Mozart?? I cannot wait!!!!

It’s funny that as I am reading through the Einstein bio I keep thinking of your series on Darwin and noting the parallels

I suspect that it is the integration of taxonomy with geography that partially led to the incites of his evolutionary theory.

That fits the impression I got from the exhibition — his theory is about the way species adapt to their environment, so seeing them in their actual habitat, and putting that together with what he knew from his studies, could well have made the crucial difference.

And as for Mozart … just wait till I get started on him.

What I do know, is that typically, when proper light is shed on many scientific geniuses, what we find is that they were good at popularizing ideas that were somewhat theirs, but often begged, stolen or borrowed from elsewhere.

Or they were good at integrating different ideas in a new way.

From my own experience as well, most of the good ideas that I’ve had come from focus and interest plus vast reading of different data and ideas from related fields. (i.e. I think many interesting ideas will be forthcoming from the intersection of cognitive ecolology, ethology and psychology such as the recent work of B. Crespi linking psychological spectrum disorders with evolutionary theory.) The wider your sources, the better you can integrate the ideas in novel ways. This is why much contemporary research focus is on multidisciplinary approaches. Complex issues such as climate change require specialists from many disciplines to get together and put ideas together. In a way, I think Darwin did this, but in his own head, or in consulting and getting pieces of info from various specialists (and maybe smartly not giving them back what he knew so they wouldn’t one-up him), and weaving it together.

My own view on speculation on how Darwin came up with his idea: With Darwin, many of his ideas were biogeographic in nature, connecting the species with it’s environment, and though I haven’t extensively studied his work and the context in which he worked, I suspect that it is the integration of taxonomy with geography that partially led to the incites of his evolutionary theory.

I suspect that what actually gave Darwin his edge was his years of research (knowledge), analytical process, constant devotion to solving this problem and actually going down on the trip to see the landscapes where the specimens came from. There is nothing to replace actually seeing the habitat an animal lives in to be able to start to “get” evolution. There is also a distinct similarity between Darwin’s theories to James Hutton’s theory of uniformitarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hutton). Uniformitarianism states that the small regular changes that happen on a short time scale, can add up to the big effects we see on landscapes (i.e. daily water erosion on micro level leads over large time to Grand Canyon). Basically, if you apply this notion to plants/animals, you get rough evolutionary theory.

I learned about Darwin in bio and Hutton in geography, and from what I can remember, Hutton’s work predates Darwin, (Darwin likely had access to Hutton, or his successor Lyell’s work) and so in many ways Hutton was more of a pioneer in ideas challenging to the church and established dogma. He just doesn’t get the publicity Darwin does.

Oh, ok, I just looked it up, and I suspect you may find this interesting. It shows that the connections between Hutton’s theories of uniformitarianism and Darwin’s theory of evolution are far more than just coincidental (which you might already know, but I wasn’t aware of the actual historic linkage).

http://www.innovations-report.de/html/berichte/biowissenschaften_chemie/bericht-22489.html

That’s my two bits!

Is it perhaps a combination of the researching, the habitual seeking and an innate resistance to the status-quo that helped these men make creative leaps? Or is there some other common thread as yet undiscovered?

Zoe — recovering book geek here as well!

I think people often forget the immense value of sharp — or first-hand — observation. The world should not be lived though books — and I say that as someone who is a literature geek and die-hard book lover.