A couple of months ago I railed against the inappropriate use of language. Certain people pooh-poohed my concern. Others agreed with me, but I retreated into my cave to lick my wounds.
But it appears that I’m in good company. Richard Sever, Executive Editor at JCS, agrees with me:
It would be easy to dismiss criticism of this as mere pedantry, if it weren’t for puzzled researchers voicing concern at the seemingly illogical or counterintuitive ‘design’ of a biological structure or process. . . Systems that emerge by selection differ fundamentally from those conceived by design. Failing to acknowledge this in our choice of words is lazy, clutters our thinking and does a disservice to those entering biology from disciplines (scientific and non-scientific) in which evolution by selection is not a central theme and the word ‘design’ carries inherent baggage.
So, ner.
Glad to hear someone else is railing against this. As I said, it is not simply a bad choice of word: it can distort one’s approach to a problem. Mole, a columnist at JCS, explains why in this amusing analogy to the Apollo 13 mission.
Hello Richard. Thanks for popping by – and for that link. I love the Complex I story.