Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum The Origin of Species - An Invitiation.

I have an idea for a project. The Origin of Species is one of the most important books ever written; however, surprisingly few people have read it carefully. While the Internet is a bottomless cesspool of stupidity, though, there are also a number of quite valuable resources available, some of which have considerable potential for helping us - all of us - contribute something important and of lasting value to human knowledge.

There is a site called Youtube that allows people to post 10 minute videos of their own making to the web. My idea is to use Youtube to create an "Origin of Species Redux." The 1st idea is for me to create a series of videos that would summarize the main points from each of the 14 chapters of OOS. The truth is, however, I don't know how much time I'm going to have for doing this - it might take me a year or more to do this. Moreover I really suck as a public speaker and so it would be really cool, if someone listened to my first video and said to herself, "Dear God, but this sucks. I can do better than that." and then she goes out and does it. And then maybe someone else thinks, "Hey, I'm very fond of chapter II" and so on. At the end, some adept video editor might take the best chapter ones and produce a collage that serves as a really good intro to chapter one. Same for each of the other chapters.

In this way, we could really contribute something useful. I also think it would be fun. I'm anticipating that my "challenge" will go ignored and that I will continue doing this by myself until I get bored with it or move on to another project. But if anyone would like to give it a try, the first installment is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KrRGEw5X48

Nice video, TFF, thanks for sharing. It sounds like a worthwhile project to me.

Amaranth

Among my job qualifications is professional lecturer: I'd be happy to help if it promotes the understanding of serious science.

Good luck with the project, it's a great initiative.

(Would be keen to see the video, but YouTube has been banned here)

It may be worth doing a preface video looking at exactly why it is one of the most important books ever written.If you want people to be aware of it's content then you may need to tell them why they should be interested.

Blacknad.

Good suggestion Blacknad. Perhaps an introduction/preface would also help attract support for the project.

Youtube......
thats goiong to be hard making a movie like that, not to be negative ned or anything. i like making movies and such, but something like that is actually harder than it seems. but u can still do it if you want, dont let me be the party pooper. haha.

Outstanding!
Pick a chapter - any chapter - and make a video.

Regarding a preface video - very good suggestion. Will do.

Tim,
You're right. It is harder than I thought it would be. I anticipate utter failure. But if my negative example can inspire a more knowledgeable and competent explicator to demonstrate how to do it right, then my time shall not have been wasted.

TFF,

I have seen both Intro and Chapter One.

Have you seen this for a laugh?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8SFK0OPO2A&mode=related&search=

I could only watch two minutes (it is way over the top) but it is 'unique'.



Anyway, do you know how to produce Flash animation. Something like that would be good. People will not sit and listen to a talking head these days (especially the youth).

To hit the biggest audience you will need some eye-candy as well. Maybe it would help if you presented it naked - that would generate some interest

Joking aside, and honest feedback: I was very interested to listen to it, but still found it a little dry. You will need some kind of imagery.

Blacknad.

Dear Blacknad,
Points well taken. I hope that this will be an evolutionary project, so to speak, and that successive iterations will improve it.

Blacknad,
Thanks for sharing that link. I watched it twice. Neat!

Amaranth

Rose. Yes. It goes with a post I made regarding Jah and Rastafarians.

Fallible. Is your idea to promote interest in the original book "Origin of Species" or to provide a sustained proof of exactly how evolution has led to all the species present on earth today? If the latter I have collected a fair amount of stuff on the subject. I'll send you a list and you can decide what you'd like to use.

Terry,
My initial idea is to explain exactly what Darwin is saying. The reason is simple - there are a lot of people (mostly, but not exclusively creationists) who believe they know what it says, but do not. I would like to summarize the most important points of what it actually says.

If this works out, I might even try doing a similar thing for other great works of science. I'm not sure.

However, I do have a mind that after the initial project is completed that I/we might include extensive expository material to update, clarify, etc.

Anything you might provide could be useful.
thanks,
(but also consider doing a chapter!)

Cool TFF, Godd going!

Just saw the Daily SHow and they have a parody (squared) of Inconvenient Truth. Hilarious; well worth trying to catch.
More later?
~Samwik

P.S.
I was struck by the point about diversity of "domesticated" species.
--Especially Humans, eh?
Recently I've been learning about new advances in genomics, and also learning about the links to brain "disorders" such as autism and Asperger's.
--...and maybe the likes of the VPI (VA Tech) psycho.

