Classical Darwinism posits one possible historical outcome: fittest design. Prigogine’s thesis of open, nonlinear systems renders fittest design meaningless, and Deleuze grasps this and posits a deeper phylum common to all things: the machinic phylum.
This might be because you haven’t grasped Prigogine and the revolutions in 20th c physics. You’re also retconning Darwin to reflect later things, like nonequilibrium dynamics. Also, has anyone posited that Deleuze has updated the body of knowledge of biology?
-
-
he makes claims that touch upon biology. those claims also happen to be (mostly) wrong
-
Well, that’s convincing!
- End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.