Professor H. James Birx shows how the never-ending controversy of human evolution came to be. He details the events that caused thinkers like Charles Darwin to develop his theory of evolution, and what ideas caused some people to reconcile a somewhat mystical theology with a concrete model of the universe. He tells you how Darwin's work infuriated everybody from "God-fearing" Christians to the church heirarchies. Birx explains how scientific advances and philosophical arguments have made beliefs about divine intervention as (...) the origin of man a moot point. He shows how creationism ignores proven scientific facts, and how human evolution remains a much sounder truth. You'll read how some western religions are starting to accept evolution as the process which creates life on earth. You'll also learn why scientific evolution and creationism have not been accepted together and how bold attempts to merge the two ideas have failed miserably. (shrink)

"With a strong interdisciplinary approach to a subject that does not lend itself easily to the reference format, this work may not seem to support directly academic programs beyond general research, but it is a more thorough and up-to-date ...

Social studies teachers are often reported as remaining reluctant to engage their students in discussions of contemporary social and political issues. It is therefore critically important to investigate instances of such discussions when they do occur. This paper, part of a larger qualitative study that included six middle and high school classrooms and 24 observed discussions, considers how students are positioned in classroom discussions of social and political issues. By thinking in terms of positions and Ellsworth's (1997) notion of “modes (...) of address”, the authors conceptualize political discussions in terms of the delicate relations between intent and outcome, the social and personal, certainty and surprise. This paper identifies three modes through which students are invited into relation to social and political life via discussions of current topics: task-oriented participants, distanced commentators, and/or as implicated citizens. (shrink)

John Locke's subtle and influential defense of religious toleration as argued in his seminal _Letter Concerning Toleration_ appears in this edition as introduced by one of our most distinguished political theorists and historians of political thought.

What are the philosophical implications of the theory of evolution? What beliefs about man can we rule out in light of scientific knowledge of the theory of natural selection? Are there different ways to interpret the Darwinian revolution? How should we regard the evolutionary musings of thinkers such as Henri Bergson or Teilhard de Chardin? With H. James Birx, John Loughney, and Drew Arrowood.

The present study focuses on furthering the theoretical foundations of the field of spirituality and religiosity in the workplace (SRW) by providing a parsimonious definition, and multi-dimensional model for the construct of spirituality grounded in a pluralistic and historically authentic framework using the Sophia Perennis or Perennial Philosophy (Lings, 2005, A return to the spirit.... Fons Vitae, Louisville). In this process, the study addresses the dilemma of religiosity versus spirituality faced by researchers in this area (Benefiel, Fry, & Geigle, 2014, (...) Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 6(3), 175). It also addresses concerns regarding the potential conflicts related to spirituality and religiosity that could arise in a secular workplace, which emphasizes inclusiveness and equality. A three factor model of spirituality is developed using the grounded theory approach (Corbin & Strauss, 1990, Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21) and is corroborated by factor analysis of multiple samples ( n = 159 and n = 181), and participants representing three major world faith traditions (both Eastern and Western). (shrink)

Peer review is a widely accepted instrument for raising the quality of science. Peer review limits the enormous unstructured influx of information and the sheer amount of dubious data, which in its absence would plunge science into chaos. In particular, peer review offers the benefit of eliminating papers that suffer from poor craftsmanship or methodological shortcomings, especially in the experimental sciences. However, we believe that peer review is not always appropriate for the evaluation of controversial hypothetical science. We argue that (...) the process of peer review can be prone to bias towards ideas that affirm the prior convictions of reviewers and against innovation and radical new ideas. Innovative hypotheses are thus highly vulnerable to being “filtered out” or made to accord with conventional wisdom by the peer review process. Consequently, having introduced peer review, the Elsevier journal Medical Hypotheses may be unable to continue its tradition as a radical journal allowing discussion of improbable or unconventional ideas. Hence we conclude by asking the publisher to consider re-introducing the system of editorial review to Medical Hypotheses. (shrink)

This book provides practical and research-based chapters that offer greater clarity about the particular kinds of teacher reflection that matter and avoids talking about teacher reflection generically, which implies that all kinds of reflection are of equal value.

This paper presents the use of the Giving Voice To Values (GVV) pedagogical approach for educating entrepreneurial leaders. First, we introduce a new framework for entrepreneurial leadership and review the three principles of this framework. Second, we discuss how the GVV pedagogical approach provides a unique way to educate entrepreneurial leaders. Finally, we describe how Babson College plans to use the GVV approach in our curricula.

The development of science has been a distinctive feature of human history in recent times, especially in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. In light of the problems that define the philosophy of science today, James Fetzer provides a foundation for inquiry into the nature of science, the history of science, and the relationship between the two. In Philosophy of Science, Fetzer investigates the aim and methods of empirical science and examines the importance of methodological commitments to the study of (...) science and the significance of interpretations of probability for understanding laws of nature and scientific explanations. This book offers a welcome framework for investigating the most recent work and the most promising solutions to the central problems that arise within this discipline. The result is a timely introduction to an increasingly important field. -- Publisher description. (shrink)

In this review, we describe some of the central philosophical issues facing origins-of-life research and provide a targeted history of the developments that have led to the multidisciplinary field of origins-of-life studies. We outline these issues and developments to guide researchers and students from all fields. With respect to philosophy, we provide brief summaries of debates with respect to (1) definitions (or theories) of life, what life is and how research should be conducted in the absence of an accepted theory (...) of life, (2) the distinctions between synthetic, historical, and universal projects in origins-of-life studies, issues with strategies for inferring the origins of life, such as (3) the nature of the first living entities (the “bottom up” approach) and (4) how to infer the nature of the last universal common ancestor (the “top down” approach), and (5) the status of origins of life as a science. Each of these debates influences the others. Although there are clusters of researchers that agree on some answers to these issues, each of these debates is still open. With respect to history, we outline several independent paths that have led to some of the approaches now prevalent in origins-of-life studies. These include one path from early views of life through the scientific revolutions brought about by Linnaeus (von Linn.), Wöhler, Miller, and others. In this approach, new theories, tools, and evidence guide new thoughts about the nature of life and its origin.We also describe another family of paths motivated by a” circularity” approach to life, which is guided by such thinkers as Maturana & Varela, Gánti, Rosen, and others. These views echo ideas developed by Kant and Aristotle, though they do so using modern science in ways that produce exciting avenues of investigation. By exploring the history of these ideas, we can see how many of the issues that currently interest us have been guided by the contexts in which the ideas were developed. The disciplinary backgrounds of each of these scholars has influenced the questions they sought to answer, the experiments they envisioned, and the kinds of data they collected. We conclude by encouraging scientists and scholars in the humanities and social sciences to explore ways in which they can interact to provide a deeper understanding of the conceptual assumptions, structure, and history of origins-of-life research. This may be useful to help frame future research agendas and bring awareness to the multifaceted issues facing this challenging scientific question. (shrink)

Historian James H. Jones published the first edition of Bad Blood, the definitive history of the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, in 1981. Its clear-eyed examination of that research and its implications remains a bioethics classic, and the 30-year anniversary of its publication served as the impetus for the reexamination of research ethics that this symposium presents. Recent revelations about the United States Public Health Service study that infected mental patients and prisoners in Guatemala with syphilis in the late 1940s in (...) order to determine the efficacy of treatment represent only one of the many attestations to the persistence of ongoing, critical, and underaddressed issues in research ethics that Bad Blood first explored. Those issues include, but are not limited to: the complex and contested matters of the value of a given research question, the validity of the clinical trial designed to address it, and the priorities of science. (shrink)