DOCSLIB.ORG

Haeckel and Du Bois-Reymond

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Haeckel and Du Bois-Reymond Theory in Biosciences https://doi.org/10.1007/s12064-019-00282-6 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Haeckel and du Bois‑Reymond: rival German Darwinists Gabriel Finkelstein1 Received: 12 October 2018 / Accepted: 14 January 2019 © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 Abstract Ernst Haeckel and Emil du Bois-Reymond were the most prominent champions of Darwin in Germany. This essay compares their contributions to popularizing the theory of evolution, drawing special attention to the neglected fgure of du Bois- Reymond as a spokesman for a world devoid of natural purpose. It suggests that the historiography of the German reception of Darwin’s theory needs to be reassessed in the light of du Bois-Reymond’s Lucretian outlook. Keywords Ernst Haeckel · Emil du Bois-Reymond · Darwin · Reception · Germany Introduction the Ministry of Education, and the Royal Family, du Bois- Reymond summed up the signifcance of his English coun- terpart: “Darwin seems to me to be the Copernicus of the organic world.” Just as the astronomer’s theory had dis- placed the earth from its position at the center of the cosmos, he argued, the biologist’s theory had displaced man from his position at the center of nature. Both upheavals had marked revolutions in science (du Bois-Reymond 1883; Finkelstein 2013: 233–264). As might have been expected, du Bois-Reymond’s speech did not sit well with the conservative press. The Kreuzzei- tung denounced it as treasonous (Anon 1883f). The Reichs- bote noted that it equated man to an ape (–b– 1883). Ger- mania attacked it for promulgating a “bestial doctrine” (Zacharias 1883). And the Kölnische Volkszeitung would have recommended prison, but noted that “professors like Mr. Dubois-Reymond, who refer to women in their lectures as human mother-animals (menschliche Muttertiere) should On January 25, 1883, the Professor of Physiology at the not be crowned with martyrdom” (Anon 1833a). Similar University of Berlin, Emil du Bois-Reymond, read a short invective poured in from readers. Pastors reproached du obituary appended to a speech delivered in celebration of the Bois-Reymond for materialism (Nathusius 1883). Catholics silver wedding anniversary of the Prussian crown prince and deemed him worse than nihilists (Anon 1883c, d). Antisem- princess. Addressing members of the Academy of Science, ites threatened him with the law of the jungle (Anon 1883e). Critics sent him his photograph with “Look at this ape!” scribbled on the back.1 “Brother monkeys” invited him to This article is a contribution to the Special Issue Ernst Haeckel (1834–1919): The German Darwin and his impact on modern biology—Guest Editors: U. Hossfeld, G. S. Levit, U. Kutschera. * Gabriel Finkelstein [email protected] 1 Nachlaß du Bois-Reymond, K. 7 M. 1 Bl. 18–19, Staatsbibliothek 1 Department of History, University of Colorado Denver, PO zu Berlin, Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Haus Potsdamer Straße, Hand- Box 173364, Denver, CO 80217-3364, USA schriftenabteilung. Vol.:(0123456789)1 3 Theory in Biosciences the zoo.2 Wags had him proclaiming his fraternity with wild- Dobzhansky, we might even go so far as to say that nothing life (Anon 1883a, b). Most condescendingly, an aristocrat in German Darwinism makes sense except in the light of du implored him to drop the term “menschliche Muttertiere,” Bois-Reymond. since abusing women had never been the “German way.”3 The furor then spread to the Prussian parliament, where it provoked 2 days of angry debate. August Reichensper- Rival Darwinians ger, the Catholic Center Party deputy for Cologne, regarded du Bois-Reymond’s beliefs as little better than those of the Emil du Bois-Reymond (1818–1896) was an unlikely “redskins in the wilds of America.” Ludwig Windthorst, convert. Born the same year as Karl Marx, Emil Brontë, the leader of the Center Party, was amazed