Switch to: References

Citations of:

If Darwin wasn't the _Beagle's_ Naturalist, why was he on Board?

Harold L. Burstyn

British Journal for the History of Science 8 (1):62-69 (1975)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.

“My appointment received the sanction of the Admiralty”: Why Charles Darwin really was the naturalist on HMS Beagle.John van Wyhe - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (3):316-326.details For decades historians of science and science writers in general have maintained that Charles Darwin was not the ‘naturalist’ or ‘official naturalist’ during the 1831–1836 surveying voyage of HMS Beagle but instead Captain Robert FitzRoy’s ‘companion’, ‘gentleman companion’ or ‘dining companion’. That is, Darwin was primarily the captain’s social companion and only secondarily and unofficially naturalist. Instead, it is usually maintained, the ship’s surgeon Robert McCormick was the official naturalist because this was the default or official practice at the time. (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 1 citation
Claiming Darwin: Stephen Jay Gould in contests over evolutionary orthodoxy and public perception, 1977–2002.Myrna Perez Sheldon - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 45 (1):139-147.details This article analyzes the impact of the resurgence of American creationism in the early 1980s on debates within post-synthesis evolutionary biology. During this period, many evolutionists criticized Harvard biologist Stephen Jay Gould for publicizing his revisions to traditional Darwinian theory and opening evolution to criticism by creationists. Gould’s theory of punctuated equilibrium was a significant source of contention in these disputes. Both he and his critics, including Richard Dawkins, claimed to be carrying the mantle of Darwinian evolution. By the end (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 3 citations
Wallace’s and Darwin’s natural selection theories.Santiago Ginnobili & Daniel Blanco - 2019 - Synthese 196 (3):991-1017.details This work takes a stand on whether Wallace should be regarded as co-author of the theory of natural selection alongside Darwin as he is usually considered on behalf of his alleged essential contribution to the conception of the theory. It does so from a perspective unexplored thus far: we will argue for Darwin’s priority based on a rational reconstruction of the theory of natural selection as it appears in the writings of both authors. We show that the theory does not (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 2 citations

1