~SA

Thefalliblefiend wrote:

"but also consider doing a chapter"

Obviously the great man knew nothing about genes and so we can now explain many things he had trouble with.

Maybe Chapter IX, Hybridism. I believe its influence on evolution has been greatly under-rated. I've got two brothers who have been dairy farmers and I was raised on one. I've helped them with their breeding programs (my degree is in agriculture). Artificial breeding has revealed a lot about inbreeding and hybrid vigour.

I could probably knock something up in a couple of weeks. Where do you want me to send it?

By the way, have you read a book "Almost Like a Whale" by Steve Jones (ISBN 1862 30025 9)? It's his update of Origin. "Hybridism" is chapter VIII in his book. He drops Darwin's chapter VII from my 1895 edition, "miscellaneous objections etc."

Terry! outstanding!
The best thing would be for you to create your own youtube account and publish it. Failing that you could try to email it to me at thefalliblefiend@ida.org . If there's a problem, we can figure out the details then.

Thank you so much for your generosity!
tff

In my book, hybridism is chapter VIII, but the exact chapter number is something we might work out towards the end.

thanks again,
k

Fallible. The chapter on "miscellaneous objections to the theory of natural selection" (chapter VII in my edition) may have been dropped from your edition or added by the time mine came out. I certainly can't think of any reason to include such a chapter these days!

His chapter on hybridism deals with the idea that hybrids between varieties or species covers the whole spectrum from increased fertility to total infertility. It's a good argument against those who believe species are fixed entities. I'll get onto it ASAP and get back to you.

I don't have my version at hand, but here's the chapters from the Gutenberg version which I had thought was identical to my own - except I thought I only had 14 chapters. Anyway, mine and this one do include the "miscellaneous objections." I wonder - do creationists often quote from that chapter?

INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER I. VARIATION UNDER DOMESTICATION.

CHAPTER II. VARIATION UNDER NATURE.

CHAPTER III. STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE.

CHAPTER IV. NATURAL SELECTION; OR THE SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST.

CHAPTER V. LAWS OF VARIATION.

CHAPTER VI. DIFFICULTIES OF THE THEORY.

CHAPTER VII. MISCELLANEOUS OBJECTIONS TO THE THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION.

CHAPTER VIII. INSTINCT.

CHAPTER IX. HYBRIDISM.

CHAPTER X. ON THE IMPERFECTION OF THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD.

CHAPTER XI. ON THE GEOLOGICAL SUCCESSION OF ORGANIC BEINGS.

CHAPTER XII. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION.

CHAPTER XIII. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION -- CONTINUED.

CHAPTER XIV. MUTUAL AFFINITIES OF ORGANIC BEINGS: MORPHOLOGY -- EMBRYOLOGY -- RUDIMENTARY ORGANS.

CHAPTER XV. RECAPITULATION AND CONCLUSION.

Mine is the 6th edition and agrees with the above. Jones leaves the above chapter VII out of his version and so all chapters shift one place. Darwin starts his chapter VII with:

"I will devote this chapter to the consideration of various miscellaneous objections which have been advanced against my views ..."

It therefore must have been added after a first edition came out. A quick skim through the chapter suggests your question, "I wonder - do creationists often quote from that chapter?" is answered in the affirmative. In fact it's probably the only chapter they have read. They still raise the same difficulties but are not yet aware of the solutions, perhaps deliberately.

Makes sense to put it here then everyone can contribute.

Darwin Chapter IX

In this chapter Darwin shows that the difference between varieties and separate species is simply a matter of degree. If we define separate species as being unable to form fertile offspring then, of course, separate species will be unable to form fertile offspring. But in practice it is often totally impossible to define whether two populations are separate species or merely varieties.

Darwin's objective was to prove that with time varieties evolve into species. As an extension it is obvious that species evolve into genera, etc. His case suffers a little in that at the time he was unaware that the infertility that arises through inbreeding springs from a different cause to the infertility that develops between species. This led him to a few dead ends but, read in the light of what we now know, his examples are still very interesting.

And we now know that the gap between species can change with changing environment. For example two species of Galapagos finches readily form hybrids during optimum environmental conditions but separate when times are hard. It seems even human groups behave the same way. John Dewey claimed as long ago as 1915 that different classes and social groups mix with each other more during expansive econmomic periods. It's probable that ancient human groups obeyed this same rule.

