to Futuyma, how do facts about the geographical distribution of organisms (including
fossils) support evolution? What role does continental drift play in explaining the geographical
distribution of organisms?
4. According to Futuyma, how do creationists explain the similarities among organisms that
evolutionists attribute to common ancestry or convergent evolution? Why is the evolutionists’
explanation the better one, according to Futuyma? Is he convincing?
5. According to Futuyma, why are the limits that scientists place on groups of related species (genera,
families, orders, etc.) somewhat arbitrary? Why is this important for the evolution/creation debate?
Why are there some “gaps” between categories of organisms, according to Futuyma? Do you
agree?
6. Define “saltation,” “micromutation,” and “macromutation.” Who was Richard Goldschmidt? What
was his contribution to evolutionary biology?
7. What does Futuyma mean when he writes that evolution is a “fact”? According to Futuyma, was
evolution proved to be true before it became generally accepted? If not, how did it come to be
regarded as a fact?
9/16/03: Futuyma, chapter 4
1. What is Futuyma’s main purpose in chapter 4? How does it fit in with the overall purpose of the
book?
2. Futuyma argues that if scientists rejected the principle of uniformitarianism, they would no longer
be able to do science. What is his argument for this conclusion? Do you agree with it? Why or why
not?
3. According to Futuyma, what aspects of the fossil record support evolution? Why does he believe
that these conclusions are corroborated by other methods of constructing phylogenetic trees? Is his
reasoning convincing? Why or why not?
4. According to Futuyma, why is the fossil record so incomplete? Why is it so tricky to interpret?
What does he say about the rates at which evolution occurs in different populations? How, in his
view, does this help explain gaps in the fossil record? Is his reasoning convincing? Why or why
not?
5. What is Archaeopteryx? What are therapsids? Why are they so important in the evolution-creation
debate? In your view, do they represent transitions between major animal types—reptiles, birds,
mammals? Why or why not?
6. According to Futuyma, what evidence is there for the proposition that life forms developed
naturally from inanimate matter? Is the evidence convincing? Why or why not?
9/18/03: Futuyma, chapter 5
1. According to Futuyma, what sorts of evidence are there for the view that modern human beings
evolved from earlier apelike ancestors? How strong is the evidence, in your view? Explain.
2. What are the religious implications of the thesis that homo sapiens developed from original apelike species? Is Christianity compatible with that thesis, in your opinion? Explain.
3. At what point in human evolution did humans acquire souls? Australopithecus afarensis? Homo
erectus? Neanderthals? Homo sapiens? Why?
4. According to Futuyma, the differences between the linguistic abilities of apes and humans are not
significant enough to refute the hypothesis that humans descended from apelike ancestors? Do you
agree with him? Why or why not?
9/23/03: Futuyma, chapter 6
1. What is Futuyma’s definition of “natural selection”? What does he mean by “adaptation”? What is
the connection between the two? Does natural selection always adapt a species to its environment?
Why or why not? Why is adaptation not perfect?
2. According to Futuyma, what is the evidence that natural selection actually occurs? Is the evidence
convincing? Why or why not?
3. What is sexual selection? According to Futuyma, what does sexual selection show about the
relationship between natural selection and adaptation? Explain.
4. What is senescence? According to Futuyma, how can evolutionary biology explain senescence? In
his view, why does evolutionary biology provide a better explanation of senescence than does
creationism? Do you agree? Why or why not?
5. What is kin selection? How does it differ from other forms of natural selection? How does it
attempt to explain altruistic behavior? In your view, is that explanation adequate? Why or why not?
6. Why does Futuyma believe that the ways in which organisms are actually adapted to their
environment supports evolution over creation? Do you find his arguments convincing? Why or
why not?
9/25/03: Futuyma, chapter 7
1. What does Futuyma mean by “chance”? Why is “chance” not the opposite of “purpose,” in his
view?
2. Why, according to Futuyma, is evolution not entirely a matter of chance? What other factors are
involved in evolution?
3. What is an adaptive mutation? According to Futuyma, what reasons are there to believe that
adaptive mutations sometimes occur?
4. What is continuous variation? Give an example. According to Futuyma, how can continuous
variation be explained?
5. How does Futuyma explain rapid evolution? How can mutations increase the survivability of
organisms if the vast majority of mutation are harmful?
6. What is Futuyma’s main purpose in chapter 7? Did he accomplish that purpose, in your view? Why
or why not?
9/30/03: Futuyma, chapter 8
1. What is essentialism? What does it have to do with the evolution-creation debate, according to
Futuyma?
2. What is meant by “reproductive isolating mechanism,” “postmating isolation,” and “premating
isolating mechanism”? According to Futuyma, what role do they play in understanding the origin
of new species?
3. What is the “punctuated equilibrium” view of evolution? What is it intended to explain? What
evidence is there to support it?
4. What is Futuyma’s main purpose in chapter 8? In your opinion, did he accomplish that purpose?
Why or why not?
