Talk:Freedom Evolves

message: The current article is amazing....probably the only description of this book that does not discuss the importance of evolution in Dennett's argument (mentioning "evolves" in the title of the book does not count). --68.109.166.14 02:43, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I added some data about it and the game theoretical justifications. --maru 19:08, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  where's the "E" word? 

message: Should we even have a page that's nothing more than a book review?  Dennett's ideas should be covered under his own page, or on pages appropriate to the ideas themselves (compatibilism, behaviorism, etc), not here.  Anyone think this page should be allowed to live? --Alienus 22:20, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There are many good wikipedia articles about books. If you destroy this page, it will just be created again. --JWSchmidt 00:34, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No kidding. --Maru  (talk) Contribs 01:12, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps there are many good articles, but this isn't one of them.  Nor, for that matter, do I see anyone working to improve it.  I think it's time for us to either put up or shut up, so to speak. --Alienus 03:52, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? What deadline is there?  --Maru  (talk) Contribs 04:33, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see any reason to think we'll EVER achieve a useful page on this topic, so it's not a matter of deadline but viability. Alienus 05:02, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If you really feel that way, then go ahead and list this article on Articles for Deletion.  I can tell you what will happen though: it will overwhelmingly be voted to keep, and I will improve the article with my copy sooner than I had planned or wanted to. That is all. It will definitely not be deleted. --Maru  (talk) Contribs 05:11, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't get it. Why did you restore the text I deleted? It's an opinionated book review from some guy's personal website. It's totally subjective. It is inappropriate to Wikipedia, and should never have been put in this article in the first place. I don't think that the article should be deleted, and a vfd will most likely result in a vote to cleanup rather than to delete. If you want to keep or rehibilitate portions of the review, go aherad. But there's no reason to keep the POV portions. — goethean ॐ 15:48, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I restored it because there was, for all its POV, a lot of good information in there.  It is not ideal, but if we deleted everything but the ideal on Wikipedia, we'd be left with no articles. --Maru  (talk) Contribs 16:16, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kill this page 

message: What little content of value there is in this article should be scraped up and tossed back in with Daniel_Dennett. Alienus 07:15, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is a waste of time to delete this wikipedia article. If it is deleted, it will simply be created again. As an alternative to deletion, I suggest that we start an article improvement process. As a first step, I suggest that everyone with a copy of the book agree to contribute a summary of the contents of one chapter and that we continue to add chapter descriptions to the article until the entire book is described. --JWSchmidt 16:00, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm impatient with that approach, so I made an attempt at removing some of the obvious problems.  What now? Alienus 22:11, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We should add a description of Dennett's treatment of evitability. --JWSchmidt 00:46, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Death by assimulation

message: Could some further explanation be added about the book's conclusion that "Evitability ... actually requires, that human action be deterministic" i.e. what is the argument that leads to this? SP-KP 02:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvement suggestion 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:01, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating