Re: Darwin tells us his intent with Natural Selection
- From: richardalanforrest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 11:43:17 -0700
On Sep 30, 6:41 pm, Raving <raving.loo...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 30, 12:16 pm, richardalanforr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Sep 30, 4:49 pm, Raving <raving.loo...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 30, 10:38 am, richardalanforr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Sep 30, 3:21 pm, Raving <raving.loo...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 30, 7:24 am, richardalanforr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 30 Sep, 10:01, backspace <sawireless2...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"...If a working ant or other neuter insect had been an ordinary
animal, I should have unhesitatingly assumed that all its characters
had been slowly acquired through natural selection; namely, by
individuals having been born with slight profitable modifications,
which were inherited by the offspring, and that these again varied and
again were selected, and so
onwards...."
".. Natura non facit saltum .." - Nature never moves in leaps
"I have called this principle, by which each slight variation, if
useful, is preserved, by the term natural selection, in order to mark
its relation to man's power of selection..." - The phrase Wikipedia
misquoted.
From these quotes we formulate what Darwin said in an attempt at
understanding his will or motive with "natural selection".
Traits in a species are slowly acquired by individuals being born with
slight profitable modifications in each successive generation until we
have a better and more improved species transforming into a new
species. The process where each slight useful variation is preserved
as the ape species gradually transformed into the human species I have
termed natural selection in order to compare its powers of conscious
selection to man's ability to consciously select.
Welcome to the 19th Century
Now why not catch up on the next century and a half of development in
evolutionary theory?
You do so by a process called "education".
Ok.
".. Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon (September 7, 1707 - April
16, 1788) was a French naturalist, mathematician, biologist,
cosmologist and author. Buffon's views influenced the next two
generations of naturalists, including Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and
Charles Darwin. Darwin himself, in his foreword to the 6th edition of
the Origin of Species, credited Aristotle with foreshadowing the
concept of natural selection but also stated that "the first author
who in modern times has treated it in a scientific spirit was
Buffon". ..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges-Louis_Leclerc%2C_Comte_de_Buffon
'French naturalist, mathematician, biologist, cosmologist and author.'
Hmm .. A true renaissance man.
I wonder what else is suggested, here ? ...
RF
Seems as if you have taken the 18th century for granted, RF. So much
for 'education'.
I wonder what else is suggested, here ? ...
So what are you suggesting? That I am unaware of Lamarck's work?
> What caught my eye was that Buffon was all of ....'naturalist,
mathematician, biologist, cosmologist and author'.
That his manner of thinking swept up that very diverse interest and
knowledge into a compact synthesis that influenced those who came
after him.
How do you infer that from this post?
You drew my eye (education) to the realization that Buffon's synthesis
of the past influenced Darwin's effort and carries forward to the
current day.
RF
Which does not answer my question.
Do you always find it so hard to read for comprehension?
Chacun son goût.
Which does not answer my question.
This is not a matter of taste, it's simple evasion.
You might not realize it but perception is a very specific and
individual activity.
What do you think gives you the insight to know what I do and don't
realize?
A person reads and comprehends in a manner that is meaningful to their
need.
Science is no different in this regard. It's need is public and
universal.
The domain of the current scientific paradigm is constrained by the
requisite of satisfying "public" and "universal". To presuppose that
the relevance of science ceases because it cannot be jointly covered
by "public" and "universal" is preposterous, idiotic, and needless.
Which is irrelevant to the topic under discussion. Scientists are
generally well aware the nature of their discipline and its
limitations. Where on earth did you get the idea that they don't?
RF
PS: I'm aware of the influence of the ideas of Buffon, Lamarck, Cuvier
and others on Darwin's ideas. Most vertebrate palaeontologists do.
It's part of their education.
....'naturalist, mathematician, biologist, cosmologist and author'.
It was the mathematician, biologist as "physiologist" so as to make a
distinction from naturalist, and cosmologist which impressed me. ..
all incorporated within a single mindset.
Not such an achievement when the sum of human knowledge was far, far
less than it is now.
Education, weightiness, and 'vertebrate palaeontology'.
I wonder what ties them together into a whole?
Raving searches for the categorizer, the vector of traverse. ...
"Raving" needs to learn before he starts looking for anything. His
posts show that he does not understand the nature of science.
RF
.
- References:
- Darwin tells us his intent with Natural Selection
- From: backspace
- Re: Darwin tells us his intent with Natural Selection
- From: richardalanforrest
- Re: Darwin tells us his intent with Natural Selection
- From: Raving
- Re: Darwin tells us his intent with Natural Selection
- From: richardalanforrest
- Re: Darwin tells us his intent with Natural Selection
- From: Raving
- Re: Darwin tells us his intent with Natural Selection
- From: richardalanforrest
- Re: Darwin tells us his intent with Natural Selection
- From: Raving
- Darwin tells us his intent with Natural Selection
- Prev by Date: Re: Don thinks 1=0.
- Next by Date: Re: Why don't animals need glasses?
- Previous by thread: Re: Darwin tells us his intent with Natural Selection
- Next by thread: Re: Darwin tells us his intent with Natural Selection
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
