We’ve been reading Charles Darwin all wrong

AV1611VET said:

I think it really happened.

Click to expand...

But why do you think that?

The earliest versions of the story don't appear to have come from people who knew him personally, and his openly Christian wife never promoted them.

Frank Robert said:

.

For many people today, Darwin has become a sort of secular deity, an icon for atheism.

​

Click to expand...

Mostly by the anti-evolutionists and religious groups.

Some religions aren't satisfied with only a God... there must also be a Devil.

honestal said:

I don't know if it's true, but I once heard that the only degree Darwin possessed was in theology

Click to expand...

It seems odd to me that you are quite free in your quotes concerning what Darwin thought, yet appear to know so little about him. These brief notes I made some years ago for myself may help correct some of that.

1. The majority of naturalists in England in Darwin's time were ministers of the church. It was expected that one of the sons of any well to do family would acquire a living. These typically afforded much free time and these reverends indulged the Victorian interest in nature. (While Darwin's father intended he become a doctor, like himself and his brother, Darwin's distaste for the idea forced the alternative on him.)

2. From his childhood he was absorbed in nature. ("I was a born naturalist," he wrote.) He collected specimens (wildlife collection was a Victorian passion) and avidly read nature books.

3. Darwin's degree may have been in theology, but while at Cambridge he was exposed to the logically constructed writing of Paley (Natural Theology) and the penetrating logic of Whewell (Bridgewater Treatises). He was also taught botany by Professor J. S. Henslow, who was a cleric, and geology by Adam Sedgwick, who was a cleric. Being a cleric was almost a requirement for being a naturalist at that time!

4. "Darwin's letters and biographical notes give the impression that in Cambridge he devoted more time to collecting beetles, discussing geology and botany with his professors and hunting and riding with similarly inclined friends, than to his prescribed studies." (Ernst Mayr, in One Long Argument Harvard University Press 1991)

5. "..when Darwin had completed his Cambridge years he was an accomplished young naturalist." (ibid.)

6. He then embarked on the Beagle for a voyage lasting five years, where he was exposed to more opportunities for research than many a Ph.D. student, opportunities which he seized and made full use of, as evidenced by the specimens he collected, the learned reports he wrote, and the novel concepts he brought to geology and biology.

A fitting summary of the man and his works was made by Alfred Wallace, the naturalist whose independent development of evolutionary theory prompted Darwin to publish his more extensive research. Wallace said this "[Darwin's early works] great as each of them is separately, and, taken altogether, amazing as the production of one man, sink into insignificance as compared with the vast body of research and of thought of which the Origin of Species is the brief epitome, and with which alone the name of Darwin is associated by the mass of educated men." (Natural Selection and Tropical Nature", London 1883.)

AV1611VET said:

I think it really happened.

Click to expand...

You believe the rumor; good for you.

Which means, if true, Charles Darwin is now in Heaven; good for him.

Of course, the rumor has no bearing on his life's work, which still stands the test of time; good for us.

TLK Valentine said:

Of course, the rumor has no bearing on his life's work, which still stands the test of time;

Click to expand...

Only on paper.

AV1611VET said:

Only on paper.

Click to expand...

High praise coming from someone who worships a book.

TLK Valentine said:

High praise coming from someone who worships a book.

Click to expand...

Ya ... wife wants me to stop singing to It and giving It my tithes.

Shemjaza said:

But why do you think that?

Click to expand...

Good feelings, as like as not.

AV1611VET said:

And for the record, rumor has it that Mr Darwin recanted on his death bed (or some six months prior).

Click to expand...

Unsubstantiated rumours are extremely unreliable. But if, for the sake of argument, Darwin did become a Hindu, Muslim, Christian, or whatever, believer on his deathbed, so what? It has no relevance to his scientific work.

AV1611VET said:

Only on paper.

Click to expand...

You keep regurgitating that quip.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:

Unsubstantiated rumours are extremely unreliable. But if, for the sake of argument, Darwin did become a Hindu, Muslim, Christian, or whatever, believer on his deathbed, so what? It has no relevance to his scientific work.

Click to expand...

The so- what is yet another excursion into
derailing and custom framing that is being
foolishly enabled by responding to it.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:

Unsubstantiated rumours are extremely unreliable. But if, for the sake of argument, Darwin did become a Hindu, Muslim, Christian, or whatever, believer on his deathbed, so what? It has no relevance to his scientific work.

Click to expand...

To my mind, those who favour the truth of this story do so because they naturally place belief above evidence. What Darwin believed, to them, is vastly more important than the decades of evidence he had accumulated. Belief, based upon faith, trumps evidence every time. If he changed his belief, their beliefs are validated and his evidence becomes irrelevant.

We see examples of this frequently on this forum. The only thing that puzzles me about it is, does it have an evolutionary advantage and if so, what is it?

FrumiousBandersnatch said:

Unsubstantiated rumours are extremely unreliable.

Click to expand...

Neat.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:

But if, for the sake of argument, Darwin did become a ... Christian, so what?

Click to expand...

"One less egg [that'll] fry." -- The Fifth Dimension

FrumiousBandersnatch said:

It has no relevance to his scientific work.

Click to expand...

I know.

His scientific work will wax stronger and stronger as time goes by.

Mr Laurier said:

You keep regurgitating that quip.

Click to expand...

Mainly on the Internet.

Estrid said:

The so- what is yet another excursion into derailing and custom framing that is being foolishly enabled by responding to it.

Click to expand...

Not everyone ignores me like you do.

They can handle me and don't suffer some low psyche-level of tolerance.

Mr Laurier said:

You keep regurgitating that quip.

Click to expand...

You're new; you'll soon learn all dozen quips AV likes to regurgitate.

Pluto, thalidomide, the Challenger disaster, Boolean standards, the apple challenge... AV is nothing if not predictable.

Ophiolite said:

To my mind, those who favour the truth of this story do so because they naturally place belief above evidence. What Darwin believed, to them, is vastly more important than the decades of evidence he had accumulated. Belief, based upon faith, trumps evidence every time. If he changed his belief, their beliefs are validated and his evidence becomes irrelevant.

We see examples of this frequently on this forum. The only thing that puzzles me about it is, does it have an evolutionary advantage and if so, what is it?

Click to expand...

I think it may be an evolutionary behaviour spandrel - in times before formal scientific enquiry, when evidence was mostly anecdotal, little different from rumour, shared belief systems would have been at the heart of tribal identity and would take precedence over, and determine the response to, those anecdotes & rumours. Plus ca change...

TLK Valentine said:

You're new; you'll soon learn all dozen quips AV likes to regurgitate.

Pluto, thalidomide, the Challenger disaster, Boolean standards, the apple challenge... AV is nothing if not predictable.

Click to expand...

I've been dealing with AV for over a decade.
We had a lovely discussion two or three times on CARM, about the harm missionaries do.
And his "embedded age" nonsense as well. Thats always good for a frustrating re-explanation of what you have already explained last week.

AV1611VET said:

I know.

His scientific work will wax stronger and stronger as time goes by.

Click to expand...

And that really would be of no threat to your faith since evolution doesn't talk about how life started nor does it say anything about God.

Warden_of_the_Storm said:

And that really would be of no threat to your faith since evolution doesn't talk about how life started nor does it say anything about God.

Click to expand...

When it culminates, I'm not even going to be here.