|
Author
|
Topic: Not enough room in DNA
|
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4659 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: 05-14-2009
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
Never heard that claim about Darwin before, would you mind citing your source ?
|
Wounded King
Member Posts: 4149 From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA Joined: 04-09-2003
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
I'm not sure what you are objecting to, that Darwin was training for the clergy is a matter of historical record, its not as if there are no biographical accounts of Darwin out there. Indeed Darwin's own autobiography is available online.
Darwin writes: AFTER HAVING spent two sessions in Edinburgh, my father perceived or he heard from my sisters, that I did not like the thought of being a physician, so he proposed that I should become a clergyman. He was very properly vehement against my turning an idle sporting man, which then seemed my probable destination. I asked for some time to consider, as from what little I had heard and thought on the subject I had scruples about declaring my belief in all the dogmas of the Church of England; though otherwise I liked the thought of being a country clergyman. Accordingly I read with care Pearson on the Creed and a few other books on divinity; and as I did not then in the least doubt the strict and literal truth of every word in the Bible, I soon persuaded myself that our Creed must be fully accepted. It never struck me how illogical it was to say that I believed in what I could not understand and what is in fact unintelligible. I might have said with entire truth that I had no wish to dispute any dogma; but I never was such a fool as to feel and say 'credo quia incredibile'. Considering how fiercely I have been attacked by the orthodox it seems ludicrous that I once intended to be a clergyman. Nor was this intention and my father's wish ever formally given up, but died a natural death when on leaving Cambridge I joined the Beagle as Naturalist. ... In order to pass the B.A. examination, it was, also, necessary to get up Paley's Evidences of Christianity, and his Moral Philosophy. This was done in a thorough manner, and I am convinced that I could have written out the whole of the Evidences with perfect correctness, but not of course in the clear language of Paley. The logic of this book and as I may add of his Natural Theology gave me as much delight as did Euclid. The careful study of these works, without attempting to learn any part by rote, was the only part of the Academical Course which, as I then felt and as I still believe, was of the least use to me in the education of my mind. I did not at that time trouble myself about Paley's premises; and taking these on trust I was charmed and convinced by the long line of argumentation. By answering well the examination questions in Paley, by doing Euclid well, and by not failing miserably in Classics, I gained a good place among the οἱ πολλοί, or crowd of men who do not go in for honours. TTFN, WK
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 106 by slevesque, posted 04-22-2010 4:15 AM | | slevesque has not replied |
|
Parasomnium
Member Posts: 2224 Joined: 07-15-2003
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
slevesque writes: Never heard that claim about Darwin before, would you mind citing your source ? I don't have the sources at my disposal right now. What I wrote I dredged up from memory, having read, not long ago, Darwin's Voyage of the Beagle and a biography by Adrian Desmond and James Moore (which, incidentally, I bought in Down House, in Kent). Perhaps I will cite some passages later. Fortunately, WK has already done some of the work, for which I thank him. Edited by Parasomnium, : No reason given.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 106 by slevesque, posted 04-22-2010 4:15 AM | | slevesque has not replied |
|
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2314 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: 09-02-2008
|
|
Message 109 of 139 (557023)
04-22-2010 7:57 AM
|
|
|
Voyage of the Beagle
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
Never heard that claim about Darwin before, would you mind citing your source ? Well, it's fairly obvious that Darwin didn't start out as a Darwinian --- how could he? He'd never read The Origin Of Species, because he hadn't written it. Darwin studied theology at university ... in the Voyage of the Beagle you can read him giggling about Lamarck's crazy ideas about evolution ... and he was a young-earther. I'm too lazy to look up the reference, but I do remember his reaction when he came across the first suggestion that the Earth was old. He was shocked and perplexed. He wrote (I quote from memory, but something like) "I had always thought that the date of six thousand years was generally accepted". Darwin wasn't born a "Darwinian", rather, he slowly came around to the views that we now attribute to him and call "Darwinian". He was forced to become "Darwinian" by the weight of the evidence. And when he did, he wrote "It is like confessing a murder". He hated the idea that he was forced to believe. He spent decades concealing it. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 106 by slevesque, posted 04-22-2010 4:15 AM | | slevesque has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 111 by slevesque, posted 04-22-2010 3:28 PM | | Dr Adequate has replied |
|
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4659 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: 05-14-2009
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
I'm not all that familiar with Darwin's pre-voyage beliefs. Of course he could not have been Darwinian, but he could have believed in some sort of evolution. I do know that he brought Lyell's 'principles of geology', so at least at the time of the voyage he was no longer a young-earther. I should probably read a biography of his life I guess, anyone have a good suggestion ?