that the rector Ivan Turgenev, and Frederick Douglass, he belonged to a had been permitted to lecture on Darwin without “express generation marked by disappointment: His political hopes reprobation” and went on to dismiss the theory of evolu- failed with the Revolution of 1848, and his professional tion as “incomplete and unproven.” Not only had du Bois- hopes were only realized a decade later. By the time he was Reymond’s denied the Mosaic theory of creation, which appointed professor in 1858 most of the steam had bled out undergirded the teachings of the Church, but he had also his research, and in compensation, he directed his energies violated the Prussian constitution, which was founded on to lecturing and writing. The appearance of Darwin’s theory Christian doctrine. Most outraged was Adolf Stöcker, the encouraged a change in his attitude. Du Bois-Reymond had leader of the antisemitic Christian Socialist party. Stöcker heard of the Origin of Species from his friend Henry Bence was appalled that du Bois-Reymond had used a public cer- Jones, and though he was unable to obtain a frst edition in emony to promulgate “crass materialism”; professors were November 1859, he picked up a copy of the second printing supposed to edify students, not shock them with terms like the following spring. “Darwin’s book has not told among “human mother-animal.” As far as he was concerned, “men our scientifc men,” he informed Bence Jones on 4 April with revolutionary tendencies” should not be “appointed to 1860. “They consider it a slight aberration of intellect, a universities and showered with honors.” In the past, free- heterodoxy painful to look at in an otherwise deserving thinkers had kept quiet; now “with a salto mortale these man.”4 By contrast, du Bois-Reymond found its argument self-indulgent celebrities fout the teachings and experience entirely convincing (Darwin 1860; Junker 1991; Junker and of millennia,” threatening to turn German culture “into a sea Hoßfeld 2001: 64–68; Glibof 2008). In July he sent Dar- tossed by storms, today high, tomorrow low, until mankind win his “Memorial to Johannes Müller”; in November he ultimately founders on the clifs of folly.” More than a lit- voiced his “strong approbation” for Darwin’s theory to the tle hypocritically, Stöcker exhorted his followers to stone historian Georg Heinrich Pertz, a man he knew to be married the windows of du Bois-Reymond’s institute (Metze 1918: to Charles Lyell’s sister; the next summer he helped Dar- 40–41; Finkelstein 2013: 255–256). win obtain an honorary degree from University of Breslau; This vignette is telling. Germany has long been recog- and he may well have introduced the Origin to Vicky, the nized as the nation most amenable to Darwin’s theory, in Prussian crown princess: Lyell found her “very much au part due to talented writers like the Ernst Haeckel, whose fait” with the book and other novelties in science, like the popularizations sold hundreds of thousand of copies, and prehistoric pile-dwellings that du Bois-Reymond had seen in part due to a large audience of educated workers eager to in Neuchâtel.5 adopt any doctrine that naturalized progress. What is less Within a year du Bois-Reymond had drawn up a general well known of this spread of ideas is the role played by du survey course highlighting two recent ideas: the conserva- Bois-Reymond. The Prussian neuroscientist has long been tion of energy and Darwin’s theory. These “Findings of Con- reckoned too mechanistic in perspective, too experimental temporary Science” served as his response to Alexander von in practice, and too conservative in politics to have had any Humboldt’s Cosmos, a four-volume “sketch of the physical interest in evolution. In fact, he was the frst German profes- description of the universe” that was the best-selling work sor to adopt Darwin’s theory, as well as the frst professor to teach it to students at a university. In homage to Theodosius 4 Emil du Bois-Reymond to Henry Bence Jones, 4 [April; incorrectly dated March] 1860, Sammlung Darmstaedter 3 k 1852 (3) Bl. 64–68, 2 Anonymous postcard, Wiesbaden-Coblenz, 5 February [1883], Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Haus Potsdamer Nachlaß du Bois-Reymond, K. 7 M. 1 Bl. 7, Staatsbibliothek zu Ber- Straße, Handschriftenabteilung. lin, Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Haus Potsdamer Straße, Handschriften- 5 Charles Lyell to Charles Darwin, Magdeburg, 16 January 1865, abteilung. Letter 4746, Darwin Correspondence Project; Emil du Bois-Rey- 3 L. von Schmeling to Emil du Bois-Reymond, Hamburg, 24 Febru- mond to Jeannette Claude, Neuchâtel, Hotel Bellevue, 23 August ary [1883], Nachlaß du Bois-Reymond, K. 7 M. 1 Bl. 29–32, Staats- 1863 (#128), 3 September 1863 (#134), Dep. 5 K. 11 Nr. 5, Nachlaß bibliothek zu Berlin, Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Haus Potsdamer Runge-du Bois-Reymond, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preußischer Straße, Handschriftenabteilung; Finkelstein (2013: 255). Kulturbesitz, Haus Potsdamer Straße, Handschriftenabteilung. 1 3 Theory in Biosciences of the day (Rupke 1997, 1:vi). Up to then du Bois-Reymond 548–550). The clues to the order of species suggested by had typically lectured on physiology, but Humboldt’s exam- Darwin’s theory did not support conjectures about the herit- ple led him to the conclusion that popularizers of science age of man. As du Bois-Reymond quipped, Haeckel’s family “persist in the public mind as memorial stones of human trees of human origins were worth about as much to natural- progress long after the waves of oblivion have surged over ists “as the pedigrees of Homeric heroes to historians. If I the originators of the soundest research” (du Bois-Reymond want to read a work of fction,” he added, “I can fnd some- 1912a: 354).6 His assessment was correct: Over the three thing better than a ‘History of Creation’” (du Bois-Reymond decades that he taught his survey something close to 25,000 1912b: 550; Finkelstein 2013: 250–251).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Darwin and Religion
    Darwin and religion Activity 3: Controversy Subject: RE 2 x 45 minutes Suggested preparation What do I need? Presentation: Letter 2544 Thomas Huxley to Darwin, Darwin and religion 23 November 1859 Letter 2548 Adam Sedgwick to Darwin 24 November 1859 Letter 2534 Charles Kingsley to Darwin 18 Nov 1859 Letters questions Who’s who The publication of On the Origin of Species challenged and sometimes divided Darwin’s colleagues and peers in relation to their religious belief. Letters show how reactions to Darwin’s work were divided. In this activity we explore whether or not Darwin’s work can be compatible with religious faith. 1 Darwin Correspondence Project www.darwinproject.ac.uk Cambridge University Library CC-BY-ND 2.00 What do I do? 1. Read through the letters, Who’s who? and answer the letter questions. 2. Discuss why Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection might have been controversial at the time. 3. Divide into 3 groups: Group 1: Make a case for why Darwin’s theory might not be acceptable to a religious faith (of your choosing). Group 2: Make a case for how Darwin’s theory might be accommodated by a religious faith. Group 3: Make a case for how Darwin’s theory might reject a religious perspective. 4. Present your argument to the class, using evidence from Darwin’s letters. 2 Darwin Correspondence Project www.darwinproject.ac.uk Cambridge University Library CC-BY-ND 2.00 Letter 2544 Thomas Huxley to Charles Darwin, 23 November 1859 23 Nov 1859 My dear Darwin ...Since I read Von Bär’s Essays nine years ago no work on Natural History Science I have met with has made so great an impression upon me & I do most heartily thank you for the great store of new views you have given me Nothing I think can be better than the tone of the book—it impresses those who know nothing about the subject— As for your doctrines I am prepared to go to the Stake if requisite in support of Chap.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Theology and Natural History in Darwin’S Time: Design
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ETD - Electronic Theses & Dissertations NATURAL THEOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY IN DARWIN’S TIME: DESIGN, DIRECTION, SUPERINTENEDENCE AND UNIFORMITY IN BRITISH THOUGHT, 1818-1876 By Boyd Barnes Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Vanderbilt University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Religion May, 2008 Nashville, Tennessee Approved: Professor James Hudnut-Beumler Professor Dale A. Johnson Professor Eugene A. TeSelle Professor Richard F. Haglund Professor James P. Byrd William Buckland “The evidences afforded by the sister sciences exhibit indeed the most admirable proofs of design originally exerted at the Creation: but many who admit these proofs still doubt the continued superintendence of that intelligence, maintaining that the system of the Universe is carried on by the force of the laws originally impressed upon matter…. Such an opinion … nowhere meets with a more direct and palpable refutation, than is afforded by the subserviency of the present structure of the earth’s surface to final causes; for that structure is evidently the result of many and violent convulsions subsequent to its original formation. When therefore we perceive that the secondary causes producing these convulsions have operated at successive epochs, not blindly and at random, but with a direction to beneficial ends, we see at once the proofs of an overruling Intelligence continuing to superintend, direct, modify, and control the operation of the agents, which he originally ordained.” – The Very Reverend William Buckland (1784-1856), DD, FRS, Reader in Geology and Canon of Christ Church at the University of Oxford, President of the Geological Society of London, President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Dean of Westminster.
    [Show full text]
  • In This Index Fellow of the Royal Society Is Abbreviated to FRS and President to PRS
    Index In this index Fellow of the Royal Society is abbreviated to FRS and president to PRS. Abbott, E. C. see Gadow, Hans and E. C. Abbott automata 51, 51nn4–5 Abel, Frederick Augustus 177, 177n1, 179 Avebury, Baron see Lubbock, John Aberdeen University, Huxley as rector 35, 36, 36n1, 42–3; his inaugural address 42, 43n1 Abney, William de Wiveleslie 85, 85n2, 115, 148, 149, 187, 220 Babbage, Charles 269, 269n2 ‘The solar spectrum ...’ 143, 144n1, 145 Baer, Karl Ernst von 12 Acade´mie Royale des Sciences, Paris 145 Autobiography 12n3 Acland, Sir Henry Wentworth 240, 240n3, RS Copley Medal awarded to 12n3 241, 242 Baeyer, Johann Friedrich Wilhelm von 118, 119n4 acquired characteristics 23 [Bale], [unidentified] 31 advertising 261, 261n2 Balfour, Arthur James Macmillan’s advertisement for Huxley: Lessons Foundation of belief 307; Huxley’s reply to: in elementary physiology 136–7 ‘Mr Balfour’s attack on agnosticism’ 307n2, Airy, George Biddell 40, 40n3 308 Albert, Prince Consort 269n2 Balfour, Francis Maitland xvi, 40n4, 44, 44n1, Allchin, William Henry 48, 48n1, 61, 70, 81 52–3, 53n1, 65, 67, 231 Alter, Peter Huxley on 79, 142 The reluctant patron ... xiin5, xviin14 lectures by 68 amphioxus 55, 56, 232, 233 ‘On the development of the spinal nerves in anatomy 8, 28, 80, 81, 234 elasmobranch fishes’ 65n6, 66 animals, cruelty to 73, 73n1 death xvi, 79, 79n1; Foster’s obituary notice 88, see also vivisection 89n1 Antarctic expedition, Australian colonies proposal see also Foster, M. and Francis M. Balfour for 193, 193n1 Bancroft, Marie Effie
    [Show full text]
  • War Rudolf Virchow Ein Gegner Der Evolutionstheorie ? Philosophia Scientiæ, No S2 (1998-1999), P
