[__ Science __ ] One of Evolution’s Most Famous Stories Gets a Rewrite

[Barbarian]

Darwin is racist for saying black people are closer to gorillas.

As you see, he's comparing whites to gorillas, since both have that structure, which is often absent in blacks. Are you now claiming he thinks whites are more like gorillas than blacks are?

Darwin is racist for saying black people are closer to gorillas.

Notice that here he's showing how blacks (but not other people) are different than gorillas. You seem to have it precisely backwards.

Nowhere does Darwin attribute any variations to civilization. Civilization is a noun, not a verb. Darwin isn't so ignorant as to attribute differences in humans to civilization.

In fact that is what most of the differences in human races is. The fact is, there are no biological human races. Darwin had it right yet again, even though he had no way to prove that all humans were essentially alike. Genetics has since validated Darwin's prediction.

The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate
Charles Darwin The Descent of Man

For whatever reason you resist such facts, it's probably time to make some peace with them

 

[Barbarian]

I admit I am confused at what those examples have to do with this:
"natural selection could only have endowed the savage with a brain a little superior to that of an ape." -Descent of Man

Darwin was a gradualist. So in his view, the first humans could only have had a brain a bit superior to that of other apes. Turns out, he was right about that. The first known humans had brains only slightly larger than other apes. Once again, Darwin's predictions have been validated. He was wrong about gradualism being the only mode of evolution, though. He just happened to be right in this case.

Apart from his deeply rooted racism, what scientific evidence could Darwin have for this?

Gradualism is what he repeatedly saw in nature. It is pretty much the rule, but exceptions exist.

We know today the "savage" brain is the same brain as all Homo sapiens.

But it wasn't when humans first evolved, as Darwin accurately determined.

 

[Barbarian]

"It has been asserted that the ear of man alone possesses a lobule; but "a rudiment of it is found in the gorilla"; and, as I hear from Prof. Preyer, it is not rarely absent in the negro."- Descent of Man
White people are not being singled out here, only black people.

People other than black people are being compared to gorillas; while black people are noted to be different. So your story is now that Darwin thought black people were superior?

 

[Barbarian]

Ah, the mental similarities are unimportant or singular in nature because they're explained by a common ancestor. Too bad Darwin didn't put two and two together to figure out there's no biological basis for race.

Notice that he says that all races seem to have the same mental capacities. So that's biological. But they differ in other ways that he infers to be cultural.

 

[Vaccine]

As you see, he's comparing whites to gorillas, since both have that structure, which is often absent in blacks. Are you now claiming he thinks whites are more like gorillas than blacks are?

Where are whites mentioned?
"It has been asserted that the ear of man alone possesses a lobule; but "a rudiment of it is found in the gorilla"; and, as I hear from Prof. Preyer, it is not rarely absent in the negro."- Descent of Man

Notice that here he's showing how blacks (but not other people) are different than gorillas. You seem to have it precisely backwards.

How does that passage say black people are different?

In fact that is what most of the differences in human races is. The fact is, there are no biological human races. Darwin had it right yet again, even though he had no way to prove that all humans were essentially alike. Genetics has since validated Darwin's prediction.

The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate
Charles Darwin The Descent of Man

For whatever reason you resist such facts, it's probably time to make some peace with them

What did Darwin mean by the highest races?
What did Darwin mean by the lowest savages?

 

[Vaccine]

Darwin was a gradualist. So in his view, the first humans could only have had a brain a bit superior to that of other apes. Turns out, he was right about that. The first known humans had brains only slightly larger than other apes. Once again, Darwin's predictions have been validated. He was wrong about gradualism being the only mode of evolution, though. He just happened to be right in this case.

"natural selection could only have endowed the savage with a brain a little superior to that of an ape." -Descent of Man

There is no mention of "first humans".
When Darwin wrote of the first humans, he referred to them as the progenitors of man. When Darwin spoke of contemporary black people he referred to them as savages. So that text is refers to black people currently living at the time he wrote Descent of Man.

Gradualism is what he repeatedly saw in nature. It is pretty much the rule, but exceptions exist.


But it wasn't when humans first evolved, as Darwin accurately determined.

So you're saying gradualism proved black people have a brain a little superior to that of an ape?
Darwin was speculating black people's brain is a little superior to an ape based on their actions. Which is subjective at best, racist at worst. We know black people don't have inferior brains so Darwin was wrong about that point.

