Clicca qui per scaricare

Condividi
Intelligent design and the appeal of teleology. structure and diagnosis of a pseudoscientific doctrine
Titolo Rivista: PARADIGMI 
Autori/Curatori:  Telmo Pievani 
Anno di pubblicazione:  2013 Fascicolo: 1  Lingua: Italiano 
Numero pagine:  14 P. 151-164 Dimensione file:  172 KB
DOI:  10.3280/PARA2013-001010
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più:  clicca qui   qui 


Uno studio filosofico e cognitivo degli argomenti addotti dai sostenitori dell’Intelligent Design (ID) mostra quanto essi siano attentamente predisposti per risultare attraenti a una mente, come quella umana, fortemente persuasa da sistemi di credenze di tipo teleologico - come già intuito da Darwin - e dall’attribuzione di intenzionalità e di finalità ai fenomeni naturali. Descriviamo qui come la struttura epistemica dell’ID sia consapevolmente plasmata da questa attrazione cognitiva presente in noi "nati per credere" e sia poi implementata da una forte familiarità con le regole talvolta fuorvianti dei dibattiti pubblici. Viene quindi delineata una possibile procedura di valutazione epistemologica di questa forma di pseudoscienza, a partire da gradi successivi di concessione del "beneficio del dubbio".


Keywords: Disegno intelligente, Pluralismo epistemologico, Ragionamento teleologico, Richiamo cognitivo, Unicità della biologia evolutiva.