Anyone want to add anything, take it away or dismiss it totally? Or try another chapter?

Curious. Are you going to make a video of this?

No. I thought you were, with Dan doing the talking! We'll see what happens. Inshallah.

Okay. Very good. Thanks!

Should I have a go at summarising chapter VII Miscellaneous Objections?

Go for it!
thanks,
k

By the way Fallible. What did you find "Curious"?

"By the way Fallible. What did you find "Curious"?"
hahaha...I meant "I'm curious as to whether you're going to make the vid or whether I should plan to make it."

btw, I'm trying to learn a video tool now so that people don't have to see my ugly mug and I can do some other edits. I'm not sure what I'll settle on.

thanks again,
tff

Hey Fallible. DA wrote way back:

"Among my job qualifications is professional lecturer: I'd be happy to help if it promotes the understanding of serious science."

Do you think we should hold him to it? But maybe he's no better looking than either of us.

I'd love it if Dan took up the torch and ran with it.

I'm looking at ways of making videos. I downloaded ms moviemaker last night, but I'm still experimenting with it. I might go out and buy something, but I need to make sure whatever I get does something useful - or else why wife will play the Lorena B game with me.

I'm diverted on another project right now - one for my youngest kid - and I'm hoping to learn some lessons that will be useful for this OOS project.
tff

Good luck.

TFF, I saw your video and your passion about the subject material and your blistering intelligence shine through. I joke, but you need a pipe and smoking jacket. Great job; you can be my professor anytime.
Sincerely,

mitth: "I saw your video"
thanks, but I'm convinced I can do better.
I experimenting with windows moviemaker on another project. If this works out, I'll try to not use my voice at all, or at least not my physical picture. I notice I'm continually clearing my throat (allergies and nervousness). And I'm not using a script. I should write rather than speak, I think.

Anyway, I hope to learn a lot on this other project that I can apply to the redux project.
tx,
tff

Yes it's interesting the different ways cultures have of filling gaps while speaking. English-speaking people usually say "um", or "ah". I was amused in Scotland when the first person I asked for directions started out, "em". My brother reckons he could never give a speech in Maori because his throat would become raw. He's not able to cough enough. Have you got maori ancestry Fallible? (joke).

On topic. I don't know the best way to explain exactly how evolution actually works. Pictures are obviously a necessity. Maybe a film of the Darwin redux...

Hiya TFF,

It occurs to me, after writing my post #21409 on "Is Science the Answer," that perhaps your presentation could use some clarifying statements (setting parameters).

I'm assuming you are trying to reach people who may be somewhat leary of, or hostile to, evolution theory.

Anyway, some statements about what E.theory is NOT, might be as informative as 'what it is.'

As an example, 'E.theory doesn't say anything about the existence of God (or the origin of life).'
Or something like 'E.theory is a tool that generally is consistent with (and explains) observations in the material world (physical reality). It doesn't say anything about any spiritual reality.'
Or perhaps 'E.theory doesn't purport to understand everything there is to know about how genetics work (or even how life works in general).'

Additionally, other general statements might help put E.theory into a wider context.
Something such as, 'E.theory principles can be applied to other areas of human interest including politics, organizations, economics, chemistry, astronomy, families, psychology, art, and philosophy,' might help people understand and relate to E.theory better.

Those 'sentences' may not be the best way to say things, but do you get the idea?

~~Samwik

That's good advice, thanks. I especially liked:

'E.theory principles can be applied to other areas of human interest including politics, organizations, economics, chemistry, astronomy, families, psychology, art, and philosophy,'

The sooner we do that the better off we'll be. All our ideas and beliefs, both individual and collective, evolve.

I get the idea and agree with it.
thanks much for the feedback.

Hiya TFF,
I discovered something today which also may help as a resource in the "perspectives/context" areas.

It's called the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
http://www.iep.utm.edu/

I was looking up Searle's Chinese-Room problem, and voila....

Check the "E" section on Evolution (& ff), as well as Evidentialism, and Epistomology.

There was even a section on Epistomology, Feminist:
Feminist epistemologies take seriously the ways in which knowers are enmeshed in social relations that are generally hierarchical while also being historically and culturally specific.

Sounds like good advice across the board to me....

~~SA

Ah sam--those Feminist Epistomologists! What a great name!

