Quotes About Darwin

One such evolutionary system, or ridge, encompasses panhuman emotional faculties, or affective "programs." These include the basic, or primary, emotions that Darwin first identified: surprise, fear, anger, joy, sadness, disgust, and perhaps contempt. Certain reactions characteristic of the neurophysiology of surprise and fear are already evident in reptiles, and the other primary emotions are at least apparent in monkeys and apes.

Genetics might be adequate for explaining microevolution, but microevolutionary changes in gene frequency were not seen as able to turn a reptile into a mammal or to convert a fish into an amphibian. Microevolution looks at adaptations that concern the survival of the fittest, not the arrival of the fittest... The origin of species — Darwin's problem — remains unsolved.

If I seem unduly preoccupied with Darwin's stomach, perhaps you can understand why. It seems both apt and ironic that the man responsible for launching the modern study of fear—and for identifying it as an emotion with concrete physiological, and especially gastrointestinal, effects—was himself so miserably afflicted by a nervous stomach.

Behe named this inability to explain the creation of new taxa through genetics "Darwin's black box". When the box is opened, he expects evidence of the Deity to be found. However, inside Darwin's black box resides merely another type of genetics--developmental genetics

Evolution is the law of policies: Darwin said it, Socrates endorsed it, Cuvier proved it and established it for all time in his paper on 'The Survival of the Fittest.' These are illustrious names, this is a mighty doctrine: nothing can ever remove it from its firm base, nothing dissolve it, but evolution.

Darwin abolished special creations, contributed the Origin of Species and hitched all life together in one unbroken procession.

Si ricorda quello che dice Darwin della musica? Sostiene che la capacità di eseguirla e di apprezzarla esisteva nella razza umana molto prima che si arrivasse alla facoltà di parlare. Per questo, forse, la musica esercitava su di noi una sottile influenza.

It was magnificent," he said, as he took his seat. "Do you remember what Darwin says about music? He claims that the power of producing and appreciating it existed among the human race long before the power of speech was arrived at. Perhaps that is why we are so subtly influenced by it. There are vague memories in our souls of those misty centuries when the world was in its childhood.

Recuerda usted lo que afirma Darwin sobre la música? Sostiene que la capacidad de producirla y de apreciarla existió en la raza humana mucho antes de que esta alcanzase la facultad de la palabra. Quizá sea esta la razón de que influya en nosotros de una manera tan sutil. Existen en nuestras almas confusos recuerdos de aquellos siglos nebulosos en que el mundo se hallaba en su niñez.

Recuerda usted lo que Darwin ha dicho acerca de la música? En su opinión, la facultad de producir y apreciar una armonía data en la raza humana de mayor antigüedad que el uso del lenguaje. Acaso sea ésta la causa de que influya en nosotros de manera tan sutil. Perviven en nuestras almas recuerdos borrosos de aquellos siglos en que el mundo se hallaba aún en su niñez

I quoted to him what I remembered of Charles Darwin: 'Judging by the past, we may safely infer that not one living species will transmit its unaltered likeness to a distant futurity...' Darwin was right, Nebogipfel said gently.

In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth." Sorry, Darwin-huggers, but it's not "In the beginning, a monkey evolutioned gay marriage.

Many people through the ages have attributed to God the beauty and complexity of nature that in their time seemed to have no scientific explanation. But just as Darwin and Wallace explained how the apparently miraculous design of living forms could appear without intervention by a supreme being, the multiverse concept can explain the fine-tuning of physical law without the need for a benevolent creator who made the universe for our benefit.

In Darwins post-platonische werelds is de variatie de fundamentele werkelijkheid en veranderen berekende gemiddelden in abstracties. We blijven echter de voorkeur geven aan het oudere en tegengestelde standpunt: we zien variatie nog steeds als een massa onlogische toevalligheden, die hoofdzakelijk van waarde is omdat zo'n spreiding te gebruiken is voor de berekening van een gemiddelde, hetgeen we dan beschouwen als iets wat een essentie nog het best benadert.

Yes, the world has been different ever since Darwin. But no less exciting, instructing, or uplifting; for if we cannot find purpose in nature, we will have to define it for ourselves.

At bottom, you see, we are not Homo sapiens as all. Our core is madness. The prime directive is murder. What Darwin was too polite to say, my friends, is that we came to rule the earth not because we were the smartest, or even the meanest, but because we have always been the craziest, most murderous motherfuckers in the jungle. And that is what the Pulse exposed five days ago.

Charles Darwin, who had witnessed the atrocities perpetrated against Argentina's native Indians by Juan Manuel de Rosas, had predicted that "the country will be in the hands of white Gaucho savages instead of copper-coloured Indians. The former being a little superior in education, as they are inferior in every moral virtue.

Natural science in England, as Darwin already knew to his cost, was still the purview of Christian scholars. But here was a question that Darwin found compelling: if God had created all the creatures of the world, what possible reason could there be for the variations found in the Galápagos?

Darwin, writing in Victorian England, shared Glaucon's view (from aristocratic Athens) that people are obsessed with their reputations.

I find it ironic that liberals generally embrace Darwin and reject "intelligent design" as the explanation for design and adaptation in the natural world, but they don't embrace Adam Smith as the explanation for design and adaptation in the economic world. They sometimes prefer the "intelligent design" of socialist economies, which often ends in disaster from a utilitarian point of view.

broke now, just wait until the baby boom generation is fully retired. I find it ironic that liberals generally embrace Darwin and reject "intelligent design" as the explanation for design and adaptation in the natural world, but they don't embrace Adam Smith as the explanation for design and adaptation in the economic world. They sometimes prefer the "intelligent design" of socialist economies, which often ends in disaster from a utilitarian point of view.

Me parece irónico que los liberales acepten a Darwin y rechacen el -diseño inteligente- como la explicación del diseño y la adaptación en el mundo natural, pero no aceptan a Adam Smith como la explicación del diseño y la adaptación en el mundo económico. Algunos países a veces prefieren el -diseño inteligente- de las economías socialistas, que en ocasiones suele acabar en desastre desde un punto de vista utilitarista.

As Darwin said long ago, the most cohesive and cooperative groups generally beat the groups of selfish individualists. Darwin's ideas about group selection fell out of favor in the 1960s, but recent discoveries are putting his ideas back into play

Emerson and Darwin each found in nature a portal between the realm of the profane and the realm of the sacred. Even if the hive switch was originally a group-related adaptation, it can be flipped when you're alone by feelings of awe in nature, as mystics and ascetics have known for millennia.