Talk:Asa Gray

This passage under “Relationship with Darwin” troubled me because it seemed inconsistent with Gray’s support of Darwin.

Gray strongly objected to the idea of transmutation of species but not special creation. Perceiving law in the universe, he saw all species "that they not only had a Creator but have a Governor".[129].

“Special creation” rules out the ability of natural selection to produce new species. I was not able to consult the book referenced in the note, but I did find something written by Gray that supports his rejection of special creation. Arguing against the “anti-evolution” arguments of Dawson’s The Story of the Earth and Man, Gray clearly rules out “special creation” as an appropriate explanatory argument.

This belief [that evolution is “bad and irreligious”], and the natural anxiety with which [Dr. Dawson] contemplates their prevalence, may excuse a certain vehemence and looseness of statement which were better avoided, as . . . where he despairingly suggests that the prevalence of the doctrines he deprecates "seems to indicate that the accumulated facts of our age have gone altogether beyond its capacity for generalization, and, but for the vigor which one sees everywhere, might be taken as an indication that the human mind has fallen into a state of senility.

This is droll reading, when one considers that the "evolutionist" is the only sort of naturalist who has much occasion to employ his "capacity for generalization" upon "the accumulated facts" in their bearing upon the problem of the origin of species; since the "special creationist," who maintains that they were supernaturally originated just as they are, by the very terms of his doctrine places them out of the reach of scientific explanation.

— Asa Gray, “The Attitude of Working Naturalists Toward Darwinism [VI-1]” original published in The Nation (October 16, 1873) and reprinted in Darwiniana.^[1]

I am no expert and came here for basic information. I don’t think I know enough to edit the article, but I am concerned that Gray is being misrepresented. Tpmpmurphy (talk) 02:32, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Here's exactly what the paragraph says:

He left no doubt that he considered the idea of the transmutation of the species instead of special creation most objectionable both theologically and philosophically. He saw the "unity we perceive in nature" to which "sound science has ever delighted to point, as the proof that all direct handiwork of a single omniscient Creator." He saw law operating in the universe, to be sure, but the regularity with which the species reproduced their like impressed him "that they not only had a Creator, but a Governor". He felt that "abler pens than ours have shown, that the agencies now in operation will not account for the origin of any created thing." To Gray, creation did not limit itself to the beginning of time, and, while admitting that land animals did not appear til a late geologic era, "we are still to be convinced that they were not then created as perfect as they are now." The direct creative agency of the Deity was "the only cause, so far as we yet know, which will account for the facts." Those who "adopt the other view, and carry the principle nec Deus intersit to this length, are bound to show that natural agencies are competent to produce such results as these. The burden of proof rests upon them."

HalfGig talk 01:32, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I have to agree that special creation is not what Asa Gray favoured. Agassiz's view that all species were created even with the exact geographic distributions that they now cover, would match that more closely, but Gray is arguing for natural selection being "governed" by a creator. "One, indeed, who believes, from revelation or any other cause, in the existence of such a Creator, the fountain and Source of all things in heaven above and in the earth beneath, will see in natural variation, the struggle for life, and natural selection, only the order or mode in which this Creator, in his own perfect wisdom, sees fit to act."^[1] I've attempted to clarify.

Sminthopsis84 (talk) 21:17, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much. HalfGig talk 22:11, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Asa Gray. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080101115037/http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk:80/darwinletters/namedefs/namedef-1957.html to http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/darwinletters/namedefs/namedef-1957.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100622010615/http://www.huh.harvard.edu/libraries/asa/ASABIO.html to http://www.huh.harvard.edu/libraries/asa/ASABIO.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:15, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

One of this article's main authors did not wish to edit down the Dupree biography to its essentials, but rather converted it into this article! Meaning that the wealth of little details normally found in a full-volume biography is not pared down sufficiently to make the narrative which an encyclopedia article requires. Time of death, to the minute, geographic extent of a cemetery, and similar factoids clogged up this article. Anyone who has the time may continue declogging this otherwise useful and interesting article.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

This has been worked on. HalfGig talk 22:10, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Asa Gray. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150102023446/http://studentaffairs.stonybrook.edu/res/housing_facilities/reshalls_apts/mendelsohn.shtml to http://studentaffairs.stonybrook.edu/res/housing_facilities/reshalls_apts/mendelsohn.shtml
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/darwinletters/namedefs/namedef-1957.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:10, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

'Gray is a critical link in the history of American intellectualism, and his writings that argue that religion and science are not necessarily mutually exclusive have been considered his supreme accomplishment;^[1]'

Just one source is cited for this, but it is clearly a controversial opinion, since it is based on someone's agreeing with the notion that religion and science - or, specifically, Christianity and Darwinism - are, well, 'not necessarily mutually exclusive'. The cited author might agree with it, but many others would disagree. At a minimum, more sources would be appropriate. Furthermore, this seems to be the only basis of a similar, but actually different claim found in the lede: 'his Darwiniana (1876) was considered an important explanation of how religion and science were not necessarily mutually exclusive'. This is a claim about the past, presumably about how his work was viewed his contemporaries (or perhaps by people in some following generations, but not our contemporaries). But, since the claim is different from the one for which Dupree is cited, that means that it isn't sourced at all. ~2025-31121-91 (talk) 02:19, 19 November 2025 (UTC)