Darwin Online Has Virtually Reassembled the Naturalist's Personal Library 24
Jennifer Ouellette reports via Ars Technica: Famed naturalist Charles Darwin amassed an impressive personal library over the course of his life, much of which was preserved and cataloged upon his death in 1882. But many other items were lost, including more ephemeral items like unbound volumes, pamphlets, journals, clippings, and so forth, often only vaguely referenced in Darwin's own records. For the last 18 years, the Darwin Online project has painstakingly scoured all manner of archival records to reassemble a complete catalog of Darwin's personal library virtually. The project released its complete 300-page online catalog -- consisting of 7,400 titles across 13,000 volumes, with links to electronic copies of the works -- to mark Darwin's 215th birthday on February 12.
"This unprecedentedly detailed view of Darwin's complete library allows one to appreciate more than ever that he was not an isolated figure working alone but an expert of his time building on the sophisticated science and studies and other knowledge of thousands of people," project leader John van Wyhe of the National University of Singapore said. "Indeed, the size and range of works in the library makes manifest the extraordinary extent of Darwin's research into the work of others."
"This unprecedentedly detailed view of Darwin's complete library allows one to appreciate more than ever that he was not an isolated figure working alone but an expert of his time building on the sophisticated science and studies and other knowledge of thousands of people," project leader John van Wyhe of the National University of Singapore said. "Indeed, the size and range of works in the library makes manifest the extraordinary extent of Darwin's research into the work of others."
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Score:-1, Angered a progressive cunt
Isn't it rather odd - they get angry at you for saying exactly what they say quite loudly loudly. https://www.npr.org/sections/h... [npr.org]
Schrödinger's progressive: Reeeing about old white men in science, then reeeing if someone says what they are saying in the "wrong" context.
Racism and sexism is not the sole province of "Old White Men". In fact, some people who consider themselves inclusive are some of the worst racists, the worst sexists, and the worst ageists out there.
Re:Old white dude (Score:4, Insightful)
Who exactly is cancelling Charles Darwin? This looks like some manufactured outrage, a strawman you can beat endlessly without ever having to get out of your echo chamber.
Jesus, grow up.
Re: (Score:2)
Who exactly is cancelling Charles Darwin? This looks like some manufactured outrage, a strawman you can beat endlessly without ever having to get out of your echo chamber.
Jesus, grow up.
I dunno who the AC is, but you have to admit, you get really really pissed off if your narrative is not followed.
And dear Mighty Martian, having a sense of humor and not flying into a rage if someone dares to say something you don't like is part of growing up. Take your own advice, because you sound like Donald Trump shitting his depends because Nicky Haley, Nicky Haley, Nicky Haley. Or Taylor Swift. Or anyone who doesn't tow his party line.
If you haven't figured out from my posting history, I just lov
Re: (Score:2)
That's fine. However in Darwin's era only the white dudes were really allowed to do the science, except for an extremely small number of women. And the origins of evolutionary theory was from white men in Darwin's era, so...
In other words, you can't easily retroactively create female scientists for a long gone era. You can find some overlooked female scientists but there won't be enough to balance the demographics. Just like today, females had to be twice as good as men to be noticed, which is why the few
The List (Score:5, Informative)
Lots of people in the field (Score:5, Interesting)
In fact, I'm personally convinced that had Da Vinci lived longer in good health, he would have ended up also coming to the theory of evolution, due to a convergence of two of his interests:
* He (unusually for his day) was fond of mountain hikes for non-travel reasons, where he liked to study exposed fossil beds. From them, he concluded that the Earth was actually extremely ancient, and laid down in layers, with different species showing up in different timeperiods (he also argued against the global flood theory)
* He was extremely interested in comparative anatomy, diagramming for example equivalent anatomy of humans vs. horses or whatnot and how tissues corresponded but differed in size and shape.
Surely, had he lived long enough, these two pathways would have converged. Of course, due to the lack of a scientific publishing industry in his era, his works didn't have much influence at the time.
Re:Lots of people in the field (Score:5, Insightful)
He was 67 when he died, a decent age for the time. Considering he was already a painter, draughtsman, engineer, scientist, theorist, sculptor, and architect, his plate was pretty full. He might have been able to crib some notes on ideas he had, but I don't think he would have been to come up with a near complete concept like Darwin did. Personal opinion.
Knowing when to STFU (Score:2)
No, Da Vinci would probably know to STFU to avoid the ire of the Church, comparable to Galileo's problems. Maybe the idea of evolution even did pop into his head, but he kept it quiet, so we don't know about it today. And/or other scholars of that era.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not really all that sure that anything resembling Darwin's theory of natural selection could have developed without Linnaean taxonomy, not to mention that unlike much larger biospheres, the Galapagos Islands could be more easily observed, so I think it unlikely that da Vinci would have had the kind of environmental exposure.
Re: (Score:3)
Yup, one could think of the idea of evolution but they'd be unable to provide good evidence for it at the time. Sort of like the atom, suggested by ancient Greek philosophers who had no evidence for a rudimentary atomic theory nor proposed experimental methods to gain such evidence, it was purely a thought exercise to them.
Re: (Score:2)
There's also the rather unique aspects of Darwin's theory as opposed to previous theories, such as Lamarck's theory. That organisms seem to fit into hierarchies was in and of itself not a new idea, though I would argue Linnaean taxonomy with its fairly strict methodology was a new innovation. Darwin's key observation wasn't merely that populations evolve, but rather that there is variation exists in all populations, and that some variations will be more favorable than others, and thus more likely to be sele
Re: (Score:1)
I guess that one didn't age well.
For reference, this is 2024.
Re: (Score:2)
How could any sane person take that ridiculously extremist diatribe seriously?!
Sorry but not even Poe's Law can save you with this one.
Re: (Score:2)
Because -you- posted it. You're ridiculous and insane. It shouldn't be that hard for even you to figure out. Except you lack self knowledge and ability to introspect.
It is impressive... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
This is what happens when you go outside and look at your surroundings rather than keeping your fat ass on the couch.
Re: (Score:1)
But to read that much you do need to keep your ass on the couch rather than going outside...
Don't tell me, (Score:1)
...the AI uses a Genetic Algorithm to evolve results ;-)