Thomas Huxley nsIn existographies, Thomas Huxley (1825-1895) (IQ:170|#337) [RGM:530|1,500+] (Gottlieb 1000:799) (CR:126) was an English natural philosopher, nicknamed “Darwin’s bulldog”, noted for his argumentative advocacy of English naturalist Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution; social chemistry philosophy; atheism discussion; materialism logic; coining of the term "agnostic" (1869); among other erudition.

Huxley-Wilberforce debate
See main: Huxley vs Wilberforce debate
On 30 Jun 1860, Huxley, seven months after the publication of his friend Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species, famously debated Bishop Samuel Wilberforce. [14] Huxley, according to Christopher Hitchens (Ѻ), mopped the floor with Wilberforce, commenting that the debate was similar to the 1925 “Scopes Monkey Trial” debate.

Laws of nature
In 1868, Huxley penned his “A Liberal Education and Where to Find It” essay, wherein he gave a few well-apt quotes on the laws of nature and that if anything is to be called "education" this must be its focus: [10]

“Education is the instruction of the intellect in the laws of nature, under which name I include not merely things and their forces, but men and their ways; and the fashioning of the affections and of the will into an earnest and loving desire to move in harmony with those laws. For me, education means neither more nor less than this. Anything which professes to call itself education must be tried by this standard, and if it fails to stand the test, I will not call it education, whatever may be the force of authority, or of numbers, upon the other side.”

“It is a very plain and elementary truth, that the life, the fortune, and the happiness of every one of us, and, more or less, of those who are connected with us, do depend upon our knowing something of the rules of a game infinitely more difficult and complicated than chess. It is a game which has been played for untold ages, every man and woman of us being one of the two players in a game of his or her own. The chessboard is the world, the pieces are the phenomena of the universe, the rules of the game are what we call the laws of nature.”


Social chemistry
In 1871, Huxley coined the both the terms "social chemistry" and "social molecule", as follows: [1]

“Every society, great or small, resembles ... a complex molecule, in which the atoms are represented by men, possessed of all those multifarious attractions and repulsions which are manifested in their desires and volitions, the unlimited power of satisfying which we call freedom ... the social molecule exists in virtue of the renunciation of more or less of this freedom by every individual. It is decomposed, when the attraction of desire leads to the resumption of that freedom the expression of which is essential to the existence of the social molecule. The great problem of social chemistry we call politics, is to discover what desires of mankind may be gratified, and what must be suppressed, if the highly complex compound, society, is to avoid decomposition.”

In 1962, in commentary on Huxley's call for the development of social chemistry, Austrian sociologist Werner Stark commented: [8]

“Why should no social chemistry ever been developed?” He states that “nobody would suggest that the social scientists should imitate meteorology, for this discipline does not appear to have got very far … but what about chemistry? A sociology based on chemistry [has] in fact been called for, but, significantly, [this call has] found no echo. It would have been easy to take up this suggestion and develop it further. An intending social chemist would have found it one whit more difficult to manufacture a sociological parallel to the Boyle-Charles law than Haret did to the Newtonian propositions. But the experiment appears never to have been tried. Why?”


Non-living world | Defunct theory of life

See main: Life terminology upgrades
Huxley is often cited as having the mindset that he expected the gap between the non-living and living things to be bridged. (Ѻ) The following are example quotes:

“The elements of living matter are identical with those of mineral bodies; and the fundamental laws of matter and motion apply as much to living matter as to mineral matter; but every living body is, as it were, a complicated piece of mechanism which ‘goes’, or lives only under certain conditions.”
— Thomas Huxley (1880) [7]

“In the living world facts of this kind are now understood to mean evolution from a common prototype. It is difficult to imagine that in the non-living world they are devoid of significance. It is probable that they mean that evolution of our elements from a primary undifferentiated form of matter.”
— Thomas Huxley (c.1885) [13]


Consciousness | Movement
In 1901, Huxley stated the following so-called "zombie argument", as it is called in modern consciousness debates:

“The argument which applies to brutes [zombies] holds equally good of men … It seems to me that in men, as in brutes, there is no proof that any state of consciousness is the cause of change in motion of the matter of the organism.”

Meaning that, according to Huxley, consciousness is NOT the cause of change in motion of human (see: Library walk problem).

Huxley's demon
See main: Scientific demons
Huxley stated an evolution version of Laplace’s demon as such: [4]

“If the fundamental proposition is true, that the entire world, living and not living, is the result of the mutual interaction, according to a set of definite laws, of the forces possessed by the molecules of which the primitive nebulosity of the universe was composed, it is not less certain that the existing world law, potentially, in the cosmic vapor, and that a sufficient intellect could, from a knowledge of the properties of the molecules of that vapor, have predicted, say the state of the Fauna of Great Britain in 1869, with as much certainty as one can say what will happen to the vapor of the breath in a cold winter’s day.”

This “sufficient intellect” might be categorized as Huxley’s demon.

Huxley seems to have been the inspiration for the now-famous evolution timeline drawings, supposedly as found in (or derived from) his book 1863 Man’s Place in Nature:

Human and ape skeletons (Huxley)
Ape to human evolution display (skeletons)
Left: drawing by Benjamin Hawkins attributed to (in some way) Huxley's 1863 Man’s Place in Nature [2] Right: Display: "The Evolution of the Ape to Human" at the Peabody Museum, Yale University. [3]
Noted grandchildren of Thomas Huxley include: writer and human entropy theorist Aldous Huxley, who wrote about entropy, second law, and the soul in many of his works, and chnopsologist (biologist) Julian Huxley, who had views on anti-entropy and evolution. In a curious anecdote, Julian, at age four, after reading Charles Kingsley's The Water Babies, and finding his grandfather mentioned, wrote to him:

"Dear Grandpater have you seen a Water-baby? Did you put it in a bottle? Did you wonder if it could get out? Can I see it some day? Your loving Julian."