|
JonF
Member (Idle past 187 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: 06-23-2003
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
I do know that he brought Lyell's 'principles of geology', so at least at the time of the voyage he was no longer a young-earther. He couldn't bring Lyell and remain a young-earther?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 111 by slevesque, posted 04-22-2010 3:28 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4659 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: 05-14-2009
|
|
|
Message 113 of 139 (557090)
04-22-2010 4:01 PM
|
Reply to: Message 112 by JonF
04-22-2010 3:51 PM
|
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
He applied uniformitarian interpretations to geological formation he saw, giving dates much higher then 6k years
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 112 by JonF, posted 04-22-2010 3:51 PM | | JonF has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 115 by subbie, posted 04-22-2010 4:10 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
subbie
Member (Idle past 1274 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: 02-26-2006
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
Perhaps he was a young earther, but, like all men of science, was interested in the evidence and so read Lyell to see what evidence he had. You must remember, most scientists of 1700s and early 1800s believed in some form of creationism. The sciences of geology were still in their infancy. It was the discoveries of these men that convinced the scientific community that the evidence doesn't support creationism.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 111 by slevesque, posted 04-22-2010 3:28 PM | | slevesque has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 117 by Dr Jack, posted 04-22-2010 5:24 PM | | subbie has replied |
|
subbie
Member (Idle past 1274 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: 02-26-2006
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
He applied uniformitarian interpretations to geological formation he saw, giving dates much higher then 6k years No. He concluded that the evidence showed largely uniformitarian processes and concluded on the basis of the evidence that the age was much higher than 6,000 years.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 113 by slevesque, posted 04-22-2010 4:01 PM | | slevesque has replied |
|
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4659 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: 05-14-2009
|
|
|
Message 116 of 139 (557106)
04-22-2010 5:23 PM
|
Reply to: Message 115 by subbie
04-22-2010 4:10 PM
|
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
Evidence isn't as black and white as you portray it here. Had Darwin been reading a book by Cuvier, he would have applied a catastrophist interpretation to the geological formations he saw. rarely will evidence demande a strict interpretation, in many cases many hypothesis sometimes very different can be made about something. It all depends on the what approach you take towards it. But we are getting far off-topic so we'll have to stop here (All I wanted originally was some additional information on a minor detail). If anyone wants to continue this then they can start a topic.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 115 by subbie, posted 04-22-2010 4:10 PM | | subbie has not replied |
|
Dr Jack
Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: 07-14-2003 Member Rating: 8.3
|
|
|
Message 117 of 139 (557107)
04-22-2010 5:24 PM
|
Reply to: Message 114 by subbie
04-22-2010 4:06 PM
|
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
Naive Creationism wasn't believed by thinking men long before Darwin, even before Lyell, and Darwin almost certainly believed Lyell. 6-day Creationism of the kind bandied about today was blown out of the water as soon as people started seriously looking at what's beneath the surface of the Earth - the arguments were between multiple special creations, catastrophyism and uniformitarianism. Darwin might even have taken a Lamarkian view of nature (which, btw, still had God pretty central in it!).
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 114 by subbie, posted 04-22-2010 4:06 PM | | subbie has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 119 by subbie, posted 04-22-2010 5:56 PM | | Dr Jack has not replied |
|
Parasomnium
Member Posts: 2224 Joined: 07-15-2003
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
At first, I couldn't find a passage mentioning that Darwin quoted the Bible to his shipmates, but I was sure I had read it somewhere. Fortunately, I found it on the internet:
Darwin writes: "Whilst on board the Beagle I was quite orthodox, and I remember being heartily laughed at by several of the officers (though themselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some point of morality."
Source: Darwin's autobiography, page 85 That was the fact I was the least sure of, writing from memory, and I'm glad I was right after all. The other facts about young Darwin's religious views that I mentioned in my first post in this thread can be found in various books by and about him, (e.g. the biography I already mentioned, and Darwin's Voyage of the Beagle). There's also a nice two-volume set of books with selected letters, covering two periods: 1822-1859 and 1860-1870.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 106 by slevesque, posted 04-22-2010 4:15 AM | | slevesque has not replied |
|
subbie
Member (Idle past 1274 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: 02-26-2006
|
|
|
Message 119 of 139 (557111)
04-22-2010 5:56 PM
|
Reply to: Message 117 by Dr Jack
04-22-2010 5:24 PM
|
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
Yes, you're absolutely correct. The brand of creationism practiced pre-Darwin bears no resemblance to creationism of today.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 117 by Dr Jack, posted 04-22-2010 5:24 PM | | Dr Jack has not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
Re: Evidence & Interpretation
I'm not all that familiar with Darwin's pre-voyage beliefs. Of course he could not have been Darwinian, but he could have believed in some sort of evolution. But he didn't. Could have, yes, but as a matter of fact he didn't. We don't have to discuss hypothetical situations, we can look at what actually happened.
I should probably read a biography of his life I guess, anyone have a good suggestion ? I've never read a biography of Darwin --- I hate reading biographies --- but every word that he ever wrote is available on line. His private letters and his notebooks and everything. He was a compulsive writer, he'd write ten letters a day to other biologists. If you really want to look into Darwin's mind, then you really can.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 111 by slevesque, posted 04-22-2010 3:28 PM | | slevesque has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2