 

[Vaccine]

"It has been asserted that the ear of man alone possesses a lobule; but "a rudiment of it is found in the gorilla"; and, as I hear from Prof. Preyer, it is not rarely absent in the negro."- Descent of Man
White people are not being singled out here, only black people.

People other than black people are being compared to gorillas; while black people are noted to be different. So your story is now that Darwin thought black people were superior?

Darwin made it quite clear he thought black people were inferior.
You insert words that aren't there "white people". You insert comparisons that aren't there "people other than black people". And draw erroneous conclusions "black people were superior".
At this point I assume you're just being facetious because it's obvious Darwin's being racist here:
"It has been asserted that the ear of man alone possesses a lobule; but "a rudiment of it is found in the gorilla"; and, as I hear from Prof. Preyer, it is not rarely absent in the negro."- Descent of Man

 

[Barbarian]

I've been belaboring that very point, that Darwin didn't think humans were essentially the same, since post #53. In fairness, he pointed to our mental similarity. But reading the full text we discover:
"Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, as in colour, hair, shape of skull, proportions of the body, etc., yet if their whole structure be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these are of so unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races."

The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate
Charles Darwin The Descent of Man

When you get the full story, it sounds a great deal different, doesn't it?

So you're saying gradualism proved black people have a brain a little superior to that of an ape?

I'm pointing out that Darwin was correct in his prediction that the first humans (who certainly were not the black population we see now) had brains only slightly better than other apes. Darwin really had nothing but his observations of existing populations to make such a prediction, but he got it right. Has nothing to do with racism.

Darwin was speculating black people's brain is a little superior to an ape based on their actions.

See above. He notes how "similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened to be intimate." You seem to have confused Darwin's prediction of very early humans with his observations that the minds of other races are very similar to ours.

His statement clearly shows he didn't think blacks had brains inferior to those of others.

 

[Vaccine]

The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate
Charles Darwin The Descent of Man

When you get the full story, it sounds a great deal different, doesn't it?

Not sure what point you're trying to make with that text. It mentions both mental similarity and races differ as much as any three that can be named.

Here's the full story on mental similarity:
"The races differ also in constitution, in acclimatisation and in liability to certain diseases. Their mental characteristics are likewise very distinct; chiefly as it would appear in their emotional, but partly in their intellectual faculties." -Descent of Man

"No doubt the difference in this respect is enormous, even if we compare the mind of one of the lowest savages, who has no words to express any number higher than four, and who uses hardly any abstract terms for common objects or for the affections, with that of the most highly organised ape." --Descent of Man

"natural selection could only have endowed the savage with a brain a little superior to that of an ape." -Descent of Man" -Descent of Man

"Apes are much given to imitation, as are the lowest savages;"-Descent of Man

"Judging from the hideous ornaments, and the equally hideous music admired by most savages, it might be urged that their aesthetic faculty was not so highly developed as in certain animals, for instance, as in birds." -Descent of Man

"New diseases and vices have in some cases proved highly destructive; and it appears that a new disease often causes much death, until those who are most susceptible to its destructive influence are gradually weeded out (33. See remarks to this effect in Sir H. Holland's 'Medical Notes and Reflections,' 1839, p. 390.); and so it may be with the evil effects from spirituous liquors, as well as with the unconquerably strong taste for them shewn by so many savages."- Descent of Man

"With respect to savages, Mr. Winwood Reade informs me that the negroes of West Africa often commit suicide."-Descent of Man

"The other so-called self-regarding virtues, which do not obviously, though they may really, affect the welfare of the tribe, have never been esteemed by savages, though now highly appreciated by civilised nations."-Descent of Man

"It has been recorded that an Indian Thug conscientiously regretted that he had not robbed and strangled as many travellers as did his father before him. In a rude state of civilisation the robbery of strangers is, indeed, generally considered as honourable."-Descent of Man

"Most savages are utterly indifferent to the sufferings of strangers, or even delight in witnessing them. It is well known that the women and children of the North-American Indians aided in torturing their enemies."-Descent of Man

"Civilised races can certainly resist changes of all kinds far better than savages; and in this respect they resemble domesticated animals, for though the latter sometimes suffer in health (for instance European dogs in India), yet they are rarely rendered sterile, though a few such instances have been recorded."