To which Thomas replied: "I never could make sure about that Water Baby. I have seen Babies in water and Babies in bottles" but the baby in water was not in a bottle and the Baby in the bottle was not in water." [5]

A noted student of Huxley was Lloyd Morgan who's 1929 work Mind at the Crossways expanded on his mentor's use of the "animalcule" concept.

Quotes | On
The following are quotes on Huxley:

Huxley, in his Place of Man in Nature (1863), very ably discussed this most important consequence of evolution, according to which, with the aid of comparative anatomy and ontogeny, and the support of the facts of palaeontology, he proved that the ‘descent of man from the ape’ is a necessary consequence of Darwinism, and that no other scientific explanation of the origin of the human race is possible.”
Ernst Haeckel (1899), The Riddle of the Universe (pg. 82)

Quotes| By
The following are quotes by Huxley:

Mind [or consciousness] is a function of matter, when that matter has attained a certain degree of organization.”
Thomas Huxley (1871), “Mr. Darwin’s Critics”; paraphrase version cited by Lee Strobel [2]

“Religions rise because they satisfy the many and fall because they cease to satisfy the few.”
Thomas Huxley (c.1870), Undated note (Ѻ)

“It may be asked if even-handed justice has eve yet been dealt out to the sages of antiquity, who for eight centuries, from the time of Thales to that of Galen, toiled at the foundations of physical science.”
— Thomas Huxley (1877), “Science” (pg. 323) [11]

“Boyle did a great service to science by his Skeptical Chemist, I am inclined to think that, at the present day, a Skeptical Biologist might exert a equally beneficent influence.”
— Thomas Huxley (1877), “Science” (pg. 380) [11]

“All physical science starts from certain postulates. One of them is the objective existence of a real world.”
— Thomas Huxley (1887), cited by Mellor (1922), in: chapter twelve “Thermodynamics and Thermochemistry” [12]

“Few literary dishes are less appetizing than cold controversy.”
— Thomas Huxley (1892), Prologue to Controverted Questions (Ѻ)(Ѻ)

1. Huxley, Thomas. (1871). “Administrative Nihilism”, Fortnightly Review, pg. 536. Nov.
2. (a) After T. H. Huxley (by permission of Messrs. Macmillan); SKELETONS OF THE GIBBON, ORANG, CHIMPANZEE, GORILLA, MAN; Photographically reduced from diagrams of the natural size (except that of the gibbon, which was twice as large as nature) drawn by Mr. Waterhouse Hawkins (1807-1894) from specimens in the Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons.
(b) Thomson, J. Arthur. (1922). The Outline of Science, Vol 1. (of 4) (pg. 161). G.P. Putnam’s Sons.
(c) Ape skeletons (diagram) – Wikipedia.
3. Evolution (article) –
4. Bergson, Henri. (1911). Creative Evolution (pg. 44). H. Holt and Co.
5. Ball, Philip. (2011). Unnatural: the Heretical Idea of Making People (pg. 167-68). Vintage Books.
6. Water babies (image) – Wikipedia.
7. (a) Huxley, Thomas. (1880). Science Primers: Introductory (§65: Living Bodies differ from Mineral Bodies in their Essential Composition, in the manner of their Growth, and in the fact that they are reproduced by Germs, pg. 92). Publisher.
(b) Pearson, Karl. (1900). The Grammar of Science (pg. 329). Adam and Charles Black.
8. Stark, Werner. (1962). The Fundamental Forms of Social Thought. (pgs. 261-63). Routledge.
9. Guzeldere, Guven. (1997). “Epiphenomenalism and the Possibility of Zombies”, in: The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates (editors: Ned Block, Owen Flanangan, Guven Guzeldere) (pgs. 41-42). MIT Press.
10. (a) Huxley, Thomas H. (1868). “A Liberal Education and Where to Find It” (Ѻ), in: Collected Essays III. Publisher.
(b) Dozier, Rush W. (1992). Codes of Evolution: the Synaptic Language Revealing the Secrets of Matter, Life, and Thought (pg. 71). Crown Publishers.
11. Huxley, Thomas. (1887). “Science”, in: Reign of Queen Victoria: a Survey of Fifty Years of Progress (editor: Thomas Ward) (§:322-87; Thales, pg. 323; Boyle, pg. 380). J.B. Lippincott Co.
12. (a) Mellor, Joseph W. (1922). A Comprehensive Treatise on Inorganic and Theoretical Chemistry, Volume One (real world, pg. 688). Longmans.
(b) Mellor, Joseph W. (1922). A Comprehensive Treatise on Inorganic and Theoretical Chemistry, Volume Two. Longmans.
13. Bray, Henry T. (1910). The Living Universe (pg. 165). Truro Publishing Co., 1920.
14. 1860 Oxford evolution debate – Wikipedia.

Further reading
● Huxley, Thomas H. (1862). On the Physical Basis of Life. C.C. Chatfield, 1870.
● Huxley, Thomas H. (1863). On Our Knowledge of the Causes of the Phenomena of Organic Nature. London: Robert Hardwicke.
● Huxley, Thomas. (1889). Agnosticism and Christianity: a Controversy. Publisher.

External links
Thomas Henry Huxley – Wikipedia.

TDics icon ns