    PHILOSOPHIA SCIENTIÆ KLAUS WENIG War Rudolf Virchow ein Gegner der Evolutionstheorie ? Philosophia Scientiæ, no S2 (1998-1999), p. 211-229 <http://www.numdam.org/item?id=PHSC_1998-1999___S2_211_0> © Éditions Kimé, 1998-1999, tous droits réservés. L’accès aux archives de la revue « Philosophia Scientiæ » (http://poincare.univ-nancy2.fr/PhilosophiaScientiae/) implique l’accord avec les conditions générales d’utilisation (http://www. numdam.org/conditions). Toute utilisation commerciale ou im- pression systématique est constitutive d’une infraction pénale. Toute copie ou impression de ce fichier doit contenir la pré- sente mention de copyright. Article numérisé dans le cadre du programme Numérisation de documents anciens mathématiques http://www.numdam.org/ War Rudolf Virchow ein Gegner der Evolutionstheorie ? Klaus Wenig Berlin - Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin Philosophia Scientiae, Cahier Spécial (2), 1998-1999, 211-230 Klaus Wenig Kurzfassung. Rudolf Virchow galt lange Zeit in der Biologiegeschichtsschreibung als Gegner der Deszendenztheorie und damit als Gegner der Entwicklungslehre. Der Aufsatz belegt, daB Virchow der Darwinschen Théorie aufgeschlossen und wohlwollend gegeniiber stand. Als streng empirisch arbeitender anatomischer Pathologe und Anthropologe verlangte er empirischen Nachweis, die „missing links" zu den rezenten Lebewesen. In den wissenschaftlichen Diskussionen um die Verfikation der Deszendenztheorie beteiligte er sich mit Beitrâgen iiber Vererbungsvorgànge. Seine Schriften und Reden belegen seine eigene Einschàtzung, dafi er sich nicht als Gegner, sondern als Freund, nicht aber als Anhànger der Deszendenztheorie verstand. Summary. In the historiography of biology Rudolf Virchow was long regarded as an opponent of the théories of descent and évolution. The présent article argues that Virchow was open to results of the newly developed researches in phylogeny.
    [Show full text]
  • Was Hitler a Darwinian?
    Was Hitler a Darwinian? Robert J. Richards The University of Chicago The Darwinian underpinnings of Nazi racial ideology are patently obvious. Hitler's chapter on "Nation and Race" in Mein Kampf discusses the racial struggle for existence in clear Darwinian terms. Richard Weikart, Historian, Cal. State, Stanislaus1 Hamlet: Do you see yonder cloud that's almost in shape of a camel? Shakespeare, Hamlet, III, 2. 1. Introduction . 1 2. The Issues regarding a Supposed Conceptually Causal Connection . 4 3. Darwinian Theory and Racial Hierarchy . 10 4. The Racial Ideology of Gobineau and Chamberlain . 16 5. Chamberlain and Hitler . 27 6. Mein Kampf . 29 7. Struggle for Existence . 37 8. The Political Sources of Hitler’s Anti-Semitism . 41 9. Ethics and Social Darwinism . 44 10. Was the Biological Community under Hitler Darwinian? . 46 11. Conclusion . 52 1. Introduction Several scholars and many religiously conservative thinkers have recently charged that Hitler’s ideas about race and racial struggle derived from the theories of Charles Darwin (1809-1882), either directly or through intermediate sources. So, for example, the historian Richard Weikart, in his book From Darwin to Hitler (2004), maintains: “No matter how crooked the road was from Darwin to Hitler, clearly Darwinism and eugenics smoothed the path for Nazi ideology, especially for the Nazi 1 Richard Weikart, “Was It Immoral for "Expelled" to Connect Darwinism and Nazi Racism?” (http://www.discovery.org/a/5069.) 1 stress on expansion, war, racial struggle, and racial extermination.”2 In a subsequent book, Hitler’s Ethic: The Nazi Pursuit of Evolutionary Progress (2009), Weikart argues that Darwin’s “evolutionary ethics drove him [Hitler] to engage in behavior that the rest of us consider abominable.”3 Other critics have also attempted to forge a strong link between Darwin’s theory and Hitler’s biological notions.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Henry Huxley