Far from asserting "all races were essentially the same in their thinking and emotions". Darwin points to numerous differences in mental characteristics between his "civilized races" and the "savage" races. Of course, there's one passage about unimportant mental similarities, which he doesn't even bother to elaborate on. That one example doesn't negate the numerous examples of Darwin's racism.

Also, The text you quoted contradicts assertions you've made about Darwin destroying "the notion that human races were different species".

The full story on Darwin's ideas on race:

"American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named"

"Now if we reflect on the weighty arguments above given, for raising the races of man to the dignity of species, and the insuperable difficulties on the other side in defining them, it seems that the term "sub-species" might here be used with propriety. But from long habit the term "race" will perhaps always be employed."

"So again, it is almost a matter of indifference whether the so-called races of man are thus designated, or are ranked as species or sub-species; but the latter term appears the more appropriate."

"We have now seen that a naturalist might feel himself fully justified in ranking the races of man as distinct species; for he has found that they are distinguished by many differences in structure and constitution, some being of importance."

I'm pointing out that Darwin was correct in his prediction that the first humans (who certainly were not the black population we see now) had brains only slightly better than other apes. Darwin really had nothing but his observations of existing populations to make such a prediction, but he got it right. Has nothing to do with racism.

Nice try but Darwin quote was about savages, not first humans.
"natural selection could only have endowed the savage with a brain a little superior to that of an ape." -Descent of Man" -Descent of Man

See above. He notes how "similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened to be intimate." You seem to have confused Darwin's prediction of very early humans with his observations that the minds of other races are very similar to ours.

His statement clearly shows he didn't think blacks had brains inferior to those of others.

Quite the contrary, Darwin spoke of how inferior their brains were. He wrote about how the lowest savage has "no words to express any number higher than four, and who uses hardly any abstract terms". No wonder he was amazed by the two black people he actually got to know. Too bad those two people didn't make a dent in his racism.

 

[Barbarian]

The full story on Darwin's ideas on race:

"American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named"

The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate
Charles Darwin The Descent of Man

When you get the full statement, it sounds a great deal different, doesn't it?

 

[Vaccine]

The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate
Charles Darwin The Descent of Man

When you get the full statement, it sounds a great deal different, doesn't it?

It's just an aside. It's no different than someone remarking on the mental similarities of a dog or dolphin. Darwin considered that "full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate" to be endowed with "a brain a little superior to that of an ape." No wonder he was "incessantly struck". If Darwin wasn't so racist, he would have no reason to find anything remarkable about the mind of a "full-blooded negro".

Anyone who actually read Descent of Man would see Darwin spent the majority of his book pointing out how superior the white civilized races are and how inferior black people, Indians, and Australians are. Or that Darwin stressed how "unimportant or of so singular a nature" those mental similarities are.

 

[Barbarian]

The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate
Charles Darwin The Descent of Man

When you get the full statement, it sounds a great deal different, doesn't it?

It's just an aside.

Sounds pretty important to me. If Darwin observed that all races have pretty much the same mental capacities, that's inconsistent with the claim that he thought they were inferior.

Notice that the people who handed you the quote you used, deleted the part where Darwin pointed out all humans have similar mental capacities. So it's pretty clear that they thought it was important enough to hide from you.

 

[Vaccine]

The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate
Charles Darwin The Descent of Man

When you get the full statement, it sounds a great deal different, doesn't it?

The full statement:
"Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, as in colour, hair, shape of skull, proportions of the body, etc., yet if their whole structure be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these are of so unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races. The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans are as different from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Feugians on board the "Beagle," with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate."

When you read the full statement, it does sound a great deal different. When you start with "The same remark..." you leave off a crucial part. Your quote sounds as if the numerous points of mental similarity are important. The full text shows the opposite. that they're unimportant. Why did you leave that part out?

Sounds pretty important to me. If Darwin observed that all races have pretty much the same mental capacities, that's inconsistent with the claim that he thought they were inferior.

Notice that the people who handed you the quote you used, deleted the part where Darwin pointed out all humans have similar mental capacities. So it's pretty clear that they thought it was important enough to hide from you.

See above, as usual, the full text above shows the opposite.
If you can produce any examples of those numerous similarities from Darwin I'd be happy to see them. But I read Descent of Man and couldn't find any. What I read was Darwin extolling the differences:

"The races differ also in constitution, in acclimatisation and in liability to certain diseases. Their mental characteristics are likewise very distinct; chiefly as it would appear in their emotional, but partly in their intellectual faculties." -Descent of Man

"Nevertheless, at this early period, the intellectual and social faculties of man could hardly have been inferior in any extreme degree to those possessed at present by the lowest savages; otherwise primeval man could not have been so eminently successful in the struggle for life, as proved by his early and wide diffusion."-Descent of Man

"natural selection could only have endowed the savage with a brain a little superior to that of an ape." -Descent of Man

"Apes are much given to imitation, as are the lowest savages;"-Descent of Man

"No doubt the difference in this respect is enormous, even if we compare the mind of one of the lowest savages, who has no words to express any number higher than four, and who uses hardly any abstract terms for common objects or for the affections, with that of the most highly organised ape." -Descent of Man

"Judging from the hideous ornaments, and the equally hideous music admired by most savages, it might be urged that their aesthetic faculty was not so highly developed as in certain animals, for instance, as in birds." -Descent of Man

"New diseases and vices have in some cases proved highly destructive; and it appears that a new disease often causes much death, until those who are most susceptible to its destructive influence are gradually weeded out; and so it may be with the evil effects from spirituous liquors, as well as with the unconquerably strong taste for them shewn by so many savages."- Descent of Man

"With respect to savages, Mr. Winwood Reade informs me that the negroes of West Africa often commit suicide."-Descent of Man

"The other so-called self-regarding virtues, which do not obviously, though they may really, affect the welfare of the tribe, have never been esteemed by savages, though now highly appreciated by civilised nations."-Descent of Man

"It has been recorded that an Indian Thug conscientiously regretted that he had not robbed and strangled as many travellers as did his father before him. In a rude state of civilisation the robbery of strangers is, indeed, generally considered as honourable."-Descent of Man

"Most savages are utterly indifferent to the sufferings of strangers, or even delight in witnessing them. It is well known that the women and children of the North-American Indians aided in torturing their enemies."-Descent of Man

"Civilised races can certainly resist changes of all kinds far better than savages; and in this respect they resemble domesticated animals, for though the latter sometimes suffer in health (for instance European dogs in India), yet they are rarely rendered sterile, though a few such instances have been recorded."-Descent of Man

"So again, it is almost a matter of indifference whether the so-called races of man are thus designated, or are ranked as species or sub-species; but the latter term appears the more appropriate."-Descent of Man

"We have now seen that a naturalist might feel himself fully justified in ranking the races of man as distinct species; for he has found that they are distinguished by many differences in structure and constitution, some being of importance."-Descent of Man

If Darwin wasn't so racist in the first place, he wouldn't have been so incessantly struck by the mental similarities of a black person in the second place.
Imagine someone spending their whole life believing a person with green eyes had a brain little superior to that of an ape, that they couldn't count higher than 4, that they couldn't think in abstract terms, that they are prone to suicide and drinking, and classifying green eyed people as a sub-species is appropriate. Then during a voyage they become intimate with a green eyed person and to their shock, discovered a green eyed person had numerous similarities.
Yet, after that discovery, still writing a book saying all those idiotic things.
What's wrong with Darwin that after having his core beliefs challenged, he doubled down on his nonsense and dismissed the mental similarities as unimportant?
Because at his core he was racist. Not the kind to shoot black people on sight, just the kind that thought they shouldn't be allowed to breed.

 

[Barbarian]

When you read the full statement, it does sound a great deal different. When you start with "The same remark..." you leave off a crucial part. Your quote sounds as if the numerous points of mental similarity are important.

Well, let's take a look..

"Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, as in colour, hair, shape of skull, proportions of the body, etc., yet if their whole structure be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these are of so unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races.

First, Darwin is talking about differences in structure, not minds.
Second, even if he was, he's pointing out that it's highly unlikely that they were evolved after races appeared.

What Darwin did assert was that humans, no matter how superficially different they might be, turn out to be essentially the same in their mental capacities. BTW, Darwin got this one right, too. The Human Genome Project showed that there is more genetic variation within "races" than there is between them. There are no biological human races; race in humans is a cultural construct. And Darwin suspected this, although he couldn't prove it.

 

[Vaccine]

Well, let's take a look..

"Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, as in colour, hair, shape of skull, proportions of the body, etc., yet if their whole structure be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these are of so unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races.

