Pierre-Paul Grassé Zitate

Pierre-Paul Grassé war ein französischer Zoologe und Entomologe. Er war Experte für Termiten.

Grassé wurde 1926 an der Universität Montpellier über die Einzeller im Darm von Termiten promoviert. Ab 1929 war er Professor in Clermont-Ferrand, wo er sich weiter mit Termiten aus Afrika befasste. 1937 wurde er Professor an der Sorbonne und war ab 1941 Nachfolger von Maurice Caullery auf dem Lehrstuhl für Evolution der Lebewesen . Wie seine beiden Vorgänger auf dem Lehrstuhl war er Neo-Lamarckist.

Er ist Herausgeber des in Frankreich häufig nur kurz Grassé genannten Traité de zoologie, der ab 1952 in 17 Bänden bei Dunod erschien. Er wird auch heute noch in Neubearbeitungen fortgesetzt. Er gab auch eine dreibändiges Kompendium über Termiten heraus . Auf ihn geht die Gründung des Tropenforschungsinstituts in Makokou in Gabun zurück, das hauptsächlich Primatenforschung dient. Mit dem CNRS gründete er ein Zentrum für Elektronenmikroskopie in der Biologie .

1948 wurde er Mitglied der Académie des sciences und war 1967 ihr Präsident. 1939 war er Präsident der Société zoologique de France und 1941 der Société entomologique de France. Er war Kommandeur der Ehrenlegion und vielfacher Ehrendoktor . Wikipedia  

✵ 27. November 1895 – 9. Juli 1985
Pierre-Paul Grassé: 12   Zitate 0   Gefällt mir

Pierre-Paul Grassé: Zitate auf Englisch

“They are quite sincere but they are not critical enough. Biochemists and biologists who adhere blindly to the Darwinism theory search for results that will be in agreement with their theories and consequently orient their research in a given direction,”

Grassé, Pierre Paul (1977); Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation. Academic Press, p. 7
Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation (1977)
Kontext: For those who would still doubt the relevance of our criticisms, another quote from a paper written by two American biologists, King and Jukes (1969), is presented:. These biologists are convinced that the Darwinian credo is correct, and they accept it. They are quite sincere but they are not critical enough. Biochemists and biologists who adhere blindly to the Darwinism theory search for results that will be in agreement with their theories and consequently orient their research in a given direction, whether it be in the field of ecology, ethology, sociology, demography (dynamics of populations), genetics (so-called evolutionary genetics), or paleontology. This intrusion of theories has unfortunate results: it deprives observations and experiments of their objectivity, makes them biased, and, moreover, creates false problems. Heedful of genetics and demography, Darwinians have seldom taken fossils* into consideration, or, and this is more serious, they have applied the laws of genetics to them without making a critical analysis; considering our ignorance of the relationships between fossils, which in most cases are found very far apart and in distinct beds, this approach can only be arbitrary.

“Through use and abuse of hidden postulates, of bold, often ill-founded extrapolations, a pseudoscience has been created. It is taking root in the very heart of biology and is leading astray many biochemists and biologists, who sincerely believe that the accuracy of fundamental concepts has been demonstrated, which is not the case.”

Grassé, Pierre Paul (1977); Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation. Academic Press, p. 6
Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation (1977)
Kontext: Through use and abuse of hidden postulates, of bold, often ill-founded extrapolations, a pseudoscience has been created. It is taking root in the very heart of biology and is leading astray many biochemists and biologists, who sincerely believe that the accuracy of fundamental concepts has been demonstrated, which is not the case. Wishing to point out this type of misconception, we quote P. T. Mora, an American biochemist, who writes about polysaccharides contained in the cell membrane: To admit that the action of enzymes and, enzymes and, more important, that their foundation is directed by the genetic code should not permit one to mantain that the information was selected by evolution (the consequence is mistaken for the cause); no one knows anything about this.

“A given phenomenon, today considered random, may tomorrow be considered determined because its causes will have been unraveled by thorough and specific study.”

Grassé, Pierre Paul (1977); Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation. Academic Press, p. 279
Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation (1977)
Kontext: Exceptional, unforeseeable, or even inexplicable phenomena would hence be fortuitous. these very vague adjectives too often have a merely circumstancial meaning. A given phenomenon, today considered random, may tomorrow be considered determined because its causes will have been unraveled by thorough and specific study.
Biologists, whose task is not to seek moral causes or intentions, must first of all make sure that so-called random facts really are random facts; they must constantly keep in mind Poincare's (1912b, p. 65) famous phrase: "Chance is only the measure of our ignorance."

“We have gone from Darwinism into neo-Darwinism, and, very recently, to ultra-Darwinism, which not only claims to be the sole custodian truth in regard to evolution, but to be evolution itself. Darwin himself did not display so much confidence when writing to one of his grandsons… Present-day ultra-Darwinism, which is so sure of itself, impresses incompletely informed biologists, misleads them, and inspires fallacious interpretations.”

Grassé, Pierre Paul (1977); Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation. Academic Press, p. 6
Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation (1977)
Kontext: We have gone from Darwinism into neo-Darwinism, and, very recently, to ultra-Darwinism, which not only claims to be the sole custodian truth in regard to evolution, but to be evolution itself. Darwin himself did not display so much confidence when writing to one of his grandsons... Present-day ultra-Darwinism, which is so sure of itself, impresses incompletely informed biologists, misleads them, and inspires fallacious interpretations. The following is one of the numerous examples found in books today:
This text suggests that modern bacteria are evolving very quickly, thanks to their innumerable mutations. Now, this is not true. For millions, or even billions of years, bacteria have not transgressed the structural frame within which they have always fluctuated and still do.
It is a fact that microbiologists can see in their cultures species of bacteria oscillating around an intermediate form, but this does not mean that two phenomena, which are quite distinct, should be confused; the variation of the genetic code because of a DNA copy error and evolution. To vary and to evolve are two different things; this can never be sufficiently emphasized.

“Natural order was not invented by the human mind or set up by certain perceptive powers… The existence of order presupposes the existence of organizing intelligence. Such intelligence can be none other than God's.”

Dieu existe? Oui http://books.google.com.mx/books/about/Dieu_existe_Oui.html?id=TBUCHQAACAAJ&redir_esc=y (1979). Paris. Stock. Christian Chabanis, p. 94.
Original: L’ordre naturel n’est pas une invention de l’esprit humain et une mise en place de certaines propriétés d’observation... Qui dit ordre dit intelligence organisatrice. Cette intelligence ne peut être que celle de Dieu.

“The immanent purpose is an intrinsic property of living beings, without it, they would not exist. Consider the autonomous function units and their components: organs, tissues, isolated cells, as well as other properties such as nutrition, body defense, growth, reproduction, to which they are subject at the end. When it comes to these properties, biologists do not argue; but if you pronounce the word purpose, there is a public outcry. Probably because they do not distinguish the purpose of fact or immanent, the trascendental purpose. Of the latter, the biologist has little or nothing to say; it is a matter of metaphysics.”

Grassé, Pierre Paul (1977); Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation. Academic Press, p. 2
Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation (1977)
Original: La finalité immanente est une propriété intrinseque des etres vivants, sans elle, ils n'existeraient pas. Considérés en tant qu' unités fonctionelles autonomes, leurs constituants: organes, tissus, cellule isolée, au meme titre que les autres propriétés: nutrition, défense de l'organisme, croissance, reproduction, sont subordonnés à une fin. Quand il s'agit de ces propriétes, les biologistes ne se disputent pas; mais si l'on pronounce le mot finalité, c'est un levée de boucliers. Probablement parce qu'ils ne distinguent pas la finalité de fait ou immanente, de la finalité trascendante. Sur cette derniere, le biologiste n'a que peu, sinon rien à dire; elle ressortit de la métaphysique

“The philosopher considering the Universe in its entirety is led to admit that there is only one necessary, absolute being, God. All other beings are contingent; this is why Pascal said of himself: "I feel that I might not have been… therefore I am not a necessary being" (Pensées, No. 597). The proposition applies equally to every living thing.”

Grassé, Pierre Paul (1977); Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation. Academic Press, p. 172
Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation (1977)
Original: Le philosophe, considérant l'univers dans son intégralité, est conduit à n'admettre qu'un seul être nécessaire, absolu, Dieu. Tous les autres sont contingents; c'est pour cela que Pascal disait de lui-même : « Je sens que je puis n'avoir pas été... donc je ne suis pas un être nécessaire » (Pensées, 597). Cette proposition s'applique avec autant de justesse à tout être

“The Darwinians have coined the terms pseudoteleology and teleonomy to designate the finality which they at the same time deny. Appearances are deceptive, they say; the materials of life are always the work of chance. What some take for finality is only the result of the ordering of random materials bynatural selection. Even were this to be true, as it is not, the demon of finility would still not have been exorcized. For natural selection is, in essence and function, the supreme finilizing agent. Actually, the terms pseudoteleology and teleonomy are the homage paid to finality, as hypocrisy pays homage to virtue. Giard (1905), himself a shrewd scholar but blinded by a foolish anticlericalism, went so far as to abjure Lamarckism and write, "To account for the wondrous adaptations such as those we observe between orchids and the insects that fertilize them, we have hardly any choice but the bare alternative hypotheses: the intervention of a sovereignly intelligent being, and selection." He cannot have seriously subjected his supposed dilemma to critical scrutiny or he would have seen that he was substituting for the dethroned divinity just such another, a sorting and finalizing, in sum transcendental, agent, natural selection. Paul Wintrebert, a convinced and even intractable atheist, did not fall into the same trap but realized perfectly that Giard's alternative involves, whatever opinion be held, recognizing the intervention of a purposive guiding agent. Giard's concept, which is that held by many atheists and "freethinkers", gives a singular and belittling idea of God. The Almighty, obliged to remodel and retouch His own handiwork.”

Grassé, Pierre Paul (1977); Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation. Academic Press, p. 165
Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation (1977)

“The mutation of bacteria and viruses are merely hereditary fluctuations around a median position; a swing to the right, a swing to the left, but no final evolutionary effect.”

Pierre Paul Grassé¨(1973). L'évolution du vivant: matériaux pour une nouvelle théorie transformiste. A. Michel,. p. 151
Evolution of living organisms: evidence for a new theory of transformation (1977)
Original: En somme, les mutations des Bactéries et des virus ne sont que des fluctuations héréditaires, autour d'une position moyenne, oscillation à droite, oscillation à gauche: effet évolutif final nul.

Ähnliche Autoren

Richard Dawkins Foto
Richard Dawkins 22
Britischer Zoologe, Biologe und Autor
Henry De Montherlant Foto
Henry De Montherlant 11
französischer Schriftsteller
Romain Gary Foto
Romain Gary 2
französischer Schriftsteller
Michel Foucault Foto
Michel Foucault 10
französischer Philosoph
Romain Rolland Foto
Romain Rolland 10
französischer Schriftsteller
Louis-ferdinand Céline Foto
Louis-ferdinand Céline 3
französischer Schriftsteller und Arzt
Georges Braque Foto
Georges Braque 6
französischer Maler
Guillaume Apollinaire Foto
Guillaume Apollinaire 1
französischer Schriftsteller und Kunstkritiker
Paul Claudel Foto
Paul Claudel 2
französischer Schriftsteller, Dichter und Diplomat
Marcel Pagnol Foto
Marcel Pagnol 2
französischer Schriftsteller, Dramaturg und Regisseur