  1. Avise J.C. (2010). Footprints of Nonsentient Design inside the Human Genome. PNAS, 107, suppl. 2: 8969-8976., DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0914609107
  2. Ayala F.J. (2007). Darwin’s Gifts to Science and Theology. Washington DC: Joseph Henry Press
  3. Ayala F.J. & Arp R., eds. (2010). Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology. Chichester (UK): Wiley-Blackwell
  4. Bloom P. (2004). Descartes’ Baby: How the Science of Child Development Explains what Makes us Human. New York: Basic Books.
  5. Boyer P. (2001). Religion Explained. New York: Basic Books
  6. Brumfiel G. (2005). Intelligent Design: Who has Designs on your Student’s Minds? Nature, 434: 1062-1065., DOI: 10.1038/4341062a
  7. Carey S. (2000). Science Education as Conceptual Change. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21: 13-19., DOI: 10.1016/S0193-3973(99)00046-5
  8. Conway Morris S. (2003). Life’s Solution. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press., DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511535499
  9. Coyne J.A. (2009). Why Evolution is True. New York: Viking Press
  10. Darwin Ch. R. (1836-1844). Notebooks 1836-1844. Edited by P. H. Barrett, P. J. Gautrey, S. Herbert, D. Kohn & S. Smith. Ithaca (NY): Cornell University Press, 1987
  11. Darwin Ch. R. (18726). The Origins of Species. London: John Murray
  12. De Caro M. & Macarthur D. (2004). Naturalism in Question. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
  13. De Caro M. & Pievani T. (2010). Bellarmine’s Revenge? On Some Recent Trends in the Roman Catholic Church concerning the Relation of Faith and Science. Boundary2, 37, 1: 1-22.
  14. Eldredge N. (2000). The Triumph of Evolution, and the Failure of Creationism. New York: W.H. Freeman and C.
  15. Forrest B. (2000). Methodological Naturalism and Philosophical Naturalism: Clarifying the Connection. Philo 3 (2): 7-29., DOI: 10.5840/philo20003213
  16. Forrest B. & Gross P.R. (2004). Creationism’s Trojan Horse. Oxford-New York: Oxford University Press., DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195157420.001.0001
  17. Futuyma D.J. (1995). Science on Trial. The Case for Evolution. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates.
  18. Girotto V., Pievani T. & Vallortigara G. (2008). Nati per credere. Torino: Codice Edizioni
  19. Godfrey-Smith P. (1999). Adaptationism and the Power of Selection. Biology and Philosophy, 14: 181-194., DOI: 10.1023/A:1006630232690
  20. Gould S.J. (2002). The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge (MA): Belknap- Harvard University Press.
  21. Gould S.J. & Vrba E.S. (1982). Exaptation, a Missing Term in the Science of Form. Paleobiology, 8(1): 4-15.
  22. Hart D. & Sussman R.W. (2009). Man the Hunted. Primates, Predators, and Human Evolution. Boulder (CO): Westview Press
  23. Keleman D. (2003). British and American Children’s Preferences for Teleo-functional Explanations of the Natural World. Cognition, 88: 201-221., DOI: 10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00024-6
  24. Kitcher P. (1982). Abusing Science. The Case Against Creationism. Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press.
  25. Küng H. (2007). The Beginning of All Things. London: Eerdmans Publishing Company
  26. Lakatos I. (1978). The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. In: Philosophical Papers, vol. 1. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press., DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511621123
  27. Lakatos I. & Musgrave A., eds. (1974). Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press
  28. Lombrozo T., Keleman D. & Zaitchik D. (2007). Inferring Design: Evidence of a Preference for Teleological Explanations in Patients with Alzheimer’s Disease. Psychological Science, 18: 999-1006., DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02015.x
  29. Murray M.J. & Schloss J.P. (2010). Evolution, Design, and Genomic Suboptimality: Does Science ‘Save Theology’?. PNAS, 107, 30, E121., DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1007401107
  30. Pennock R. T. (1999). Tower of Babel. The Evidence against the New Creationism. Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press.
  31. Perakh M. (2004). Unintelligent Design. New York: Prometheus Books
  32. Pievani T. (2003). Rhapsodic Evolution: Essay on Exaptation and Evolutionary Pluralism. World Futures, 59: 63-81., DOI: 10.1080/02604020216077
  33. Pievani T. (2006). Creazione senza Dio. Torino: Einaudi
  34. Pievani T. (2009). The World after Charles R. Darwin: Continuity, Unity in Diversity, Contingency. Rend. Acc. Lincei, 20. 4: 355-361. http://rd.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12210-009-0068-2
  35. Pievani T. (2011). Born to cooperate? Altruism as Exaptation, and the Evolution of Human Sociality. In: Origins of Cooperation and Altruism. Ed. by R.W. Sussman & R.C. Cloninger. New York: Springer: 41-61., DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-9520-9_4
  36. Pievani T. (2012). An Evolving Research Programme: the Structure of Evolutionary Theory from a Lakatosian Perspective”. In: The Theory of Evolution and Its Impact. Ed. by A. Fasolo. New York: Springer: 211-228., DOI: 10.1007/978-88-470-1974-4_14
  37. Pigliucci M. & Müller G., eds. (2010). Evolution. The Extended Synthesis. Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press
  38. Prothero D.R. (2007). Evolution. What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters. New York: Columbia University Press
  39. Saxe R., Tenenbaum J.B. & Carey S. (2005). Secret Agents. Inferences about Hidden Causes by 10- and 12-month-old Infants. Psychological Science, 16: 995-1001., DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01649.x
  40. Scott E.C. (2004). Evolution vs Creationism. Berkeley (CA): University of California Press
  41. Shanks N. (2004). God, the Devil, and Darwin. Oxford-NewYork: Oxford University Press., DOI: 10.1093/0195161998.001.0001
  42. Sober E. (2008). Evidence and Evolution. The Logic Behind the Science. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press., DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511806285
  43. Vallortigara G. (2008). Animals as Natural Geometers. In: Cognitive Biology: Evolutionary and Developmental Perspectives on Mind, Brain and Behavior, ed. by L. Tommasi, M.A. Peterson & L. Nadel. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press: 83-104.
  44. Wolpert L. (2007). Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast. London: Faber and Faber
  45. Young M. & Edis T. (2009). Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism. Piscataway (NJ): Rutgers University Press



  1. Telmo Pievani, Geoethics pp. 57 (ISBN:9780127999357)

Telmo Pievani, in "PARADIGMI" 1/2013, pp. 151-164, DOI:10.3280/PARA2013-001010

   

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association associazione indipendente e no profit per facilitare l'accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche