Name Michael Ruse | Role Philosopher | |
 | ||
Born June 21, 1940 (age 83) ( 1940-06-21 ) Birmingham, England Website philosophy.fsu.edu/content/view/full/35805 Institutions Florida State University (2000–present)
University of Guelph (1965–2000) Main interests Philosophy of biology
Philosophy of science Areas of interest Philosophy of science, Philosophy of biology Education University of Bristol (1970), McMaster University (1964), University of Bristol (1962) Awards Guggenheim Fellowship for Natural Sciences, US & Canada Books Can a Darwinian be a Chri, The evolution‑creation struggle, The Darwinian Revolution, Darwin and Design, Taking Darwin seriously Similar People David Hull, William A Dembski, Robert J Richards, Jane Maienschein, Stephen Jay Gould | ||
The evolution debate it s not about theology michael ruse
Michael Ruse, FRSC (born 21 June 1940) is a philosopher of science who specializes in the philosophy of biology and is well known for his work on the relationship between science and religion, the creation–evolution controversy, and the demarcation problem within science. Ruse currently teaches at Florida State University. He was born in England, attending Bootham School, York. He took his undergraduate degree at the University of Bristol (1962), his master's degree at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario (1964), and Ph.D. at the University of Bristol (1970).
Contents
- The evolution debate it s not about theology michael ruse
- Michael ruse gaia hypothesis global warming religion science
- Career
- Personal life
- Selected works
- References
Michael ruse gaia hypothesis global warming religion science
Career
Ruse taught at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada for 35 years. Since his retirement from Guelph, he has taught at Florida State University and is the Lucyle T. Werkmeister Professor of Philosophy (2000–present). In 1986, he was elected as a Fellow of both the Royal Society of Canada and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He has received honorary doctorates from the University of Bergen, Norway (1990), McMaster University, Ontario, Canada (2003) and the University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada (2007). In September 2014 he was made an Honorary Doctor of Science by University College London.
Ruse was a key witness for the plaintiff in the 1981 test case (McLean v. Arkansas) of the state law permitting the teaching of "creation science" in the Arkansas school system. The federal judge ruled that the state law was unconstitutional.
Ruse delivered some of the 2001 Gifford Lectures in Natural Theology at the University of Glasgow. His lectures on Evolutionary Naturalism, "A Darwinian Understanding of Epistemology" and "A Darwinian Understanding of Ethics," are collected in The Nature and Limits of Human Understanding (ed. Anthony Sanford, T & T Clark, 2003). Ruse debates regularly with William A. Dembski, a proponent of intelligent design. Ruse takes the position that it is possible to reconcile the Christian faith with evolutionary theory. Ruse founded the journal Biology and Philosophy, of which he is now Emeritus Editor, and has published numerous books and articles. He cites the influence of his late colleague Ernan McMullin.
Personal life
Ruse has two children from his first marriage: Nigel and Rebecca. He has been married to his second wife, Lizzie, since 1985 and they have three children: Emily, Oliver and Edward. Ruse is an atheist but sees nothing wrong with trying to reconcile science and religion, a position which has brought him into conflict with Richard Dawkins and Pharyngula science blogger PZ Myers. Ruse has also made several criticisms of prominent figures within New Atheism, and of New Atheism as a movement. For example, Ruse has made the claim that Dawkins would fail "introductory" courses on the study of "philosophy or religion" (such as courses on the philosophy of religion), courses which are offered, for example, at many of the world's educational institutions such as colleges and universities. Ruse also claims that New Atheism - which is perceived, by him, to be "a bloody disaster" - makes him ashamed, as a professional philosopher of science, to be among those hold to an atheist position, particularly as, according to him, New Atheism does science a "grave disservice" and does a "disservice to scholarship" at more general level.