skip to content

Darwin Correspondence Project

From S. T. Preston   8 August 1880

25 Reedworth Street | Kennington Road SE | London.

Aug 8th. 1880

Dear Sir

I thank you for your frank and open expression of views in your last letter.1 I can appreciate that there may be an appearance to justify a prejudice as to writing on several subjects in my case. But I think it will be—so far—admitted that as science progresses, it becomes all the more difficult to separate into distinct branches— that Ethics (for instance) cannot in the present day be treated apart from Physics: and minds are so differently constituted that each must (I think) try to do his best & hope to be judged by results, irrespective of connecting circumstances. But I venture to think (if I may be allowed the opinion) that a spirit of exclusiveness may tend sometimes to be carried too far. Thus (as an example), the modern Vortex-Atom theory might be thought at first sight an exclusively mathematical subject. But it has its physical side.2 Mental capacities (as is known) tend to develop in grooves. A man therefore (possibly) might be competent to do something on the physical side of this theory, because his capacity did not run high in the mathematical direction. Yet I can well imagine that a non-mathematician who attempted to suggest anything in regard to this theory (however carefully he might have thought it out) would run the risk of being considered à priori presumptuous. Yet I think he should not withold what he has to suggest on that ground. The essential fact of the borders of all subjects encroaching on each other, gives (as it seems to me) an occasional chance for an outsider to step in and say a word with advantage—and may it not be beneficial sometimes for minds of extremely diverse capacities all to be brought to bear on one and the same subject: their sum being then equivalent to (the rare instance of) one mind developed in a large number of directions at once.

As regards experimental work, I quite appreciate what you say as to the value of this, & have already (under drawbacks) given some time to it. From the exceptional nature of my career and the great disadvantages I have been under through the effects of religious dogma (which I can well imagine it may be difficult to realize), I do not expect to achieve much; but what satisfaction I have will be that of doing original work to the best of my capacity. I hope you will excuse these particulars and not think that I wish to draw you into a correspondence on personal matters which can be of very little interest to you.

Your’s truly | S Tolver Preston

P.S. I do not know if you may have seen (through Prof Tyndall perhaps) the pamphlet Physics & Ethics.3 If so, I should merely like to say that the strong materialistic stand-point taken up there is more apparent than real. But, as a fact, I was not so much concerned in the preparation, excepting in the Ethical portion of it. Those who are unaware of the time and thought expended by my friend4 on this pamphlet, might perhaps think the critical tone adopted in places somewhat bold.

Charles Darwin Esqr FRS &c.

Footnotes

CD’s letter has not been found. Preston had sent CD a copy of his paper ‘Natural science and morality’ (Preston 1880a; see letter from S. T. Preston, 5 August 1880 and n. 6).
The theory that atoms were vortices in a perfect fluid or ether was first developed by William Thomson (see W. Thomson 1867 and W. Thomson 1880); it stimulated research on fluid dynamics as well as abstract mathematical models of matter and motion (see Preston 1880b and Kragh 2002).
John Tyndall. The pamphlet was [Seaton] 1879).
Preston’s friend was William Sharpey Seaton.

Bibliography

Kragh, Helge. 2002. The vortex atom: a Victorian theory of everything. Centaurus 44: 32–114.

Preston, Samuel Tolver. 1880a. Natural science and morality. Journal of science 3d ser. 2: 443–62.

Preston, Samuel Tolver. 1880b. On the physical aspects of the vortex-atom theory. Nature, 20 May 1880, pp. 56–9.

[Seaton, William Sharpey.] 1879. Physics and ethics: the conservation of energy and free will: scientific imagination and the origin of knowledge: the ascent of man and the basis of right and wrong. London: Harrison and Sons.

Thomson, William. 1867. On vortex atoms. Philosophical Magazine 4th ser. 34: 15–24.

Thomson, William. 1880. Vortex statics. Philosophical Magazine 5th ser. 10: 97–109.

Summary

Appreciates what CD says about his writing on two diverse subjects. Argues for value of "interdisciplinary approach". Has CD seen the pamphlet, "Physics and ethics" which he co-authored with an anonymous friend?

Letter details

Letter no.
DCP-LETT-12683
From
Samuel Tolver Preston
To
Charles Robert Darwin
Sent from
London, Reedworth St, 25
Source of text
DAR 174: 63
Physical description
ALS 3pp

Please cite as

Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter no. 12683,” accessed on 29 March 2024, https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=letters/DCP-LETT-12683.xml

letter