155:
consilience between what are currently isolated domains of human knowledge and intellectual exploration. An evaluation of the merits of Wilson's book can only be built rationally upon analysis of Wilson's specific proposals for unifying adjacent domains of knowledge. For example, Wilson points out that we can associate each meme that a person has to the specific neural network that allows that meme to exist in thought and guide behavior. This idea is as refreshing, powerful, simple, dramatic and world-shattering as was the idea that a gene is a specific part of a chromosome.
81:
22:
71:
53:
154:
To say that this book is about a way "to unite the hard sciences with the humanities" is like saying a
Shakespeare play is a way to unite nouns and verbs. Wilson makes clear that consilience can be sought between ALL branches of human knowledge. Wilson provides many specific proposals for how to seek
150:
To label this book as being "slight" provides only the point of view of those who Wilson knew would reject the idea of consilience. It would be neutral and objective to first describe the controversy over the idea of consilience and then say, "Critics of Wilson's book about consilience have tried to
146:
This is a controversial book. Wilson knew it would enrage many non-scientists. Much of the book was crafted by Wilson in anticipation of the complaints that he knew would be heaped upon him for daring to discuss the unity of knowledge. For those of Wilson's critics who actually bother to read the
147:
book, after they are done dismissing the idea of consilience (as Wilson explained they would try to do) they really should take the time to address the fact that Wilson predicted how consilience would be dismissed without the critics ever bothering to discuss the specifics of the book.
158:
When I have the time, I will make a list of the many other specific paths towards consilience that Wilson discusses in his book. This will provide a basis for objective evaluation of the book.
151:
dismiss it as being slight. Readers of the book who find value in it often describe it as a book that deals constructively with very weighty matters that confront modern society."
198:
101:
193:
105:
33:
170:
Does anyone else think that the section"Examples of consilience discussed by Wilson" contains excessive use of bold?
95:
58:
21:
39:
109:
175:
113:
159:
187:
80:
86:
171:
76:
179:
70:
52:
100:. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can
15:
112:. To improve this article, please refer to the
8:
19:
108:. To use this banner, please refer to the
47:
106:discuss matters related to book articles
114:relevant guideline for the type of work
49:
7:
92:This article is within the scope of
38:It is of interest to the following
14:
79:
69:
51:
20:
1:
122:Knowledge:WikiProject Books
215:
199:WikiProject Books articles
125:Template:WikiProject Books
194:Start-Class Book articles
162:06:28, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
64:
46:
180:18:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
166:Excessive use of bold?
28:This article is rated
34:content assessment
144:
143:
140:
139:
136:
135:
96:WikiProject Books
206:
130:
129:
126:
123:
120:
102:join the project
89:
84:
83:
73:
66:
65:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
214:
213:
209:
208:
207:
205:
204:
203:
184:
183:
168:
127:
124:
121:
118:
117:
85:
78:
32:on Knowledge's
29:
12:
11:
5:
212:
210:
202:
201:
196:
186:
185:
167:
164:
142:
141:
138:
137:
134:
133:
131:
91:
90:
74:
62:
61:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
211:
200:
197:
195:
192:
191:
189:
182:
181:
177:
173:
165:
163:
161:
156:
152:
148:
132:
128:Book articles
115:
111:
110:documentation
107:
103:
99:
98:
97:
88:
82:
77:
75:
72:
68:
67:
63:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
169:
157:
153:
149:
145:
94:
93:
87:Books portal
40:WikiProjects
30:Start-class
188:Categories
160:JWSchmidt
36:scale.
172:RJFJR
119:Books
59:Books
176:talk
104:and
190::
178:)
174:(
116:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
