Darwin and Natural Selection
Rolf
Translated from the Swedish magazine Illustrert Vetenskap (Illustrated
Science):
30 March 1959, Darwin wrote to geologist Lyell that publisher Murray doesn't
want the term 'natural selection' in the title of his book. Darwin writes:
"The reason I like the term is that it is being used in all works about
breeding, and it surprises me that Murray doesn't know it."
Later, Darwin had to concede that someone had beaten him to be the first to
use the term "natural selection." 21 April 1860 he writes in Gardeners
Chronicle " I willingly recognize that Mr. Patrick Matthew with many years
anticipated the explanation that I gave in "On the Origins of Species" under
the name of "Natural Selection". (.) I can only offer my apology to Mr.
Matthew." Matthews article, in which he used the term, was published in
Naval Timber and Agriculture 1. January 1831.
Other sources also indicate use of the term in the early 1800's.
Rolf
Robert Carnegie
Regarding Patrick Matthew I think it is fair to say "We know". An
account is given in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Matthew
I perceive that your quotes seem to be translated also, whereas the
originals presumably were in English, see above.
However, I had understood that only the term "selection", not "natural
selection", was borrowed by Darwin from the world of planned breeding
(animals, also plants?) And if that borrowed term was "natural
selection" then it would not be reasonable for Darwin to pretend to
have invented it, or to apologise to Matthew in particular for
claiming the intellectual property.
backspace
Which raises the question: What was the intent or pragmatics Matthew
had with NS in 1831 and what
possible relevance could it have today in trying to understand how
birds implement inverted pendulum control?
--
fnord
Ray Martinez
>
> - Show quoted text -
It doesn't matter: Darwin owns the phrase "natural selection" because
he is the biologist that got the scientific community to accept his
explanation of the concept - eventually.
Just like the term "Watchmaker" belongs to William Paley because he
was the first to provide the best interpretation of its metaphoric
meaning, even though he did not invent the term, and even though he
was accused of plagiarism.
Ray
Dana Tweedy
>
> It doesn't matter: Darwin owns the phrase "natural selection" because
> he is the biologist that got the scientific community to accept his
> explanation of the concept - eventually.
Darwin no more "owns" the term "natural selection" as the first George
Bush owns the phrase "Read my lips".
>
> Just like the term "Watchmaker" belongs to William Paley because he
> was the first to provide the best interpretation of its metaphoric
> meaning, even though he did not invent the term, and even though he
> was accused of plagiarism.
Paley does not "own" the "argument from design" either, even though he's
the most famous promoter of the concept.
DJT
Robert J. Kolker
>
> Paley does not "own" the "argument from design" either, even though he's
> the most famous promoter of the concept.
Plato put forth an argument from design in -The Timeaus-. That is circa
350 b.c.e or over 2300 years ago.
Bob Kolker
Tristan Miller
In article
<26c97e46-8a22-4901...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Ray
Martinez wrote:
> It doesn't matter: Darwin owns the phrase "natural selection" because
> he is the biologist that got the scientific community to accept his
> explanation of the concept - eventually.
>
> Just like the term "Watchmaker" belongs to William Paley because he
> was the first to provide the best interpretation of its metaphoric
> meaning, even though he did not invent the term, and even though he
> was accused of plagiarism.
And by extension, I take it the catchphrase "inability to refute" belongs
to you?
Regards,
Tristan
--
_
_V.-o Tristan Miller [en,(fr,de,ia)] >< Space is limited
/ |`-' -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= <> In a haiku, so it's hard
(7_\\ http://www.nothingisreal.com/ >< To finish what you
Rolf
"Ray Martinez" <pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:26c97e46-8a22-4901...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
As far as I can tell, you are wrong, as always. Darwin just realized that
Natural Selection was the engine driving evolution. Nobody before Darwin
(and Wallace) had thought that Natural Selection was the driving force of
evolution.
Natural Selection was Natural selectin both before and after Darwin, the
differnec ebeing that after Darwin it was accepted also as the mechanism
behind evolution. Evolution was understood to have happened even before
thet - but now it was relized how evolution could take place.
You wouldn't know a fact if it hit you in the nose since you are a Dr.
Scottist, all you say is perfectly consistent with that moronic point of
view. You are incapable of sayuing anything else. The differnec ebetween
idiots and all the rest of us is that idiots stick to the same stupid
arguments in utter disregard for facts.
The rest of us, we may change opinion whenever new facts come to light. I am
doing it all the time. when did you laste change your opinion on anything?
As for bacspace, he is even more stupid than you. He suffers form the
delusion that the world consist of words only. Taht analysis of words,
semantics, can tell us anything abotu the real world. While the simpel fact
is that the world exists in and by itslef, on its own premises, in its own
way, regardless of the words we use. Oor words are just tools, the tool we
use to express and communicate our understanding of nature. When you
underanart, words lose their importance.
It is like the bits and bytes in our computer, they are highly inmportant
for expression and communication, but once they have been translated into
huma readable language, they become absolutely irrelevant.
But it takes a functioning brain to understand such complex matters. Now,
get yourself a copy of that wonderful book, "The God Delusion", there you
will find a heaven of subjcts to rally against instead of evolution, of
which you understand nothing.