Darwinism has to go.

[Pops In]

<small class="post-date" id="day_15">July 15, 2008, 6:48 pm</small> Let’s Get Rid of Darwinism (http://judson.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/lets-get-rid-of-darwinism/)


<!-- end post-info --> (The third part in a series celebrating Charles Darwin (http://judson.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/darwinmania/).)


Charles Darwin was a giant. He did not merely write “On the Origin of
Species” — one of the most important books ever written by anyone — in
which he describes how evolution by natural selection works, and what
some of its consequences and implications are. He also wrote — and this
list is not exhaustive— a treatise on the formation of coral reefs that is still
thought to be correct; a definitive monograph on barnacles, both extinct
and extant; a book about how earthworms make soil; a now-classic text on
carnivorous plants (the ones, like Venus fly-traps, that ensnare and digest
insects); a book about the strange ways that orchids get themselves
fertilized; and an account of the five years he spent aboard the ship HMS
Beagle, which has become a classic of travel writing.

As if that wasn’t enough, he proposed sexual selection — the idea that
decorations and ornaments, like peacocks’ tails, evolve because females in
many species prefer to mate with the most beautiful males. Sexual
selection has since become a major field of research in its own right.

In short, Darwin did more in one lifetime than most of us could hope to
accomplish in two. But his giantism has had an odd and problematic
consequence. It’s a tendency for everyone to refer back to him. “Why
Darwin was wrong about X”; “Was Darwin wrong about Y?”; “What Darwin
didn’t know about Z” — these are common headlines in newspapers and
magazines, in both the biological and the general literature. Then there are
the words: Darwinism (sometimes used with the prefix “neo”), Darwinist
(ditto), Darwinian.

Why is this a problem? Because it’s all grossly misleading. It suggests that
Darwin was the beginning and the end, the alpha and omega, of
evolutionary biology, and that the subject hasn’t changed much in the 149
years since the publication of the “Origin.”

He wasn’t, and it has. Although several of his ideas — natural and sexual
selection among them — remain cornerstones of modern evolutionary
biology, the field as a whole has been transformed. If we were to go back
in a time machine and fetch him to the present day, he’d find much of
evolutionary biology unintelligible — at least until he’d had time to study
genetics, statistics and computer science....

...Darwin was an amazing man, and the principal founder of evolutionary
biology. But his was the first major statement on the subject, not the last.
Calling evolutionary biology “Darwinism,” and evolution by natural selection
“Darwinian” evolution, is like calling aeronautical engineering “Wrightism,”
and fixed-wing aircraft “Wrightian” planes, after those pioneers of
fixed-wing flight, the Wright brothers. The best tribute we could give
Darwin is to call him the founder — and leave it at that. Plenty of people in
history have had an -ism named after them. Only a handful can claim truly
to have given birth to an entire field of modern science.


Full article @ NY Times. (http://judson.blogs.nytimes.com/)

Discuss.

[ArcticPhoenix]

I think we should keep him around a bit longer.

[Pops In]

I think the term was created by those who insist that everything is here by magic.

[ArcticPhoenix]

I think the term was created by those who insist that everything is here by magic.

So they think everything was made by Houdini? Awesome.

[kingclick]

I think the term was created by those who insist that everything is here by magic.

Oh the irony. Pops believing in something that doesn't exist!! :howling:

"Darwinism" as a term was created by Thomas Henry Huxley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Henry_Huxley).

He was a scientist but good try though.

[flygirl]

That article left out The Voyage of the Beagle. It's the first adult book I ever read.

[ArcticPhoenix]

That article left out The Voyage of the Beagle. It's the first adult book I ever read.

Sounds naughty.

[Pops In]

Oh the irony. Pops believing in something that doesn't exist!! :howling:Daft bastard.

"Darwinism" as a term was created by Thomas Henry Huxley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Henry_Huxley).

He was a scientist but good try though.If so, it is perpetuated as a derogatory term by dickheads who believe in magic.

[kingclick]

Daft bastard.
If so, it is perpetuated as a derogatory term by dickheads who believe in magic.

I'm gonna chalk that one up to our different countries because Darwinism is only used in the way it was coined over here.

It's not a slur at all in any of the instances I have seen it used. It's used like Evolution or the Law of Gravity. Just a reference to a certain view.

[Pops In]

I'm gonna chalk that one up to our different countries because Darwinism is only used in the way it was coined over here.

It's not a slur at all in any of the instances I have seen it used. It's used like Evolution or the Law of Gravity. Just a reference to a certain view.
You may chalk it as you like. The term is used erroneously and derogatory. The science is "Evolution", not "Darwinism".

[kingclick]

You may chalk it as you like. The term is used erroneously and derogatory. The science is "Evolution", not "Darwinism".Like I said maybe in your country it is. But here the term "Darwinsim" is given the same weight as Evolution.

[ArcticPhoenix]

Like I said maybe in your country it is. But here the term "Darwinsim" is given the same weight as Evolution.

Only to dumbasses with the IQ of a bug's fecal matter.


Zing!

[jitobear]

Nice one ArcticPhoenix.

Isn't Darwin already dead?

[ArcticPhoenix]

Nice one ArcticPhoenix.

Isn't Darwin already dead?

Yeah, but so is Jesus. Your point being?

[kingclick]

Only to dumbasses with the IQ of a bug's fecal matter.


Zing!Nice to see that you agree that Darwinism pretty much carries the same weight as Evolution.

[Raven]

"Darwinism" as a term was created by Thomas Henry Huxley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Henry_Huxley).. Are you entirely certain of that. Could you kindly quote the wikipedia passage that states that?

Or could the wikipedia article be quoting Helen Cronin ABOUT "Darwin's Bulldog"?

