Teilhard and Orthogenetic Evolution

The number of writings appearing on Teilhard de Chardin is increasing daily, with the great majority of them treating his philosophical, theological or humanistic ideas. Discussion of his evolutionary theory from a more scientific point of view is relatively rare. For one thing, he seems to have lea...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Beasley-Murray, George Raymond 1916-2000 (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Cambridge Univ. Press [1967]
In: Harvard theological review
Year: 1967, Volume: 60, Issue: 3, Pages: 281-295
Online Access: Volltext (Verlag)
Volltext (doi)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1582055769
003 DE-627
005 20181018085101.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 181018s1967 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1017/S0017816000003771  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1582055769 
035 |a (DE-576)512055769 
035 |a (DE-599)BSZ512055769 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)118912844  |0 (DE-627)079689434  |0 (DE-576)164336931  |4 aut  |a Beasley-Murray, George Raymond  |d 1916-2000 
109 |a Beasley-Murray, George Raymond 1916-2000  |a Beasley-Murray, George R. 1916-2000  |a Beasley-Murray, G. R. 1916-2000  |a Beasley-Murray, George 1916-2000  |a Murray, George R. 1916-2000  |a Murray, George Raymond Beasley- 1916-2000 
245 1 0 |a Teilhard and Orthogenetic Evolution  |c George B. Murray 
264 1 |c [1967] 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The number of writings appearing on Teilhard de Chardin is increasing daily, with the great majority of them treating his philosophical, theological or humanistic ideas. Discussion of his evolutionary theory from a more scientific point of view is relatively rare. For one thing, he seems to have leaned heavily, though not exclusively, on a neo-Lamarckian explanatory viewpoint. The major problem, however, is that he espoused a theory of evolution, orthogenesis, which is rejected by the majority of scientists today on the ground that there is no evidence for it. Many writers force one to conclude that they are unaware of the ramifications of holding a theory that is considered unviable in the scientific community. In the same vein, too many authors do not seem to take seriously the critics of Teilhard who have made this point, e.g., George G. Simpson, Peter Medawar and Theodosius Dobzhansky. One gets the impression that there is a wider gulf between “the two cultures” than he might have imagined. Little concern for Teilhard's orthogenetic evolution leads us to suspect that writers do not know that it makes a difference what type of evolution Teilhard espoused. There may be a cultural lag between science and the other disciplines, but orthogenesis has been around for many years now, and has been rejected by biologists for at least fifteen years, which is a conservative estimate. 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Harvard theological review  |d Cambridge : Cambridge Univ. Press, 1908  |g 60(1967), 3, Seite 281-295  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)331504553  |w (DE-600)2051494-3  |w (DE-576)094533326  |x 1475-4517  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:60  |g year:1967  |g number:3  |g pages:281-295 
856 4 0 |u https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/harvard-theological-review/article/teilhard-and-orthogenetic-evolution/288718FD18347A7B8C743EB9C6F7AD2F  |x Verlag  |3 Volltext 
856 |u https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816000003771  |x doi  |3 Volltext 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 3029066398 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1582055769 
LOK |0 005 20181018085101 
LOK |0 008 181018||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixzo 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw