Thanks CD for the second volume of Descent.
Showing 21–37 of 37 items
The Charles Darwin Collection
The Darwin Correspondence Project is publishing letters written by and to the naturalist Charles Darwin (1809–1882). Complete transcripts of letters are being made available through the Project’s website (www.darwinproject.ac.uk) after publication in the ongoing print edition of The Correspondence of Charles Darwin (Cambridge University Press 1985–). Metadata and summaries of all known letters (c. 15,000) appear in Ɛpsilon, and the full texts of available letters can also be searched, with links to the full texts.
Thanks CD for the second volume of Descent.
"If you feel astonished at my bringing man & brutes so near together in their whole nature (though with a wide hiatus) I feel still more astonished, as I believe, at your judgment on this head. I much wish you had enlarged your concluding sentence a little so as to say whether you consider the ordinary mental faculties so distinct, or whether you confine the enormous difference to spiritual powers including the moral sense.––"
Feels their conflict lies in the field of philosophy rather than in that of physical science. Regrets that they differ so widely.
On amount of modification and lines of descent in determining the position in man.
Reference to StGJM’s article "On the appendicular skeleton of the primates" Phil. Trans. R. Soc. [157 (1867): 299–430],
and his [and James Murie’s] article on lemurs ["On the anatomy of Lemuroidea"] Trans. Zool. Soc. [7 (1872): 1–114].
Has seen an article by Chauncey Wright ["Darwinism", North Am. Rev. 113 (1871): 63–103] and has heard it has been enlarged and reprinted [1871]. As CD has been distributing copies StGM wonders whether he might have one.
Sends a reprint of Chauncey Wright’s article ["Darwinism", North Am. Rev. 113 (1871): 63–103].
Thanks for Chauncey Wright’s article. Admits it is clever, but hardly expected CD to think it a serious defence of his position.
Sends his reply to Huxley’s criticisms [Contemp. Rev. 19 (1872): 168–97].
Feels that StGJM’s review of Descent [Q. Rev. 131 (1871): 47–90] greatly misrepresents CD’s opinions and conclusions. Feels their differences of opinion are so great that discussion of almost any subject would be a waste of both their time.
As a man of science, StGM has no choice but to pursue what he sees as the truth. Will happily admit he has misrepresented CD if CD will disclaim the position that StGM attacks.
Wishes their correspondence regarding their differences to be dropped, as CD feels that nothing he could say would have any influence on StGJM.
Agrees to close their correspondence. Defends his position against criticisms of Huxley and Chauncey Wright; assures CD of his continuing friendly feelings.
CD believes that StGJM has been unfair in his criticisms and has misrepresented him; he begs him not to write again. "Agassiz has uttered splendid sarcasms on me, but I still feel quite friendly towards him. M. Flourens cd. not find words to express his contempt of me: Pictet & Hopkins argued with great force against me: Fleeming Jenkin covered me with first-rate ridicule; & his crticisms were true & most useful: but none of their writings have mortified me as yours have done …" [See 8154.]
Is writing confidentially not to justify the passage referred to [see 9759], which he much regrets, but to state facts. He never intended any personal hostility to [George] Darwin and seeks advice about how to make reparation.
A severe letter of rebuke to Mivart for his attack on G. H. Darwin.
A confidential letter explaining in detail the extent to which he regrets his attack upon [George] Darwin’s article.
StGJM’s article in the Quarterly Review [137 (1874): 40–77] contains wholly false and malicious accusations against CD’s son George. Since StGJM has refused to make any sort of retraction, CD will not hold any future communication with him.