    A Most Eminent Victorian: Thomas Henry Huxley journals.openedition.org/cve/526 Résumé Huxley coined the word agnostic to describe his own philosophical framework in part to distinguish himself from materialists, atheists, and positivists. In this paper I will elaborate on exactly what Huxley meant by agnosticism by discussing his views on the distinctions he drew between philosophy and science, science and theology, and between theology and religion. His claim that theology belonged to the realm of the intellect while religion belonged to the realm of feeling served as an important strategy in his defense of evolution. Approaching Darwin’s theory in the spirit of Goethe’s Thatige Skepsis or active skepticism, he showed that most of the “scientific” objections to evolution were at their root religiously based. Huxley maintained that the question of “man’s place in nature” should be approached independently of the question of origins, yet at the same time argued passionately and eloquently that even if humans shared a common a origin with the apes, this did not make humans any less special. Because evolution was so intertwined with the questions of belief, of morals and of ethics, and Huxley was the foremost defender of Darwin’s ideas in the English- speaking world, he was at the center of the discussions as Victorians struggled with trying to reconcile the growing gulf between science and faith. Haut de page Entrées d’index Mots-clés : croyance, époque victorienne, Bible, agnosticisme, Metaphysical Society, conversion, catholicisme, Dracula, Martineau (Harriet), Huxley (Thomas Henry) Keywords: belief, Victorian times, Bible, agnosticism, Metaphysical Society, conversion, Catholicism, Dracula, Martineau (Harriet), Huxley (Thomas Henry) Haut de page 1/19 Texte intégral PDF Signaler ce document The line between biology, morals, and magic is still not generally known and admitted.
    [Show full text]
  • BIOL 1406 Darwin's Dangerous Idea
    BIOL 1406 Darwin’s Dangerous Idea - Video Exam I Essay Question: (Matching Format) Describe the history of the scientific theory, biological evolution by means of natural selection: and focus on the life of Charles Darwin as portrayed in the PBS production, Darwin’s Dangerous Idea. Be sure to describe the roles of the following: "Raz", Robert FitzRoy, Emma Darwin, Annie Darwin, Richard Owen, Charles Lyell, Thomas Malthus, Samuel Wilberforce, and Thomas Huxley.) 1.Describe Captain Fitzroy’s perspective when it comes to “free-thinking” 2. What does Fitzroy allow Darwin to borrow? 3. Who was “Raz”? 4. Who was Richard Owen? 5. What was Owen’s view on “free-thinking” with regard to human ancestory? 6. What was Owen so afraid of? 7. Who was Emma (Wedgewood) Darwin? How did she influence Charles Darwin with regard to his scientific inquiry ? 8. What type of disease do we now speculate that Darwin may have suffered from? How did he get the disease? 9. Who was Annie Darwin? 10. When Annie left, what affect did this have on Darwin? 11. Who was Charles Lyell? What role did he play in influencing Darwin? 12. Who was Thomas Malthus? What did he do to influence Darwin? 13. What did Richard Owen do that was scientifically unethical? Why did he do this? 14. Who was Samuel Wilberforce? 15. Who was Thomas Henry Huxley? What did he do to influence Darwin? 16. Who was Alfred Russel Wallace? What did he do to influence Darwin? 17. What motivated Darwin to study so many different organisms; i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Theorising Race and Evolution – German Anthropologie's Utilisation of Australian Aboriginal Skeletal Remains During the Long Nineteenth Century
    Theorising Race and Evolution – German Anthropologie's utilisation of Australian Aboriginal skeletal remains during the Long Nineteenth Century Antje Kühnast A thesis in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctorate of Philosophy University of New South Wales School of Humanities and Languages Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences September 2017 1 THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES Thesis/Dissertation Sheet Surname or Family name: Kühnast First name: Antje Other name/s: Abbreviation for degree as given in the University calendar: PhD School: Humanities and Languages