1.) The person that I believe was the most influential on Charles Darwin was Thomas Malthus.
2.) Thomas Malthus was a British economist that was heavily influential to getting Charles Darwin on his path to hypothesizing the theory of natural selection. Darwin was influenced by Malthus' "Essay on the Principle of Population" in which it was stated that population growth would cause a shortage of food, which would detriment the survival of that population. (source: http://www.allaboutscience.org/thomas-malthus-faq.htm)
3.) The points that were influenced by Malthus were that all organisms have the potential of reproducing exponentially and that resources are limited. Darwin built upon both of these ideas that, in order to survive, there needs to be enough resources to sustain the population's size and rate of growth. Seeing as how resources cannot be created / controlled, population size is the only part that is left that can actually be controlled.
4.) No, I do not believe that Darwin could have developed his theory of natural selection without the influence of this essay because he would not have had the initial idea that populations need to be controlled in order to survive.
5.) It is strange that his book On the Origin of Species took twenty years to be published, but there isn't really any evidence that specifically blames the church for his delay in the release of his book. Some other reasons that I have read are that he wanted to ensure all of the books' authenticity and that he was ill for much of his adult life.
I feel that Mathus is a great influence on Darwin. The point you brought up about the population growth would cause shortage in food relates to Darwin's idea of Natural Selection because resources are limited and the fittest would only be able to survive. For example: the giraffe with the smaller neck versus the giraffe with the longer neck going for leaves on tall trees. The giraffe with the longer neck would of course survive compared to the one with the shorter neck. Great job!
ReplyDeleteI fully agree with that fact that Malthus was Darwin's greatest influence. But I would have to actually disagree with Ashley Kabrin's comment about the giraffe's neck size. The wouldn't necessarily prove that resources are limited. The short neck giraffe could survive by finding a tree that still has the lower branches with leaves. To a certain extent, the resources are very much the same, it's only when the tall neck giraffe eats all the leaves would the short neck giraffe not survive.
ReplyDeleteMake sure you check the "Bad Resources" page on the course website. The source you used is listed there along with an explanation as to why it should be avoided.
ReplyDeleteOkay on your background on Malthus, though is it population growth alone that leads to famine? Or is it a combination of population growth and limited resources? I do see you raise the point in the next section.
The connection for Darwin wasn't the issue of control of resources or the population, but the issue of who is surviving? If not all offspring that are produced survive, then is survival random or is there a predictable pattern? Does something determine who survives? For Darwin, the answer was that the environment determines survival based upon traits that were a "best fit" to that environment, which led to the concept of "natural selection".
I always hesitate to say that ideas would never have arisen independently of one scientist, but even Darwin admits how important this idea was to his theory of evolution by natural selection. Darwin still might have come up with it on his own, but who knows when that would have happened.
There is no evidence of the church's direct interference with Darwin's work, but does that mean they didn't impact his decision to publish? Given the church's history and reputation for opposing those who propose ideas not sanctioned by the church (e.g., Galileo), do you doubt the power the church would have to influence scientific work and publication? Your conclusions here may be influenced by your source, by the way, which is religious in nature. Something to watch out for.