Darwin as a contender
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48160/18532330me15.372Keywords:
natural selection, Mivart, dialectical nets, argumentation theory, DarwinAbstract
George Jackson Mivart (1827-1900) was a formidable opponent of Charles Robert Darwin (1809-1882) and his acolytes, disputing the sufficiency of the Theory of Descent with Modification by Natural Selection as an answer to the question about the origin of species. In this work we examine this dispute between Mivart and Darwin, and Darwin's qualities as a contender that emerge from it. We use Dialectical Nets —a diagrammatic system— to represent the assertions of both and their interrelations. The dispute reinforces the value of erudition, because both produced multiple and diverse arguments by example using their extensive knowledge in different areas of biology.
References
Angelleli, I. (1970), “The Techniques of Disputation in the History of Logic”, Journal of Philosophy 67(20): 800-815.
Arcanjo, F. G. e E. P. Silva (2017), “Pangênese, genes, epigênese”, História, Ciências, Saúde – Manguinhos 24 (3): 707-726.
Bouzat, J. L. (2014), “Darwin’s Diagram of Divergence of Taxa as a Causal Model for the Origin of Species”, The Quarterly Review of Biology 89 (1): 21-38.
Browne, J. (2011), Charles Darwin: o poder do lugar (trad. Otacílio Nunes), São Paulo: Editora Unesp.
Castelnérac, B. e M. Marion (2013), “Antilogic”, The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication: Games, Game Theory and Game Semantics 8: 1-31.
Darwin, C. (1872), The Origin of Species: by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, sixth ed. with additions and corrections, London: John Murray.
Darwin, C. (2018a), “A origem das espécies por meio de seleção natural”, in Pimenta, P. P. (org., trad.), A origem das espécies, São Paulo: UBU, pp. 37-635.
Darwin, C. (2018b), “Objeções variadas à teoria da seleção natural”, in Pimenta, P. P. (org., trad.), A origem das espécies, São Paulo: UBU, pp. 727-779.
De Toffoli, S. (2024), “Who’s Afraid of Mathematical Diagrams?”, Philosopher’s Imprint 23(9) http://journals.publishing.umich.edu/phimp/article/id/1348/
Dutihl Noaves C. e S. Uckelman. (2016), “Obligationes”, in Dutihl Noaves C. e S. Read (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Medieval Logic, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 370-395.
Finocchiaro, M. A. (2005), Arguments about Arguments: Systematic, Critical and Historical Essays in Logical Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Freitas, S. H. Z., Camargos, L. A. e L. L. Lopasso (2022) “A aplicação do Princípio da Dialeticidade Recursal frente à jurisprudência defensiva dos tribunais superiores e o modelo constitucional do processo”, Revista Meritim 18(4): 103-119.
Hempel, C. G. (1974), Filosofia da Ciência Natural (trad. P. S. Rocha), Rio de Janeiro: Zahar.
Kuhn, T. (1977) “Objectivity, Value Judgment, and Theory Choice”, in Kuhn, T. S., The Essential Tension, London: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 320-339.
Krabbe, E. C. W. (2007), “On How to Get Beyond the Opening Stage”, Argumentation 21: 233-242.
Lakatos, I. (1970), “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes”, in Lakatos I. e A. Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, London: Cambridge University Press, pp. 91-195.
Laudan, L. (1977), Progress and Its Problems: Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Martins, L. A. P. (2019), “Darwin e os darwinistas”, Revista da USP 123: 119-130.
Mayr, E. (2005), Biologia, Ciência Única: Reflexões sobre a autonomia de uma disciplina científica (trad. M. Leite), São Paulo: Companhia das Letras.
Mivart, G. J. (1869a), “Difficulties of the Theory of Natural Selection – Part I”, The Month XI: 35-53.
Mivart, G. J. (1869b), “Difficulties of the Theory of Natural Selection – Part II”, The Month XI: 134-153.
Mivart, G. J. (1869c) “Difficulties of the Theory of Natural Selection – Part III”, The Month XI: 274-289.
Mivart, G. J. (1871), On the Genesis of Species, second ed., London and New York: MacMillan.
Platão (2000), A República (trad. C. A. Nunes), Belém: EDUFPA.
Popper, K. R. (2008), Conjecturas e Refutações: O Progresso do Conhecimento Científico (trad. S. Bath), Brasília: Editora da UNB.
Regner, A. C. K. P. (2006), “A polêmica Darwin versus Mivart: uma lição em refutar objeções”, Filosofia e História da Biologia 1: 55-89.
Regner, A. C. K. P. (2010), “The Structure of the Darwinian Arguments in the Origin of Species”, in Lorenzano, P., Rheinberger, H., Ortiz, E. e C. D. Gallles (eds.), History and Philosophy of Science and Technology – Volume I, Oxford: EOLSS, pp. 302-328.
Sandel, M. J. (2012), O que o dinheiro não compra: os limites morais do mercado (trad. C. Marques), Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira.
Sautter, F. Th. (2005), “Teoria dos Estágios da Argumentação”, in Trevisan, A. L. e N. D. Rossato (orgs.), Filosofia e educação: confluências, Santa Maria: FACOS-UFSM pp. 45-53.
Sautter, F. Th. (2003), “Redes Dialéticas: Parte Estática”, Veritas 68(1): 1-9
Secco, G. D. (2013), Entre provas e experimentos: uma leitura wittgensteiniana das controvérsias em torno da prova do Teorema das Quatro Cores, Tese de doutorado, Departamento de Filosofia, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro.
Shimojima, A. (2001), “The Graphic-Linguistic Distinction: Exploring Alternatives”, Artificial Intelligence Review 15: 5-27.
Toulmin, S. E. (2003), The Uses of Argument, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Eemeren, F. H. e R. Grootendorst (2004), A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
LicenseThe documents published here are governed by the licensing criteria
Creative Commons Argentina.Atribución - No Comercial - Sin Obra Derivada 2.5 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/