Talk:Georges Cuvier

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, now in the public domain.

	France Portal Georges Cuvier is within the scope of WikiProject France, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments, explaining the ratings and/or suggest improvements.)

	This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

"l'ervir de l'histoire" ????--MWAK 3 July 2005 15:03 (UTC)

That's of course servir, silly...It's amazing how often the mistake was mirrored! :o)--MWAK 5 July 2005 17:57 (UTC)

[edit] Evolution

This article does not say anything about Cuvier's biological theories. When I accessed this page, I was looking for information about the relation between Cuvier's theory and Darwin's. (I vaguely believed that Cuvier and Lamarck were evolutionist biologists before Darwin and wanted to investigate this issue) --> I was very disappointed to read only about Cuvier's personal life

Cuvier didn't believe in evolution. He thought that animals were functional wholes, and would die if any part were to become modified. Smallweed 09:30, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I came looking for information on catastrophism. General biology texts typically describe catastrophism as one of Cuvier's primary contributions with catastrophe's wiping out local populations, and the areas being recolonized from surrounding unaffected areas. This is how his explanations of the changes in the fossil record are depicted. I also understand that Cuvier's description of the geologic record is a significant and still valid contribution. I have read none of his original work, and am not about to parrot a gen. bio. interpretation into the primary page, but I would welcome comments from those familiar with his work on the typical big-picture view of Cuvier's work. Do Catastrophism and geologic record belong on the page? Should the fossil record page credit Cuvier's contributions? The Wikipedia page on Catastrophism certainly links it to Cuvier; a reciprocal link would seem appropriate. My thoughts:) Cheers! (DMC jan 29 06)

You're very right about what's missing from this article. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to deal with it now (and would need to read a good biography to make sure I got it right), but this article needs a "Work" section after the life part.--ragesoss 16:27, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely. Srnec 05:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I haven't addressed this in detail, but I have reordered the entire article, which was very much still the 1911 text, and showed some evidence of poor translation from French. If I can find good sources for further general discussion of his work I'll stick it in. Myopic Bookworm 17:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cuvier's principle?

Strange that there is no mention of "Cuvier's principle": that the part is related to the whole, so that it may be possible to reconstruct an entire unknown animal from as little as one bone:

"Cuvier saw organisms as integrated wholes, in which each part's form and function were integrated into the entire body. No part could be modified without impairing this functional integration: ... the component parts of each must be so arranged as to render possible the whole living being, not only with regard to itself, but to its surrounding relations, and the analysis of these conditions frequently leads to general laws, as demonstrable as those which are derived from calculation or experiment." (Sorry, can't reference the quotes). Which, by the by, explains why C. was opposed to the notion of evolution.

You are correct, he did say that and it was the root of his opposition to evolution. Something else that is missing from this article is a discussion of the concept of extinction, which was one of his key early contributions to paleontology. As I recall he was the first person to state categorically that fossils were the remains of creatures, now extinct, fundamentally different from modern animals. I believe that later in his career he also observed that there had been a succession of different faunas represented in the fossil record (which was the root of his ideas about catestrophism)) with the more recent fossils becoming progressively more similar to existing animals. I am going to do some serious research and see if I can't add a little perspective to this article. It is very strong at listing his professional accomplishemnts but I think it could be a little better at summarizing why that work was so important. Rusty Cashman 01:22, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I just made some significant additions and edits to the article that I think cover all the comments on this page. I was also able to work in some facts such as the fact that Cuvier was the first to demonstrate that African and Indian elephants were different species, and his important work on megatherium. In general I think the article now does a better job of explaining what some of Cuvier's work was about rather than just listing publications. I also added a few nifty external links including a link to a translation of his Discourses.Rusty Cashman 07:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Influences and Influenced in Infobox

Influences were Lamark and Buffon, to say nothing of Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire. In turn, Cuvier influenced many comparative anatomists, paleontologists, and geologists. Infobox is neat trick for this article. Scientific awards could be included in this infobox. --Wloveral (talk) 19:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure "influenced" makes much sense for a figure like Cuvier who influenced the entire scientific world, but one thing that doesn't seem to be in article at all is his work with Alexandre Brongniart on the geology of the Paris region which helped establish stratigraphy as a science. Rusty Cashman (talk) 16:09, 21 May 2008 (UTC)