theleveller, Here, trip out on this....not the bit about Darwinism and the disagreement with entropy..just for shits and giggles..


It was Descartes' dualistic world view that provided the metaphysical foundation for the subsequent success of Newtonian mechanics and the rise of modern science in the seventeenth century, and it was here at their modern origins as part of this dualistic world view that psychology and physics were defined by their mutual exclusivity. According to Descartes, the world was divided into the active, striving, end-directed psychological part (the perceiving mind, thinking I, or Cartesian self) on the one hand, and the "dead" physical part on the other. The physical part of the world (matter, body), defined exhaustively by its extension in space and time, was seen to consist of reversible (without any inherent direction to time), qualityless particles governed by rigidly deterministic law from which the striving, immaterial mind, without spatial or temporal dimension, was immune.
xxArguing that the active, end-directed striving of living things in general (Descartes had limited the active part of the world to human minds) could not be adequately described or accounted for as part of a dead, reversible, mechanical world, Kant promoted a second major dualism, the dualism between physics and biology, or between the active striving of living things and their dead physical environments. The Cartesian-Kantian dualistic tradition was built into evolutionary theory with the ascendancy of Darwinism where physics was given no role to play and "organisms and environments were totally separated" (Lewontin, 1992, p. 108). The same Kantian argument for the "autonomy of biology" from physics based on the apparent incommensurability of physics with the active, end-directedness of living things has been used by leading proponents of Darwinism right up to recent times (e.g., Mayer, 1985).

we can go on from there...if ya' want...

GfS