Faculty: Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences Title: Theorising race and evolution – German Anthropologie's utilisation of Australian Aboriginal skeletal remains during the Long Nineteenth Century Abstract 350 words maximum: (PLEASE TYPE) This thesis investigates the German physical anthropological discourse on Australian Aborigines during the long nineteenth century. It particularly explores, on the basis of contemporaneous German-language scientific publications, the way in which German physical anthropologists utilised Australian Aboriginal skeletal remains for their theorising on human diversity and evolution. One focus lies on the discussion of the Neuholländer or Australier in its various manifestations: ranging from the speculative theorising of the late Enlightenment period to the natural scientific, physical anthropological investigations of the mid-nineteenth to early twentieth centuries. It is shown that German physical anthropologists first relied on, and
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Thomas Henry Huxley a Liberal Education
    1 Thomas Henry Huxley A Liberal Education Thomas Henry Huxley (1825-1895) was a scientist, working on comparative anatomy, an ardent supporter of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, and a promoter of education for the masses. He took part in the famous Oxford Debate held in 1860 on Darwin’s theory, where his famous put- down of Samuel Wilberforce, the Bishop of Oxford, led to his being labeled “Darwin’s bulldog.” Huxley was also an essayist and coined the term agnosticism. A Liberal Education was published in 1868. Information readily available on the internet has not been glossed. Additions are in brackets [like this]. The business which the South London Working Men's College has undertaken is a great work; indeed, I might say, that Education, with which that college proposes to grapple, is the greatest work of all those which lie ready to a man's hand just at present. And, at length, this fact is becoming generally recognized. You cannot go anywhere without hearing a buzz of more or less confused and contradictory talk on this subject—nor can you fail to notice that, in one point at any rate, there is a very decided advance upon like discussions in former days. Nobody outside the agricultural interest now dares to say that education is a bad thing. If any representative of the once large and powerful party, which, in former days, proclaimed this opinion, still exists in the semi-fossil state, he keeps his thoughts to himself. In fact, there is a chorus of voices, almost distressing in their harmony, raised in favor of the doctrine that education is the great panacea for human troubles, and that, if the country is not shortly to go to the dogs, everybody must be educated.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Organism: Carl Vogt on Animals and States in the 1840S and 50S Lynn K. Nyhart* *Program in the History of Science
    1 The Political Organism: Carl Vogt on Animals and States in the 1840s and 50s Lynn K. Nyhart* *Program in the History of Science, Medicine, and Technology, University of Wisconsin – Madison, Madison, WI 53706, [email protected] ABSTRACT: How do the discourses of biology and politics interact? This article uses the case of Carl Vogt (1817-1895), a German zoologist, physiologist, and radical political activist in the German revolutions of 1848-49, to examine the traffic across the discourses before, during, and after the revolutions. It argues that the key metaphors of the “state-as-organism” (used largely by political theorists) and the “organism-as-state” (used mainly by biologists) did different work for each group in the 1840s and 1850s. Vogt himself was the rare individual who actively played with both metaphors, in defense of both his radical political views and his materialist biology. I examine especially closely his scholarly biological studies of siphonophores—marine invertebrates that looked like single organisms but were generally