Darwin's Origin of Species

[ShellShock]

Originally Posted by FlorenceArt

So why did Darwin, who was so conscious that his work itself would be controversial that he waited years to publish it, chose to leave the Creator out of the first version and to only seem to hint at Him?

It seems clear that in his later life, by the time he wrote Origin, Darwin had lost what ever faith he once had; I do not think he believed in a supernatural creator. So it seems natural to me that he would not mention a creator when he wrote the first edition, without any undue outside influences. Only later did he backtrack, once he had a public to worry about.

[catsittingstill]

I read On The Origin Of Species last year and was very impressed.

I found it a bit of a slow read, --there is a *lot* of detail in there-- but sometimes it was precisely those details that made it so appealing. The chapter on the ability of selection by humans to produce different appearances and traits in domesticated animals was wonderful. I was particularly struck by the parts about pigeons. If you've gotten that far, has anyone seen the tumbling pigeons he describes? I'm having trouble picturing how that could work.

The book is full of details I didn't know--it makes me feel ignorant, but in a good kind of "I didn't know that; where can I find out more?" way.

[WT Sharpe]

Here's an interesting link:

http://benfry.com/traces/

I found it in this month's Issue of Wired. It shows all the changes in The Origin of Species throughout the various editions. Go there, and you'll be greeted by this message:

On the Origin of Species: The Preservation of Favoured Traces
Ben Fry

We often think of scientific ideas, such as Darwin's theory of evolution, as fixed notions that are accepted as finished. In fact, Darwin's On the Origin of Species evolved over the course of several editions he wrote, edited, and updated during his lifetime. The first English edition was approximately 150,000 words and the sixth is a much larger 190,000 words. In the changes are refinements and shifts in ideas — whether increasing the weight of a statement, adding details, or even a change in the idea itself.

The second edition, for instance, adds a notable “by the Creator” to the closing paragraph, giving greater attribution to a higher power. In another example, the phrase “survival of the fittest” — usually considered central to the theory and often attributed to Darwin — instead came from British philosopher Herbert Spencer, and didn't appear until the fifth edition of the text. Using the six editions as a guide, we can see the unfolding and clarification of Darwin's ideas as he sought to further develop his theory during his lifetime.

This project is made possible by the hard work of Dr. John van Wyhe, et al. who run The Complete Work of Charles Darwin Online. The text for each edition was sourced from their careful transcription of Darwin's books, and Dr. van Wyhe generously granted permission to use the text. This piece is a simpler version of a larger effort that looks at the changes between editions, and is intended as the first in a series looking at how the book evolved over time. Built with Processing. More about the project can be found here.

[WT Sharpe]

Since I finally finished the 6th edition of The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection , I guess I’m ready for a discussion.

Originally Posted by Vector

There is no reason why our discussion can't include the current state of evolution theory.

Originally Posted by kennyc

You mean like punctuated equilibrium?

Originally Posted by Vector

Yes indeed, among other things.

In Chapter II: Variation Under Nature, Darwin writes,

It may be doubted whether sudden and considerable deviations of structure, such as we occasionally see in our domestic productions, more especially with plants, are ever permanently propagated in a state of nature. Almost every part of every organic being is so beautifully related to its complex conditions of life that it seems as improbable that any part should have been suddenly produced perfect, as that a complex machine should have been invented by man in a perfect state.

From that, it appears from this that Darwin would not think much of the Theory of Punctuated Equilibrium, although it doesn’t appear as if he rules it out entirely:

If monstrous forms of this kind ever do appear in a state of nature and are capable of reproduction (which is not always the case), as they occur rarely and singly, their preservation would depend on unusually favourable circumstances.
— Chapter Chapter II: Variation Under Nature

Just almost entirely:

They would, also, during the first and succeeding generations cross with the ordinary form, and thus their abnormal character would almost inevitably be lost.
— Chapter Chapter II: Variation Under Nature

That isn’t to say that Niles Eldredge and the late Stephen Jay Gould are wrong, of course. Gould in particular took great pains to demonstrate that his theory wasn’t in conflict with Natural Selection.