1. Why did Darwin consider mutual affinities, embryological relations, geographical distributions, and geological successions "unsatisfactory" proof of evolution, was he right about this, and why?
2. (Where) does Darwin implicitly invoke one of Newton's rules of reasoning?
3. What, if any, support does our Darwin reading give to Kuhn's ideas about science?
4. How do scientists know when they've encountered an anomaly?
5. Is science really "non-cumulative"? In what sense(s)?
1. Hume's critique of the "argument from design" failed to unseat the reigning creationist paradigm, because he did not offer a better alternative. Darwin's critique succeeded in overthrowing creationism, because he did offer an alternative theory that fit the evidence much better than the design argument did, namely natural selection.
2. Furthermore, Hume mis-construed the argument from design as an inductive analogy, rather than as an inference to the best explanation (cf. Sober 2000).
3. Finally, while Darwin himself made use of an inductive analogy between artificial and natural selection, most of the arguments in the Origin consist of comparing how well specific pieces of evidence are explained in terms of common descent with modification by natural selection vs. special creation with intelligent design.
Sober, E. 2000. Philosophy of Biology. Westview.
Boulder, CO.