Yesterday on your advice I spent a long time ( well it wasn't that long-just felt like it) aquainting myself with their point of view. Although I can see the attraction of some of their ideas about the nature of the aquisition of knowledge and I feel that language is often used unthinkingly and far too glibly, I am having problems accepting the artificial constructs that I feel are the result of much of this particular philosophy. This is evident in the quotation above. We are all, regardless of gender, even if we are male, 'enmeshed in social relations... etc'.

Broadening the origin and application of this quotation to include all would be a nice idea though, so I think I am, after all, agreeing with your last sentence.

Hiya Ellis,

( well it wasn't that long-just felt like it) -E.
...but sometimes the hours just fly by on some of those things.

...and also, thanks for the thoughtful reply.

One of the main things I learned during my quarter of "feminist studies," was that there are ~5 to 7 basic 'flavors' of feminist perspectives.
I thought of this when I read, "...their point of view." -E.

Gosh, if you think about it, there are probably also just as many masculine points of view on "social relations...etc."

But yes, I agree Feminism is just anothr way of saying that context matters (or that one's own context probably doesn't apply to someone else).
I think those "artificial constructs" are just attempts to name the many dimensions of context; but that doesn't make them any less awkward.

Cheers!
~Samwik

Unfortunately I have actually found myself thinking about this subject more than I perhaps would wish!!!!

I do agree with your points but I think the difficulty of thinking through these theories is that our actual language, ie the actual words we use, are gender neutral in spite of the fudging of things like history/ herstory (which often show ignorance of the origins of words themselves). It is entirely possible to write English in a way that does not indicate the gender of the writer. This can be useful and does not need defence like wanting to change Manchester to Womanchester.

My definition of feminism has always included the abolition of these and other "artificial constructs" to enable the achieving of the aim that I see as most important. That is equality for all regardless of their gender, race or religion- and I think the means for doing that are already present in our western societies. Barriers need to come down, not go up.

That sounds really prissy, but it is still almost as far away as when it seemed to make so much sense forty years ago!!

Hiya Ellis,

I think what you wrote sounds altruistic; not as you described.

I shoulda composed this first, because i've had several different lines of thought as i sit here to write.


...isn't there some Rod Stewart song...?

It is always a little surprising when we are able to see more layers or depth in a subject.

Discrimination between something beneficial or deleterious is a good thing.
Equality that creates sameness and discourages diversity is a bad thing.

...of course there's equality of opportunity to strive for, but even that is very context dependent.

..oh yes, re: "...the abolition of these and other "artificial constructs...." I wonder if Recognition (literally, re-thinking) of the constructs, and putting them in context, might be enough.

There were some thoughts I had involving Capitalism and freedom; and linking them with increasing opportunities and "contexts." Maybe later. Sorry, I'll try to get Back On Topic.

I was also thinking of conversations as being an evolutionary process; because language is interpreted through cumulative context and is mutated slightly through each iteration of utterance.

Now that was a fun phrase!

...that was supposed to be BOT, but...anyway.

Thanks,
~SA

Sorry, just one more barely related post: Language is important!

If I were trying to promote everyday Heroism, I wouldn't put it on a website called LuciferEffect.com. That's not an easy site to mention to other parents at the school.
http://www.lucifereffect.com/heroism.htm

...without going into how it's by a Stanford psychologist (Congressional witness on Iraq War crimes) who wrote a book called The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil.
http://www.lucifereffect.com/index.html

...just honing my comedy routine. ~Thanks BookTV!

~SA

No idea about Rod Stewart--is he a closet re-constructed feminist!!!

Language is very important, and often used manipulatively or sloppily. We are lucky to be using English which is actually gender-neutral. Some languages aren't.

I agree that acknowleding the 'constructs' would be a good idea, but letting their existence cloud our progress as we get all het up is very counter-productive and also hands those who may wish to make mischief a very handy hook to divert the debate into a pathway that could easily become trivialised. There are lots of instances of this!!

Guess not everyone knows who Rod Stewart is, but yes I think he might be a "closet re-constructed feminist," if not out-of-the-closet!

I recently became aware of how the word Evolutionism is used in that way (emphasis on the 'ism' part).

But...
Could we communicate without the constructs?

We do need to keep re-examining our constructs, though.
"Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Liberty" -T.Jefferson

Cheers,
~SA