Talk:The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex

message: The article goes into a lot of background information before it actually explains what Darwin suggested in his book on sexual selection. The article assumes that the reader will go through the length of the article reading about the problems and criticism of Darwin's previous work on natural selection and still be interested in reading what this book itself was about. Not till the second para of the sub topic "Apparently non-adaptive features" does the article explain sexual selection in the lines "Darwin developed the theory of sexual selection, which outlined how different characters could be selected for if they conveyed a reproductive advantage to the individual." Even in that para it mentions the problem of a half eye, before it mentions the problem of seemingly useless features. I think what sexual selection is, should be mentioned (in brief) early on in the article, later the article can move into details. 
Nice article, otherwise :)
*Well, I agree. I had meant to write that section, but haven't gotten around to it yet (some time later). :-) --Fastfission 05:56, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What '''is''' sexual selection

message: Can someone complete those stubs? 
--Emplynx 16:45, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Stubs

message: The article says that Darwin was a monogenist, meaning he believed human races were merely "sub-species" of each other. The following sentence also describes polygenism as the belief that races are "sub-species" of each other. The difference between the two needs to be clarified. -- Luke
*Sorry about that! I clarified it. --Fastfission 00:00, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Only in the descriptive sense—he thinks that if you mix different groups of humans together, over time the more "fit" group will probably end up exterminating the "less fit" group, as he had seen actually happen in South America, where Europeans were devastating native populations through disease, war, and encroachment. He's not advocating it in the slightest. That much is obvious if you actually read it or know anything about his views on aborigines or slavery. He was a fellow of the Ethnological Society, which advocated the need to protect endangered native groups as one would protect endangered animals. So yes, he does "equate" them in the sense that he sees them as analogous, not in that he thinks that either are acceptable. --Fastfission 01:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Monogenism verus polygenism

message: Neither Galton nor Darwin, though, advocated any eugenic policies such as those which would be undertaken in the early 20th century, as government coercion of any form was very much against their political opinions.
What is the source for this? FilipeS 23:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Diane B. Paul, "Darwin, social Darwinism and eugenics," in Jonathan Hodge and Gregory Radick, eds., The Cambridge Companion to Darwin (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 214-239., in the References section. --Fastfission 00:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Political views of Darwin and Galton

message: I'd like to upload the full set of image from this book to Commons (Category:Descent of Man), though I'm not sure that the images I'm using are the best available. The ones I've uploaded (e.g. :Image:Descent fig02.jpg) are from Darwin Online () but have a beige background (compare with say :Image:Descent of Man - Figure 16.jpg, with white background)
and some appear to be of lower resolution than those in the book. What background would be better - beige or white? And where else can we get the images from? It would be nice to have consistent looking images (and consistent figure numbers, another problem since the numbers seem to vary in different editions). This is going to take a lot of work to get them all uploaded (around 80 images total), so it's important to get this right the first time. Richard001 (talk) 08:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A point to consider is that Darwin online claims copyright on the images it puts up, and although many are photos or scans of images created in the 19th century, apparently such copyright claims can be valid under English law. It's a while since I've looked into this, but something to be treated with caution. .. dave souza, talk 08:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I didn't realize you could claim copyright of a scan of someone else's images... This might be more difficult than I thought. Richard001 (talk) 08:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I've contacted the director and we definitely can't use them. I've requested all the images I've uploaded myself be deleted and it looks like we'll have to do the same with some of the others, which have made the same assumption about scans as I did. The problem is probably widespread throughout Commons, in fact. Richard001 (talk) 23:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Images from Descent of Man

message: An anon added "The race debate: future of human race as predicted in chapter 6)". –"His prediction for the future of mankind, from chapter 6, is rarely publicized, for obvious reasons". Eh, that's a common quote mine as discussed in more detail at TOA – worth including, but needs to be discussed in context. ... dave souza, talk 16:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Darwin's prediction

message: The article suffers at present from a plague of quotation marks, which leave the reader uncertain whether they are genuine quotations from sources, or whether the contributor is being arch or sarcastic.
If a quotation is a real quotation, it should be at least a full clause long (including verb, that is) for contextual purposes. A single word in quotes surrounded by text originated by a contributor is immediately suspect. It should, it must, be sourced down to the page. Readers have a right to be able check the quote to see whether in context the quote says what the contributor asserts it does.
If the quotation is anything else it should come right out: it is not for a contributor to use puncuation to hint broadly that the source is incorrect or inappropriate (POV and/or orig. research). Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotation marks 