agreed to be collections of individuals (“states” or “colonies”), and his use of this creature for political satire after the revolution failed. More broadly, while attention to the organism-as-state peaked in the early1850s, the state-as-organism metaphor gained new possibilities. Whereas earlier it generally referred to an idealist or “ethical” meaning of “organism,” in the 1850s a new, “realistic” interpretation came onto the political scene, bearing a more strictly biological meaning of the term. The article ends with a brief analysis of the asymmetries between the two metaphors and their positions within nineteenth-century German natural science and politics.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 103 • 2009 Contents
    THE LEICESTER LITERARY & PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY TRANSACTIONS OF THE LEICESTER LITERARY Founded in 1835 www.leicesterlitandphil.org.uk & PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY. OFFICERS AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL VOLUME 103 2009 President: Mr R. Gill, MA Life Vice-Presidents Dr T.D. Ford, OBE, PhD, BSc, FGS Mrs H.A.E. Lewis, JP, MA Vice Presidents Mrs A. Dean, B.A. Mr B.D. Beeson Dr M.G.F. Crowe, MA, MB, BChir, FRCGP Professor D.P.S. Sandhu, MD, FRCS (Ed Urol), FRCS (Eng & Glas) Hon. Secretary: Dr M. Hamill MB, BCh BAO, FRCPCH 91 Kingsway Rd, Leicester. LE5 5TU Hon. Treasurer: Mr M. Kirk, OBE, FCA, Elms Cottage, 46 Shirley Road, Leicester LE2 3LJ Hon. Membership Secretaries: Mr B.D. Beeson and Mrs J. Beeson BSc The Hollies, Main St, Frolesworth, Leics LE17 3LL Hon. Programme Secretaries: Dr D.G. Lewis, MA, MD, FRCA and Mrs H.A.E. Lewis JP, MA, 3 Shirley Road, Leicester, LE2 3LL Hon. Transactions Editor: Dr D.G. Lewis, MA, MD, FRCA 3 Shirley Road, Leicester, LE2 3LL Website Editor: Professor M.A. Khan, BSc, PhD, FRAS, FRSA [email protected] Members of Council S.A. Ashraf, MA Professor P.J. Boylan BSc, PhD, FGS, FMA, FBIM, FRSA Mr J.H. Dickinson B Sc CEng, FIMMM, FGS Professor J.C. Fothergill, BSc, MSc, PhD, CEng, BSc Eng, CPhys, FIEE M Inst P FIEE Mrs A. Fuchs 'Steel Fire Dog. Image © Leicester Museums and Galleries' Mr P. Hammersley, CBE, CEng, BSc Eng, MIMechE Mr L. Lloyd-Smith, JP, DipArch, FRIBA Mrs F. Smithson Professor M. Stannard, BA, MA, DPhil, FEA, FRLS Mr M.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Genetics Book Collection Catalogue
    History of Genetics Book Collection Catalogue Below is a list of the History of Genetics Book Collection held at the John Innes Centre, Norwich, UK. For all enquires please contact Mike Ambrose [email protected] +44(0)1603 450630 Collection List Symposium der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Hygiene und Mikrobiologie Stuttgart Gustav Fischer 1978 A69516944 BOOK-HG HG œ.00 15/10/1996 5th international congress on tropical agriculture 28-31 July 1930 Brussels Imprimerie Industrielle et Finangiere 1930 A6645004483 œ.00 30/3/1994 7th International Chromosome Conference Oxford Oxford 1980 A32887511 BOOK-HG HG œ.00 20/2/1991 7th International Chromosome Conference Oxford Oxford 1980 A44688257 BOOK-HG HG œ.00 26/6/1992 17th international agricultural congress 1937 1937 A6646004482 œ.00 30/3/1994 19th century science a selection of original texts 155111165910402 œ14.95 13/2/2001 150 years of the State Nikitsky Botanical Garden bollection of scientific papers. vol.37 Moscow "Kolos" 1964 A41781244 BOOK-HG HG œ.00 15/10/1996 Haldane John Burdon Sanderson 1892-1964 A banned broadcast and other essays London Chatto and Windus 1946 A10697655 BOOK-HG HG œ.00 15/10/1996 Matsuura Hajime A bibliographical monograph on plant genetics (genic analysis) 1900-1929 Sapporo Hokkaido Imperial University 1933 A47059786 BOOK-HG HG œ.00 15/10/1996 Hoppe Alfred John A bibliography of the writings of Samuel Butler (author of "erewhon") and of writings about him with some letters from Samuel Butler to the Rev. F. G. Fleay, now first published London The Bookman's Journal
    [Show full text]