What is the full title of Charles Darwin's book about Origin of Species?

The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection: The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life





(Interesting....I've heard of of species of horses, lions, tigers, but only time I've "race" applied was towards man. Favored Races? Mein Gott!!





Wonder how he would feel amongst a crowd wearing pointy white sheets?





Can't we just start referring to this book as "Preservation of Favored Races" since the title is often just partially quoted?





Ok...will put on my asbestos suit and wait for the flames to come my way, but hey...I didn't write the title of the book...Uncle Charles did.

What is the full title of Charles Darwin's book about Origin of Species?
Sounds to me like you're the one who'd be comfortable among the white sheets crowd, kid.
Reply:Deuteronomy 23:1 Look it up
Reply:Yes, I know I'm late, but I'll bite.





"Races" in this context simply means lineages. This was, in fact the original meaning of the word, and in Darwin's time was applied when talking about any organism including "races of plants". Since then, the meaning has become more nuanced and tendentious.





As you have read the book, you will of course be aware that Darwin was not referring to "human races". Darwin barely mentions humans in "Origin" - he is discussing species and lineages (or races) within species in a very generalised way. I'm puzzled that you claim to have struggled through several hundred pages of nineteenth century scientific prose without noticing the way "race" is used.





Secondly, your quote (you've left out a few words so it doesn't make sense) was not from "Origin", it was from "The Descent of Man".





While his views on "Negroes" or "Australians" as being less "favored" than "Caucasians" obviously deserves critical unpacking, it simply reflected the universally unquestioned assumptions of his time and culture. This view was not the point of the paragraph, however, and he was certainly not advocating the disappearance of other human "races" any more than he would have celebrated the extinction of the anthropoid apes.





He was definitely wrong about "non Caucasian human lineages" being in any way "intermediate" between his own lineage and that of non human primates. Such a belief was almost universal in nineteenth century Britain until the excesses of European imperialism (culminating with the 20th century Nazi holocaust) made such an idea repugnant to all but the dullest minds.





And for the record, Darwin would have loathed the pointy sheet crowd. One of the most important influences on his life was John Edmonstone, who taught him taxidermy, and almost certainly helped inspire his desire to travel and explore the world. Their friendship was plausibly a factor in Darwin's well documented lifelong hatred of slavery and other forms of racial ill treatment.





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edmons...
Reply:Its heros having feet of clay time. Apparently Newton was a really nasty piece of work as well.





George Orwell wrote a good essay about this sort of thing called "Benefit of Clergy". He writes it about Salvador Dali and basically asks why his supporters think he must be a nice chap because he paints great pictures whilst his detractors think his pictures can't be any good because he was a c*nt.





Orwell argues for saying both that his paintings are fab and he was not fab.





Couldn't the same be said about Darwin? That he came up with the single biggest advance in biology whilst at the same time having some pretty dreadful ideas about his fellow man?
Reply:Since you already know the title, I guess I don't have to answer the question... but I'd suggest actually READING THE BOOK before declaring that you know what is contained within.





Look - you can read it FOR FREE online. Go ahead. I dare ya.





http://www.literature.org/authors/darwin...
Reply:The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection


The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life


by Charles Darwin, M.A.





Shown here:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Origi...





He could have named the book: Darwin's Racism. In the book The Origin of Species, Darwin saw the natives of Australia and Black Africans as being at the same level as gorillas. This is completely racist and disgusting!
Reply:So you've read the book, did Darwin refer to the evolution of human races even once? No - the Origin of Species is not about human evolution and the "preservation of favoured races" is in reference to populations of organisms (mostly what he called "domestic races" - human bred animal lines) who have more Darwinian fitness.





The quote you included comes from another of Darwin's books - The Descent of Man - which does deal with human evolution (did you read that one too?)





In any event, the theory of evolution has moved way beyond Darwin's Victorian treatment; it's no longer just Darwin's theory. If all you read is Darwin, you will NOT understand the modern theory of evolution; Darwin knew nothing of DNA or genetics (even though his ideas predicted their existence), and so much more.





So you can slam Darwin all you want, call him a fool, a prophet, a racist, whatever - the ideas that he first published have grown beyond his imagining (and apparently yours as well) and have evolved into the cornerstone of biology. He may have started it but thinking you can understand evolution by merely studying Darwin is myopic. No matter what Darwin may have said or not said, there is absolutely nothing racist in the modern synthesis of evolution.
Reply:Great Question!!














***Just Sitting Here Learning:)***
Reply:He was working under the assumption that since those peoples hadn't developed a civilization like other parts of the world(Europe and Asia) that they were likely a different race. Now that we can verify that human beings are 99% the same across races we know he was wrong and goes to show that racism stems from ignorance. We can prove racism is pointless(because there virtually is no such thing as race between humans); this doesn't go to show that evolution was wrong.
Reply:I agree with Bobby...learned a lot and thanks for the free read. God bless and remember Jesus is the life, truth, and the way%26lt;%26gt;%26lt;