10/2/03: Futuyma, chapter 9
1. Futuyma writes “Science is not the acquisition of truth; it is the quest for truth.” (p. 164) What does
he mean by this? Do you agree with him? Why or why not?
2. According to Futuyma, what are the relationships among the concepts of truth, fact, hypothesis,
and evidence? Can there be unknown facts, according to Futuyma? Do you agree with Futuyma’s
discussion of these concepts? Why or why not?
3. What does Futuyma say about the creationists’ claim that “evolution is a theory, not a fact, and
hence unproven.” (p. 167) Do you agree with Futuyma? Why or why not?
4. Why does Futuyma believe that “any ‘theory’ that explains phenomena by recourse to the actions
of an omnipotent, omniscient supreme being, or any other supernatural omnipotent entity, is a
nonscientific theory.” (p. 169) Do you agree with Futuyma? Why or why not?
5. Futuyma claims that a good scientific theory must be falsifiable? He goes on to argue that the
theory of evolution is falsifiable but scientific creationism is not? What does it mean to say that a
theory or hypothesis is “falsifiable”? Do you agree with Futuyma’s claims about the falsifiability of
theories, the theory of evolution, and creationism? Why or why not?
10/7/03: Johnson, chapter 1
1. What is Johnson’s purpose in chapter 1? Why did he title it “The Legal Setting”? Does he say what
the overall purpose of the book is? If so, what is it?
2. What does Johnson mean by “evolution,” “creation,” “fully naturalistic evolution,” “sudden
creation,” “sudden creation,” “special creation,” “creation-science,” “Darwinism,” and “ ‘young
earth’ position”? Do his meanings differ from those of Futuyma? If so, in what ways? Does
Johnson believe that the concept of creation is consistent with that of evolution? Explain.
3. What was the nature of the “friend of the court” brief that the National Academy of Sciences
submitted to the court in the Louisiana case? Which side did the NAS take in that case? What are
Johnson’s views on the NAS brief?
4. What evidence does Johnson cite in support of his view that evolutionary science is being used to
discredit religion and has become “dogmatic” in certain respects?
5. What does Johnson say about evolutionists’ claim that, while evolutionary theory is unsettled,
evolution itself is a well-established fact? (Recall that this was Futuyma’s view.) Do you think he
(Johnson) is right? Why or why not?
6. What is Johnson’s profession and area of expertise? What qualifications does he claim to have for
writing a book on the evolution-creation topic? Do you think he is qualified to write such a book?
Why or why not?
10/9/03: Johnson, chapter 2
1. What is Johnson’s purpose in chapter 2? According to Johnson, what are the 3 related
propositions that Darwin argues for in Origin of Species? Which of the 3 is Johnson concerned
with in chapter 2?
2. According to Johnson, what was Darwin’s argument for natural selection? (What is an
“argument by analogy”?) According to Hohnson, what are the shortcomings of Darwin’s
argument? Do you agree that they are shortcomings? Why or why not?
3. According to Johnson, is it possible to create new species artificially? It it were possible, would
this mean that Darwinism is true, according to Johnson? Why or why not? Do you agree with
him? Why or why not?
4. What is a tautology? Think of an example. According to Johnson, what reason is there to
suspect that the theory of natural selection is a tautology? What would be the impact on the
evolution-creation debate if the theory of natural selection were a tautology?
5. According to Johnson, what reason is there to suspect that the theory of natural selection is the
conclusion of a deductive argument? What are the 2 deductive arguments that Johnson
discusses? What are his criticisms of those arguments? Do you agree with those criticisms?
Why or why not? What would be the impact on the evolution-creation debate of regarding the
theory of natural selection as the conclusion of a deductive argument?
6. In the “Natural Selection as a Scientific Hypothesis” section of chapter 2, has Johnson
adequately summarized the evidence for the hypothesis? Consider the evidence that Futuyma
discusses in Science on Trial? Has Johnson adequately stated the evidence for natural
selection? Why or why not?
7. According to Johnson in the “Natural Selection as a Philosophical Necessity” section of chapter
2, what might lead someone to view the theory of natural selection as the only alternative?
What are some of the ways in which Darwinists deal with apparent evidence against the theory,
according to Johnson? (Pay particular attention to the concepts of group selection, kinship
selection, pleiotropy, and sexual selection, which Johnson discusses.) According to Johnson,
what are the problems with the Darwinists’ use of these and similar devices to maintain their
theory in the face of apparent counter-evidence? Do you agree with Johnson? Why or why not?
10/14/03: Johnson, chapter 3
1. What is Johnson’s main purpose in chapter 3? How does it fit in with the overall purpose of his
book?
2. What does Johnson mean by “Darwinist gradualism”? What does he say are the two main
problems with Darwinist gradualism? How serious are those problems, in your view?
3. According to Johnson, what theories about the development of complex organs, such as wings
or eyes, have been proposed by evolutionists? What does he say are the shortcomings of those
theories? What was Gould’s attempt to find a compromise between the two theories? Was
Gould’s compromise successful, according to Johnson? Why or why not? Do you agree?