In genetic epistemology, as in developmental psychology, too, there is never an absolute beginning.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Our problem, from the point of view of psychology and from the point of view of genetic epistemology, is to explain how the transition is made from a lower level of knowledge to a level that is judged to be higher.
Evolution is an indispensable component of any satisfying explanation of our psychology.
Mathematical discoveries, small or great are never born of spontaneous generation.
Biology has tended to be an observational science, and deriving things from first principles has not been possible in the past, but I hate to predict the future on that.
Biology is far from understanding exactly how a single cell develops into a baby, but research suggests that human development can ultimately be explained in terms of biochemistry and molecular biology. Most scientists would make a similar statement about evolution.
Physiological psychology is, therefore, first of all psychology.
You can't even begin to understand biology, you can't understand life, unless you understand what it's all there for, how it arose - and that means evolution.
The truth, it is said, is rarely pure or simple, yet genetics can at times seem seductively transparent.
The neuroscience area - which is absolutely in its infancy - is much more important than genetics.
The science is settled; it's not even a consensus, it is a unanimity that human life begins at conception.