The claim that Charles Darwin avoided publishing his book on the origin of species for 20 years for fear of being ridiculed is just a myth, according to a new study
The Cambridge historian, who was given access to Darwin's papers, said there was no evidence to show that the naturalist tried to delay the publication of the theory of evolution. Dr. John Wyhe said that the scientist was simply busy writing other books and sometimes also stopped his work due to the deterioration of his medical condition. This analysis of events was published in the Journal of the Royal Society.
"If you read his letters from the gap years, as I call them, there is a lot of evidence that he wrote to his friends and relatives ripples of his intention regarding the theory - to publish as soon as he finishes other works. Van-Ven said. "The problem was that the 'other things' took more of him than he expected. Among the works - writing detailed descriptions of animals, plants and rocks that he saw on his trip to the Galapagos Islands on the ship Beagle.
In particular, he seems to have spent a lot of time describing animals that clung to the bottom of the ship - in his personal passion.
Darwin's draft work on the book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection was published in the opening pages of The Origin of Species in 1859. He referred to the insights he received and the basic ideas of the theory as early as 1837. There were several explanations for the 22-year wait until the book was published. Some researchers have said that he had traces due to the fear of ridicule from his fellow scientists. Others said he was worried about the church's reaction. Some even claimed that his ideas might have upset his religious wife, or that the gift stemmed from a deep inner psychological turmoil. However, Van-Ven, in his position, can also judge Darwin's true motives. Van-Wyen has devoted his academic career to the study of Darwin and has collected a vast amount of notes, diaries and other documents and published them in an online library.
According to him, a close examination of these texts shows that Darwin was consistent in his ambitions to publish. "Darwin was aware that his theories would be scorned by the clergy, but this does not mean that he was afraid to say what he believed in," he said.
He needed time to gather the necessary evidence, but he was also working on other projects - mainly those related to the Beagle, and then the work on the marine creatures that cling to fish and this caused him to postpone until he could work on his theory of species in earnest.
According to Dr. Van Veen, the gap theory began to gain momentum in the 40s, mainly by writers who did not have access to all of Darwin's works.
According to him, the large gap was typical of Darwin's way of working. His book on orchids was not published until 30 years after the research began. He published his book on earthworms 42 years after he was convinced of the idea.
When his book on the origin of species was finally published, he should have had a feeling of satisfaction, although today there are those who suspect that there was also a high level of controversy, but things like the importance of the age gap were exaggerated. Darwin's diagnosis according to which species evolved over the generations through natural selection, in which the fit survives, became the mainstay of biological thought and influenced other scientific fields," Van Veen concluded.
14 תגובות
I agree with what the biology student who responded before says, except for one thing, Darwin was the second to present the ideas of evolution, the first was Wallace.
If it weren't for Wallace, he wouldn't have rushed to publish!
Sabdarmish Yehuda
"The discussion can be summarized as follows:
Darwin was a publicity-seeking plagiarist, who rushed to publish the theory of evolution and present it as scientific truth, before he had the minimal necessary proofs, and in a way that no serious scientist (like Isaac Newton, for example) would have dared to do."
You don't know what you're talking about. Most of the book The Origin of Species is evidence upon evidence, and that's the only reason he was believed at all. Darwin was not the first to come up with such theories, he was simply the first to present them in an orderly, scientific, evidentiary manner, plus a body of scientific evidence and measurements that includes: observations spanning many years , thousands of fossils, and different species from many places.
A total of more than ten thousand examples.
The discussion can be summarized as follows:
Darwin was a publicity-seeking plagiarist, who rushed to publish the theory of evolution and present it as scientific truth, before he had the minimal necessary proofs, and in a way that no serious scientist (like Isaac Newton for example) would dare to do.
More important than anything:
Whether it's Darwin, or Wallace; They did not act under the threat of the Inquisition, as was the case with Copernicus, who was forced to publish his book, only shortly before his death.
"There is and continues to be a common mistake when defining evolution as a theory, it is important to note that: evolution is a fact"
One sentence, many errors.
Why do I have the feeling that an injustice has been done to the Scottish researcher Wallace. Wallace was about to publish his story on the origin of species, a book whose quality according to all experts is no less good than Darwin's, but in all his innocence, he sent a copy for Darwin's review. In fact, Wallace preceded Darwin. But Darwin sent two distinguished messengers to Mr. Wallace, a rural Scotsman, and they convinced Wallace to give up publishing his book. Darwin's excuses for a "small" delay of over twenty years in publishing the book are unacceptable to me. We are not talking about one or two years here, twenty years! Had it not been for Wallace's agreement to give up, Darwinists would have been called Wallaceists.
Darwin had to at least share the glory of the world with Wallace, as soon as he didn't do that a stain was put on him and maybe even more than that.
I don't get any excuses like "Darwin is always different in his publications"
And by the way it was interesting to check if Darwin did not upgrade and revise his book according to Wallace. A challenge for researchers.
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Ok I translated what the problem is what I understand
I meant for you to help me with the translation, because I'm working on more important things. If that's okay with you.
Okay, I translated, they will be sent from Kazakhstan at 8:30
In the morning Israel time, thanks for the link to the NASA website
At the height of the responses, who always hides under a different name and thinks that I don't know it's the same person and is never able to respond to the usual news but only to a trivia question. I don't have a team of ten people here that will be ready four days before the launch, I also have to work. It will be enough to follow on Saturday morning. If you want to help with something - translate you The news is from the NASA website. Add seven hours to the east coast time and you will get Israel time - send me the translation by email.
A question for Avi Bilovski that is not related to the article, what time according to Israel time will the 15th crew take off to the space station
Sorry and thank you, father
Answer to Assaf:
The one who treats the words and not the content is the one who gives a platform to weaken the actual arguments. Typing general relativity brings up an absolute majority of links with the word theory. Einstein must be turning over in his grave.
The problem is simpler - the word theory in science means a hypothesis that has the most evidence, and not something weaker than a fact as in everyday language.
A common mistake exists and persists when defining evolution
As a theory, it is important to note that: evolution is a fact
(series of facts),
Darwin was a pioneer (followed by many good ones) in developing the theory that explains how the facts exist and work,
When evolution is treated as a theory, the "creationists" are given "a shovel to dig into" since science is based on theories that try to explain facts,
Fundamental theories can be disproved when new facts are discovered,
That's not how things work! Thus "creationism" fails because of ignoring a series of facts and findings to which the comprehensive name evolution is given!