__"Autobiography of Darwin"

(LOSS OF A PARENT) "When my mother died, I was eight years and half. Catherine was one year less. Yet she remembers all details and events of each day. Myself, I remember of nearly nothing... I remember my mother's dress but it is hardly if I remember how she looked...
      There is a second version: " I practically don't remember anything of her, except her bed of death, her velvet dress, and her sewing-table, curiously made.
       Then Darwin presents a strange explanation: " I believe that my absence of memories is incumbent partly upon my sisters, who, because of their grief, never wanted to ever speak or to pronounce her name...)
         Commentary of the publisher: " When one knows that Darwin preserved so few memories of her mother and none of her funeral, he is maybe interesting to signal that the only another incident of which he kept memory, is a soldier's funeral ceremony, "I remember distinctly the horse, the man's empty boots, his suspended carbine to the saddle, as well as the salvo on his tomb... "
Obviously the comment of an "outside autism" fellow!

    OTHER EPISODE, a visit to the sea, toward the age of 4 years: "I remember of nothing with the exception of the maids, (but I have no memory of their individuality), I remember by no means of my family's members that was present... I remember being nasty, having been shut in a room of which I tried to break the window...
    RESEARCH OF SOLITUDE: "Very young, I had a strong taste for the lone walks... One day, I made a fall of 7/8 feet, (2 to 2.50 meters). The number of thoughts that crossed my mind during this very short and quite sudden fall, is astonishing and seem with difficulty compatible with what established, I believe, by physiologists, i.e. that any thought necessarily requires a quantity no negligible of time."

(LOCOMOTIVES) " His mother shared his husband's botanical and zoological enthusiasm (With his father, his grandfather, (dead 8 years before his birth), Darwin had as many 'mentors' as me!!! 

    Daniel Becquemont, Magasine littéraire, mars 1999,page 24-26:
AGAINST SCHOOLING " Darwin showed a marked hostility for the classic education system. While at the Faculty of Medicine, he found some courses "intolerably boring ".
INDEPENDANCE ET PERSONAL RESEARCHES: He went to Cambridge for a career of churchman. He remained there three years, that he considered thereafter like " a loss of time ". Actually, he had acquired strong bases on sciences of Nature, and a precious collection of bugs, source of other students' jokes.
Being married, he rarely moved, avoiding public meetings but receiving a lot and corresponding with naturalists of all countries...
Never finishing, like VINCI, because of opening new horizons: His first notebooks, begun in 1837, became very quickly a summary of about twenty pages, then a treaty of 200 pages that he never intend to publish. During 20 years he accumulated data... In 1856, he began to write a treaty that was never finished...

One of the strangest pages in Philosophy:
Daniel C. Dennett, "DARWIN'S DANGEROUS IDEA",
  (Simpson & Schuster, 1995, page 21:
    "If I were to give an award for the single best idea anyone has ever had, I'd give it to Darwin, ahead of Newton and Einstein and everyone else. In a single stroke, the idea of evolution by natural selection unifies the realm of life, meaning, and purpose with the realm of space and time, cause and effect, mechanism and physical law"
   (Read also Roger Scruton, "Modern Philosophy", Penguin, 1995, pages 355 seq.
     We could collect a listing of praises on his work. I choose a text by Lorentz, remarcable on the creative role of  subconscient, use of statistics inconscioulsy dominated ; and, proof of any true genius: an opening on a century of researches:
  "Like all really great scientific discoverers, Darwin possessed an almost uncanny ability to reason on the basis of hypotheses which were not only provisional and vague but also subconscious. He deduced correct consequences from facts more suspected than known, and verified both the theory and the facts by the obvious truth of the conclusions thus reached. In other words, a man like Darwin knows much more than he thinks he knows, and it is not surprising that the consequences of his knowledge reach far and in different directions. Many different branches of biological research have been inspired by him, and each is claiming him, with equal right, as its particular originator and pioneer. What is surprising is the extent to which further research, based on Darwin's hypotheses and pursuing them in every conceivable direction, has invariably proved him right on every essential point..."
Call to papers!
   Now, we must  "break" this theory, probably the way to consolidate it. 
   Any detail can be important and searching them needs a long patience. :
   Extracts from Wilma George, "Darwin", Fontana,  1982:
   Page 13, on "autist inertia":
       "Darwin had been preparing a book for years..."
   Pagina 7, on " autist agitation", once awaken:
     "Wallace's impetus seems to have set Darwin going in earnest and expectation was rife as to the forthcoming book." (Thomas Henry Huxley). Darwin received the note of Wallace in 1958 while he had made his first comments in his notebook in 1839.
    Page 13, on the  "dispersion of Vinci":
   "Darwin had been preparing a book for years. It is difficult  to be precise about how long because he always worked on several projects at the same time...
Popper and Darwin:
    Darwin was commented as much as Descartes. Nobody  can prove Evolutionism is a science, if we demand the strict definition, (established by geOS, cosmOS and AtomOs), with a predictive value. I wish we could put a percentage of "authority" for all authors. In some case we should indicate a percentage of "intentionality": evolutionism is a nice "demo" of the reaction of all previous noodigms against a new comer. 
    Popper did for Einstein what Locke did for Newton.  Opinion of the thinker of atomOS, (he correctly refused that label of science for Freudism or Addlerism that pretended to have entered psychOS):
    "Evolutionary theory is not science but a "metaphysical research program", 
(because it can't be "refuted"). 
   Darwin had already said it: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, not formed by numerous, successive light modification, my theory would absolutely break down..." ("break!" is quite a Popperian word! and I  adopted it as a motto, as a summary for my creative theory).
    A theory is just an explanation with serious basis. Einstein proved that even Newton's description was just an hypothesis.
     Later, Popper "recanted":
       "I have changed my mind about the testability and the logical status if the theory of natural selection, and I am glad to have an opportunity to make a recantation".
    The great scientist opens a century of researches, (like Pasteur). And I prefer "thinkers" that bequeath an awful lot of papers, (Wittgenstein, Peirce...) 
    A new noodigm is announced by an intense "philosophical" activity, (like the Einstein circle). I therefore don't care if we are still in the "research program" opened by Darwin. 
   With a change: Darwin could not know  the genetic theory, which is the base of all mutations. But now we can "experiment" and some are rightly afraid byt possible "refutations". So the correct position should be:
    Mayr, (1963): "The theory of evolutionism is quite rightly called the greatest unifying theory in biology". 
    Patterson, (1978): "The basis of biological science... unifies and directs work in all sorts of specialised fields, from medicine to geology...
 Practically, Nature "plays dice" and we should accept this insecurity. It would be a good preparation to enter "psychOS", and to meet the usual opposition of all precedent noodigms...