Talk:Chance and Necessity

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
	It is requested that a picture or pictures be included in this article to improve its quality.

According to philosophers of Charles University, Faculty of nature sciences, department of philosophy and history of nature sciences, specifically Zdeněk Kratochvíl and Anton Markoš, the Democritus line or anything resembling it can't be found anywhere. Reference can be found in a Czech edition of Chance and necessity. Could someone try to merge this thought into the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.42.181.96 (talk) 21:30, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The summary was added from a paper I wrote for Professor Vincent Cirillo at UTD. -David Bashover — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.181.159.74 (talk) 22:32, 24 July 2012 (UTC) I've never seem such a well-written summary... Bravo! kmar 09:46, 6 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmaruszewski (talk • contribs) [reply]

More on the way the book was received

When I read Chance and Necessity in the 70s my impression was that it was well-written but didn't say anything controversial. This was also the opinion of those I discussed it with – in England, mostly scientists or science students. But I was aware that it was regarded as controversial in France, and by a few Brits including Mary Midgley. I have ever since wondered what its critics disagreed with. I came to this article hoping to find out. I hope someone can some day expand the "Criticism" section. Maproom (talk) 08:21, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]