message: I think that the following sexist paragraph written by Darwin is noteworthy enough to be in this article:
“The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shewn by man’s attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can women—whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands. If two lists were made of the most eminent men and women in poetry, painting, sculpture, music (inclusive of both composition and performance), history, science, and philosophy, with half-a-dozen names under each subject, the two lists would not bear comparison. We may also infer, from the law of the deviation from averages, so well illustrated by Mr. Galton, in his work on ‘Hereditary Genius,’ that if men are capable of a decided pre-eminence over women in many subjects, the average of mental power in man must be above that of women.”
- Chapter XIX: Mental Powers of Man and Woman. Page 564 of the Penguin publication.  MathEconMajor (talk) 21:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We cover the issues arising from that paragraph in the Sexual selection section, and I've added a link to the pages concerned to that readers can follow the link to the entire quotation. . .  dave souza, talk 21:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Comparison of male and female sexes

message: In the section "Natural selection and civilized society", part of the quotation is in bold, but there is no explanation of why. Is it relevant to some point? Is it in the original? The relevant quote is from chapter 5. I don't have the original source, but I don't see this emphasis in online sources.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.49.247.82 (talk) 20:08, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I see no reason for the bold style, and suggest it be removed. It is not present in the original which is here. Johnuniq (talk) 06:10, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emphasis in quotation 

message: I find it a bit odd, how the racism of Charles Darwin is downplayed in the article. Even from the text quoted it is obvious that he was proposing genocidal racism in his book Descent of man. --196.2.126.176 (talk) 11:38, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You appear to have a rather warped view of things, please read texts more carefully and look for reliable secondary sources rather than imposing your own preconceptions. Unless you've specific proposals for article improvement, your comment appears to be offtopic soapboxing, . . dave souza, talk 18:00, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  racism downplayed 

message: The section entitled "Modern views" seemed rather impoverished.  The opinions of only one scholar are summarized, and the text from which they are derived is a monograph on the subject of Freud, not of Darwin.
Beyond these concerns, I cannot help but feel---though I am by no means an expert---that the statements made in the section are an unjust representation of Darwin's actual views.  From what I do know of Darwin, I find it difficult to accept that he "looked forward to the extermination of what he considered to be savage races."  Are there in fact grounds in Descent (or in other writings of Darwin) to support this characterization?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.6.139.251 (talk) 23:12, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, I've removed the section as at best it shows an opinion from the preface to a book by Richard Webster (author) which is more concerned with Freud. It's not online for checking, but "Darwin looked forward to the extermination of what he considered to be savage races" is both inaccurate and a common creationist claim: if anything, Darwin thought it likely but tragic that uncivilised peoples would be decimated by the spread of imperialism etc., on the basis of what he'd witnessed. There are many Darwin scholars cited in the body of the article, we don't need to highlight this dubious opinion. . dave souza, talk 08:05, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: If the section seems impoverished, that is a reason for adding more material, not for removing what was already there. It is not relevant that the source is not a book specifically about Darwin. The other grounds the IP gave - that it didn't agree with the material, or consider it correct - are not really relevant, as the goal here is meant to be verifiability, not truth. Polisher of Cobwebs (talk) 08:07, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The goal is verifiability and truth, which is why that paraphrase of policy is much debated. Singling out a new section for Webster's dubious views gives them undue weight, the views of experts on the topic are shown in the relevant sections of the article. The whole article should show modern scholarship, we don't single out one non-specialist as "modern views" or give his passing comments a section on their own. . dave souza, talk 08:11, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The goal is verifiability, precisely because people can argue endlessly and unprofitably about what is true. If you consider an entire section for Webster's views undue weight, then the appropriate course would have been to integrate them into the rest of the article, as with the views of other experts. I'd like to note also that the fact that creationists may also make the claim that Darwin supported the extermination of savage races is irrelevant - Webster was not a creationist. 08:17, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have access to Webster's writings, which may have been somewhat distorted in the paraphrase. If you'd like to add his views to the relevant section, go ahead and I'll look out more considered scholarship on the points. . dave souza, talk 08:21, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern views 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060814174135/http://devon.freepgs.com/ to http://devon.freepgs.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:15, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I wish to create another section giving the main points about Races mentioned by Darwin in chapter 7. I would give the main points only without an opinion or interpretation. 
The points are not ready yet. I'm just opening a discussion about this first. Musa Isa 2020 (talk) 03:52, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chapter 7: Races