Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: grey_whiskers
I wasn't trying to play *gotcha*, but to point out that there may be other less authoritative, or less august sources which still support the "Darwinism means evolution" populist usage.

Well, Alfred Wallace wrote a book called "Darwinism". Really, how can anyone ask that thousands of references to "Darwinism" in books be erased or semantically eradicated? It's typical Darwinian arrogance to demand such things.

957 posted on 01/31/2009 5:12:34 AM PST by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Darwinism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 953 | View Replies ]


To: Ethan Clive Osgoode
Is the Britannica august enough?

“Britannica Concise Encyclopedia: Darwinism
Home > Library > Miscellaneous > Britannica Concise Encyclopedia
.content{clear:both;}
Theory of the evolutionary mechanism proposed by Charles Darwin as an explanation of organic change. It denotes Darwin's specific view of how evolution works. Darwin developed the concept that evolution is brought about by the interplay of three principles: variation (present in all forms of life), heredity (the force that transmits similar organic form from one generation to another), and the struggle for existence (which determines the variations that will be advantageous in a given environment, thus altering the species through selective reproduction). Present knowledge of the genetic basis of inheritance has contributed to scientists’ understanding of the mechanisms behind Darwin's ideas, in a theory known as neo-Darwinism.”

Or T.H. Huxley's use concurrent enough?

” a b Huxley, T.H. (April 1860). “ART. VIII.- Darwin on the origin of Species” 541–70. Westminster Review. Retrieved on 2008-06-19. “What if the orbit of Darwinism should be a little too circular?”
What if the orbit of Darwinism should be a little too circular? What if species should offer residual phænomena, here and there, not explicable by natural selection? Twenty years hence naturalists may be in a position to say whether this is, or is not, the case; but in either event they will owe the author of “The Origin of Species” an immense debt of gratitude...... And viewed as a whole, we do not believe that, since the publication of Von Baer’s “Researches on Development,” thirty years ago, any work has appeared calculated to exert so large an influence, not only on the future of Biology, but in extending the domination of Science over regions of thought into which she has, as yet, hardly penetrated”

Orbit of (hush my moufff) Darwinism?

Arrogance attempting to dictate language.

958 posted on 01/31/2009 5:29:43 AM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 957 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson