Would "Evolution of Species" be a better term than "Origin of Species"?

Question

Based on what we know today about Darwin's theory would "Evolution of Species" be a more appropriate title for his research?

The term "origin" seems to overly credit his findings.

What say you?

Answer 1

It is origin of species, not origin of life. And there is substantial evidence of speciation both in the fossil record and in the genetic record.

Answer 2

The full title was: On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life



I think that's pretty descriptive.



Don't blame Darwin for the fact that we are too lazy to use it all.

Answer 3

yes, evolution of species.

definitely not origin..

people today still dont know our origins first origins

Answer 4

Sure but we all today have an understanding of the term evolution. Back in the 18hundreds, not many people had even heard of the term.

Answer 5

Yeah, Im up for using cha!, lets start a trend....every question answered from now on? I've just done 2 questions with cha, if something is really amazing can we use chachacha or is that a bit 'dancey'?

Answer 6

I see nothing about the word "origin" that is arrogant or inappropriate. I think he knew what he meant when he wrote the book, and it's about the origin of species. Pure and simple.



atheist

Answer 7

Since evolution did have an origin, I think that Darwin's use of the word origin is more encompassing. The word evolution is pretty much a given that is used to explain the origin as well as the evolution.

Answer 8

I agree. The book doesn't really explain the origin of species, just the evolution of them.

Answer 9

No. His theory explains why life is DIVERSE and why there is more than one type of animal. Therefore, it explains the ORIGIN of the existence of different species.



PS why is this in R&S?

Answer 10

Evolution of Species , Big gang is about origin of species :-) sorry chiki chiki bang bang...

Answer 11

What happened before the Big Bang? What caused singularity of the Big Bang? Where did the encoded information contained in DNA come from? How did inorganic molecules gain the complexity required to become organic? Can Darwins, "Origin of Species answer any of these questions? Can any of you Atheists answer these questions?

Answer 12

The origin of species refers to the evolution of individual organisms, not the origin of life. "Species" is the key word.



You're actually trying to address the hypothesis known as abiogenesis.

Answer 13

Based on the fact that theory has been proved wrong, who cares what you call it,

If that theory was correct why do we not have giraffes flying planes, I don't see monkeys evolving, oh and fossil evidence has already proved him wrong, there also hasn't been enough time for that theory to work, Darwin said he hoped fossil evidence would prove it, well it has disproved him, also Darwin repented before he died, and spent the last few years of his life reputing his theory cause he knew it was wrong so we call it scientifically not just

Answer 14

Darwin's theory partly explains why new species arise.

Answer 15

It is not actual evolution but cross breeding. And it can also happened to humans when their is cross breeding between you and monkey. it can be done on artificial insimination if you do not want personal contact. with the money. and mayb e this is where the atheist came from .( crossbreed with the monkeys) and mayb e procreated through experiment to breed the moneky to humans.

jtm

jtm

Answer 16

No,origin is the word.No evolution took place,otherwise it could still be taking place.

Answer 17

Sounds a bit too much like Original sin...

That sucks..

Answer 18

His book...his Title. What training or education do you have that would qualify you to even think of renaming his book?

Answer 19

hmm, maybe if your wrote the book you could name it.