First, Darwin is talking about differences in structure, not minds.
Second, even if he was, he's pointing out that it's highly unlikely that they were evolved after races appeared.

Is that your answer for leaving out a crucial part that fundamentally changes the quote?

You brought up the text regarding mental similarities. I pointed out how the earlier part about "Many of these are of so unimportant" Again, why did you leave that part out?

What Darwin did assert was that humans, no matter how superficially different they might be, turn out to be essentially the same in their mental capacities. BTW, Darwin got this one right, too. The Human Genome Project showed that there is more genetic variation within "races" than there is between them. There are no biological human races; race in humans is a cultural construct. And Darwin suspected this, although he couldn't prove it.

The one quote you pointed to actually says the opposite. Plus, Darwin own words contradict your assertion:

"Their mental characteristics are likewise very distinct; chiefly as it would appear in their emotional, but partly in their intellectual faculties." -Descent of Man

"natural selection could only have endowed the savage with a brain a little superior to that of an ape." -Descent of Man

"Nevertheless, at this early period, the intellectual and social faculties of man could hardly have been inferior in any extreme degree to those possessed at present by the lowest savages; otherwise primeval man could not have been so eminently successful in the struggle for life, as proved by his early and wide diffusion."-Descent of Man

 

[Barbarian]

Well, let's take a look..

"Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, as in colour, hair, shape of skull, proportions of the body, etc., yet if their whole structure be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these are of so unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races.

First, Darwin is talking about differences in structure, not minds.
Second, even if he was, he's pointing out that it's highly unlikely that they were evolved after races appeared.

Is that your answer for leaving out a crucial part that fundamentally changes the quote?

I pointed it out to you. Darwin was speaking of differences in structures being unimportant, not the similarities in mental processes he noted among different races.

You brought up the text regarding mental similarities. I pointed out how the earlier part about "Many of these are of so unimportant" Again, why did you leave that part out?

I didn't. See above. I pointed it out. It's still above. And again, he noted that these differences in structure are unimportant and are unlikely to be racial anyway.

The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate
Charles Darwin The Descent of Man

"natural selection could only have endowed the savage with a brain a little superior to that of an ape." -Descent of Man

I'm pointing out that Darwin was correct in his prediction that the first humans (who certainly were not the black population we see now) had brains only slightly better than other apes. Darwin really had nothing but his observations of existing populations to make such a prediction, but he got it right. Has nothing to do with racism. As you just learned, the first known humans had brains only slightly larger than those of other apes.

Since blacks have brains essentially as large as those of other humans, Darwin could not possibly have been referring to blacks in his mention of "savages" in this context. Because you are so eager to find something racist in this, you missed that entirely. As you now see, Darwin's prediction was precisely correct. The first humans had brains only slightly greater than those of non-human apes.

Notice habilis is one of the earliest humans. Neandertals had brains slightly larger than anatomically modern humans, mostly because they were much more muscular which requires larger brains.

 

[Barbarian]

c

 

[Vaccine]

I'm pointing out that Darwin was correct in his prediction that the first humans (who certainly were not the black population we see now) had brains only slightly better than other apes. Darwin really had nothing but his observations of existing populations to make such a prediction, but he got it right. Has nothing to do with racism. As you just learned, the first known humans had brains only slightly larger than those of other apes.

Since blacks have brains essentially as large as those of other humans, Darwin could not possibly have been referring to blacks in his mention of "savages" in this context. Because you are so eager to find something racist in this, you missed that entirely. As you now see, Darwin's prediction was precisely correct. The first humans had brains only slightly greater than those of non-human apes.

Darwin wasn't talking about the first humans:

"If we look back to an extremely remote epoch, before man had arrived at the dignity of manhood, he would have been guided more by instinct and less by reason than are the lowest savages at the present time."-Descent of Man
"Hence the progenitors of man would have tended to increase rapidly; but checks of some kind, either periodical or constant, must have kept down their numbers, even more severely than with existing savages."-Descent of Man

"Perhaps the art of making rude canoes or rafts was likewise known; but as man existed at a remote epoch, when the land in many places stood at a very different level to what it does now, he would have been able, without the aid of canoes, to have spread widely. Sir J. Lubbock further remarks how improbable it is that our earliest ancestors could have "counted as high as ten, considering that so many races now in existence cannot get beyond four."-Descent of Man


