Gould, "Darwinian Fundamentalism
," The New York Review of Books; June 12, 1997).
Although McEwan fails to mention the late paleontologist and historian and philosopher of science Stephen Jay Gould in his novel, one should note that the use of "fundamentalism" as used by Clarissa is an allusion to ideas in two important articles in the New York Review of Books, "Darwinian Fundamentalism" and "Evolution: The Pleasure of Pluralism." Moreover, with Clarissa's views, McEwan is reflecting the standard argument that the sciences and the humanities are fundamentally different: the sciences are about reduction, while the humanities provide a chance at holism (see Wilson).
"Darwinian Fundamentalism." New York Review of Books 44.10 (1997): <http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1997/jun/12/ darwinian-fundamentalism/>.
But Fuller thinks that readers of his book should protest, for at least two reasons: first, because he thinks that evolutionary biology (EB) is usually presented as a monolithic ideology ('Darwinian fundamentalism', 83-5) that sweeps away all discussion of design; second, because he thinks that successful past science has been infused by the spirit of creationist design and that good science in the future should be as well.
To begin with, this position (as noted earlier) does not look constructivist, since Fuller seems to think that Darwinian fundamentalism has blocked the road to discovery, while a commitment to ID has promoted it.
For example, caricatures: Gould, his sometime co-author Richard Lewontin, and followers refer regularly to "ultra-Darwinism" "pan-adaptationism," and "Darwinian fundamentalism
." Those are slurs.
Moreover, Darwinian Fundamentalism
will again provide natural selection wherein only the more experienced operators will continue to thrive.