Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Shaping Science with RhetoricThe Cases of Dobzhansky, Schrodinger, and Wilson$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Leah Ceccarelli

Print publication date: 2001

Print ISBN-13: 9780226099064

Published to Chicago Scholarship Online: March 2013

DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226099088.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM CHICAGO SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.chicago.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright University of Chicago Press, 2022. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in CHSO for personal use.date: 02 July 2022

The Controversy over Sociobiology: Scholars Offer Conflicting Explanations

The Controversy over Sociobiology: Scholars Offer Conflicting Explanations

Chapter:
(p.113) 6 The Controversy over Sociobiology: Scholars Offer Conflicting Explanations
Source:
Shaping Science with Rhetoric
Publisher:
University of Chicago Press
DOI:10.7208/chicago/9780226099088.003.0006

Sociobiology was seen to be in “its logical position as the bridging discipline between the natural sciences on the one side and social sciences and humanities on the other.” A majority of scholars in the natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities who have written book reviews of Consilience have responded negatively to Wilson's latest appeal for interdisciplinarity. Readers have called Wilson's interdisciplinary erasing of the boundaries between the natural sciences and the humanities and social sciences “indefensible,” a sermon “shaky in substance” that is based on “a distressingly flat account of disciplines and their boundaries.” They complain that his notion of consilience rides on a “dubious assumption” about the proper relation between disciplines is grounded on purported links between natural science and social science that are “fatally weak,” and in the end will “not neatly solve any of the problems he notes, especially in the humanities and social sciences.”

Keywords:   sociobiology, consilience, interdisciplinary, natural science, dubious assumption

Chicago Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.