[kingclick]

Are you entirely certain of that. Could you kindly quote the wikipedia passage that states that?

Or could the wikipedia article be quoting Helen Cronin ABOUT "Darwin's Bulldog"?
Huxley coined the phrase in his 4th review of the Origin of Species I think. I didn't get it from wiki. Some people here have shown that wiki is a bit suspect so I only used it to let people know who he was in general.

[jitobear]

Yeah, but so is Jesus. Your point being?

An attempt at silly based on the title of the thread...move on.

[Pops In]

Huxley coined the phrase in his 4th review of the Origin of Species I think. I didn't get it from wiki. Some people here have shown that wiki is a bit suspect.
Why then post the wiki link to back up your claim... however irrelevant it may be?

[kingclick]

Why then post the wiki link to back up your claim... however irrelevant it may be?Why? Should I compell you to post something from Fox News as proof?

No. Wiki isn't a source that I trust as much anymore.

[Pops In]

Why? Should I compell you to post something from Fox News as proof?

No. Wiki isn't a source that I trust as much anymore.Jagger forfend anyone would compelling you to do anything. You made a claim and posted a wikipedia link to back it up. I skipped through it and could find no reference to what you were on about, but gave you the benefit of the doubt. :huh:

[kingclick]

Jagger forfend anyone would compelling you to do anything. You made a claim and posted a wikipedia link to back it up. I skipped through it and could find no reference to what you were on about, but gave you the benefit of the doubt. :huh:Ok...I can see that. I guess it could be seen that way. Sorry, here let me give the wiki link.

The term was coined by Thomas Henry Huxley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Henry_Huxley) in April 1860,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism

[Pops In]

Ok...I can see that. I guess it could be seen that way. Sorry, here let me give the wiki link.
Oh, thank you.

And in the paragraph following the one with the Huxley reference:
While the term has remained in use amongst scientific authors, it is increasingly regarded as an inappropriate description of modern evolutionary theory <sup id="cite_ref-howto_3-0" class="reference">[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism#cite_note-howto-3)</sup><sup id="cite_ref-4" class="reference">[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism#cite_note-4)</sup> <sup id="cite_ref-5" class="reference">[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism#cite_note-5)</sup> For example, the genetic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics) theory of heredity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heredity) was not generally known when Darwin wrote (the work of Gregor Mendel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor_Mendel),<sup id="cite_ref-6" class="reference">[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism#cite_note-6)</sup> remained in obscurity until some time later). As a result Darwin had only a vague and inaccurate understanding of heredity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heredity) (see Pangenesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangenesis)), and knew nothing of genetic drift (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_drift).<sup id="cite_ref-GeneticDrift_7-0" class="reference">[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism#cite_note-GeneticDrift-7)</sup> In modern usage, particularly in the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States), Darwinism is often used by creationists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism) as a pejorative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pejorative) term.<sup id="cite_ref-morrissullivan_8-0" class="reference">[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism#cite_note-morrissullivan-8)

I was saying?

So Darwinism has to go.

</sup>

[kingclick]

Oh, thank you.

And in the paragraph following the one with the Huxley reference:


I was saying?

So Darwinism has to go.

Like I said wiki isn't a very reliable source.

[Pops In]

Like I said wiki isn't a very reliable source.
See the little numbers? They are the article's source's.

[kingclick]

See the little numbers? They are the article's source's.Yes and those little numbers went to a site that didn't give proof of the perjorative.

Heck I could post an article right now CLAIMING that Atheists all like to molest children. Give no proof of that statment and then go to wiki and use MY OWN lie to support it with a "little number".

Gimme proof. Not just a little number into a biased and unsupported article.

[Pops In]

Yes and those little numbers went to a site that didn't give proof of the perjorative.

Heck I could post an article right now CLAIMING that Atheists all like to molest children. Give no proof of that statment and then go to wiki and use MY OWN lie to support it with a "little number".

Gimme proof. Not just a little number into a biased and unsupported article.
I'm giving you fuck all. It is quite clear that the term is erroneous and pejorative and used as such by creationists.

[kingclick]

I'm giving you **** all. It is quite clear that the term is erroneous and pejorative and used as such by creationists.

Well now the more I think about it the more I realize that I don't really hang about with Creationists that much. So I probably am wrong on this one.

I will just say that I haven't ever used the term in a pejorative way.

[Pops In]

Well now the more I think about it the more I realize that I don't really hang about with Creationists that much. So I probably am wrong on this one.

They are prevalent on t'net.

[FaeryGem]

"Darwinism" is actually a fair term. I spent an entire day at Down House (Darwin's home now a museum) a few weeks ago and "Darwinsim" popped up quite a few times. Darwin was also a naturalist not an evolutionist. I got told off by the curator at the museum for referring to Darwin as an "evolutionist". He had nothing to do with evolution, he just studied it and his theory was based on it. He studied aspects of nature and its behaviour not only on his voyages on the Beagle but in his own back garden (which is really amazing). I think the term "Darwinism" just stems from his studies and work not exatly from evolution itsself.

http://photos-g.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-sf2p/v286/173/92/691403057/n691403057_511254_846.jpg
DOWN HOUSE

[Raven]

Ok...I can see that. I guess it could be seen that way. Sorry, here let me give the wiki link. which also supports Pops' point: In modern usage, particularly in the United States, Darwinism is often used by creationists as a pejorative term.[9]

ETA: I see that Pops caught it ;)

[Pops In]

ETA: I see that Pops caught it ;)Exactly. I've never heard the term in real life. Online these fuckers are as prolific as porn sites. :lol:

[kingclick]

They are prevalent on t'net.This is the only place I interact on the net.

[Pops In]

There ya go then.