Obviously Darwin made a distinction between progenitors, earliest ancestors, and "savages". According to Darwin "savages" are:

"With respect to savages, Mr. Winwood Reade informs me that the negroes of West Africa often commit suicide."-Descent of Man

"Some savage races, such as the Australians, are not exposed to more diversified conditions than are many species which have a wide range." -Descent of Man

"On the other hand, as Buchner has remarked, how little can the hard- worked wife of a degraded Australian savage, who uses very few abstract words, and cannot count above four, exert her self-consciousness, or reflect on the nature of her own existence."-Descent of Man

"This is manifestly the case with the Australian, Mongolian, and Negro races of man;" -Descent of Man

"The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla."-Descent of Man

So Darwin defined "savages" as "Australian, Mongolian, and Negro races of man;". Darwin included modern black people in his assessment they had a brain little superior to an ape. Injecting a term that isn't there or redefining a term Darwin himself defined completely alters the meaning. Why would you do that?

Darwin could not possibly have beet referring to blacks in his mention of "savages" in this context

In case in isn't clear Darwin meant modern savages, aka "Australian, Mongolian, and Negro races of man", in that context, Darwin also wrote:

"The principle of IMITATION is strong in man, and especially, as I have myself observed, with savages."-Descent of Man
"Apes are much given to imitation, as are the lowest savages;"-Descent of Man
"natural selection could only have endowed the savage with a brain a little superior to that of an ape." -Descent of Man

There's no doubt Darwin included black people in that quote. Still think Darwin isn't racist?

 

[Barbarian]

Darwin included modern black people in his assessment they had a brain little superior to an ape.

You shouldn't fear black people. As you learned, Darwin was talking about the first men, not black people. And Darwin was quite aware that black people have brains not significantly different than other people.

And as you also learned, Darwin was quite right. The first humans had brains only slightly larger than other apes.

There's no doubt Darwin included black people in that quote.

Give the facts, there's no chance of that. Darwin was, as you learned, aware that blacks have brains pretty much like the rest of us. But he accurately predicted that the first humans would have much smaller brains.

 

[Vaccine]

You shouldn't fear black people. As you learned, Darwin was talking about the first men, not black people. And Darwin was quite aware that black people have brains not significantly different than other people.

And as you also learned, Darwin was quite right. The first humans had brains only slightly larger than other apes.



Give the facts, there's no chance of that. Darwin was, as you learned, aware that blacks have brains pretty much like the rest of us. But he accurately predicted that the first humans would have much smaller brains.

This is so painfully simple. We start with defining terms:

"With respect to savages, Mr. Winwood Reade informs me that the negroes of West Africa often commit suicide."-Descent of Man

So Darwin's term "savages" include black people. Not just any people but present day black people Mr Reade knew of. But just to be sure Darwin didn't mean people from a long time ago:

"The principle of IMITATION is strong in man, and especially, as I have myself observed, with savages."-Descent of Man

So Darwin's savages include people has observed, as in present day, extant, current, contemporary, black people. Australians and Mongolians are also labelled savages elsewhere. Now that we know who Darwin was talking about we can further connect the dots with this quote:

"Apes are much given to imitation, as are the lowest savages;"-Descent of Man

Given the above quotes it's no wonder Darwin concluded this about savages he himself observed:

"natural selection could only have endowed the savage with a brain a little superior to that of an ape." -Descent of Man

It's obvious Darwin meant to say present day "Australian, Mongolian, and Negro races of man" have a brain little superior to an ape. But the idea idea Darwin meant the "first humans" is further debunked with these quotes:

"Hence the progenitors of man would have tended to increase rapidly; but checks of some kind, either periodical or constant, must have kept down their numbers, even more severely than with existing savages."-Descent of Man

"Sir J. Lubbock further remarks how improbable it is that our earliest ancestors could have "counted as high as ten, considering that so many races now in existence cannot get beyond four."-Descent of Man

If the quote was "...endowed the progenitors of man with a brain a little superior to that of an ape." or "...endowed the earliest ancestors with a brain a little superior to that of an ape." Then yes, you might have a case. But the quote reads:

"natural selection could only have endowed the savage with a brain a little superior to that of an ape." -Descent of Man
All we have to do is look at what Darwin wrote to see the revisionist history version of Darwin is a myth.