tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31875695.post5794540592309580587..comments2024-02-07T21:24:37.121-08:00Comments on Blogtrotter: The Chicago Social Brain Network's "Invisible Forces & Powerful Beliefs": Book ReviewJohn L. Murphy / "FionnchĂș"http://www.blogger.com/profile/16616876266772470719noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31875695.post-19380027310165170512011-01-31T20:17:11.554-08:002011-01-31T20:17:11.554-08:00"other" reviewers -- I read all the revi..."other" reviewers -- I read all the reviews at Amazon. Will keep an eye out for this book.<br /><br />Memes are real, but intangible. Cacciopo's example of fish schooling is not learned behavior, rather a random phenotype selected by environment. A better analogy (to our memes) is the tool-making of chimps, which have been ID'd to specific troops, with adjoining troops of chimps learning skills from neighbors.tamerlanehttp://trueliberalnexus.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31875695.post-47875069733014658172011-01-31T14:03:37.590-08:002011-01-31T14:03:37.590-08:00TL, this book's far from specious, and I am fa...TL, this book's far from specious, and I am far from New Age! It does try to account for what cannot be tracked visibly but which brings people together, based on some meme, some "vibe," some common connection. The crew who compiled this are very serious and very secular (even the theologians perhaps in their own spirit?). I'd say the whole point was to detect what cannot be seen. If my review compressed this so much that this theme became less visible, it's my fault and not the writers, although I'd have wished a longer book as the chapters are so brief.John L. Murphy / "FionnchĂș"https://www.blogger.com/profile/16616876266772470719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31875695.post-35040878816160157522011-01-31T11:30:48.226-08:002011-01-31T11:30:48.226-08:00It's specious to equate 'invisible' wi...It's specious to equate 'invisible' with 'undetectable.' Nor is 'belief in' something the same as 'acceptance of the existence of' a thing. If this book elevates divine intervention or the power of prayer to the same footing as gravity and electricity, then it is doomed from the start. <br /><br />It does sound, however, that a genuine attempt was made to explain the influence of spiritual (non-real) beliefs with concrete, scientific (real) causes & effects. Which must be why it proved disappointing to reviewers of a spiritual/new age persuasion.<br /><br />One need not "hide behind labels" to defy any entente between Science and religious faith. The former rejects anything that cannot be detected, observed, measured or quantified; the latter insists on embracing the undetectable because of its very "invisibility."<br /><br /><br />It's an utter waste of time to try and reconcile Philosophy with Science -- the latter has made the former obsolete. Aquinas' Aristotelean / contortionist attempts to explain virtue are flattened once & for all by Hamilton's 1972 work on the cause of altruism in bees, ants & wasps. The four Thomist Laws are neatly disposed of by one law: genetics.tamerlanehttp://trueliberalnexus.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com