Jump to content

Talk:David Starr Jordan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Talk

[edit]

In late March 1891, Leland Stanford, appointed an energetic young scholar, David Starr Jordan of Indiana University, to head the fledgling university and mature with it. He had little time in which to recruit professors and design a curriculum by the university's Oct. 1 opening. Jordan found that established scholars in the East were reluctant to move to an unproven school in the West, so he turned to promising younger scholars, many from his alma mater, Cornell.

Two years later, in 1893, Senator Stanford died, and his estate was snarled in legal proceedings that threatened the life of the university. For "six pretty long years," as Jordan later summed up the difficult experience, the future of the university was in doubt. But Jane Stanford's determination, the courage of the pioneer faculty and their families, the faith that the community outside the campus placed in them and the buoyant energy of those early-day students sustained the university.

Once the estate was released from probate, Jordan was eager to build the academic program, but Mrs. Stanford wanted to see constructed the rest of the buildings she and her husband had planned -- the Outer Quad, Memorial Church, the Chemistry Building, a new library and a new gymnasium. Jordan came to call this period of construction the university's "stone age." Mrs. Stanford died in 1905; she saw fulfilled her "fondest wish . . . to live long enough to give to you young students all the requisite buildings planned by the founders."

But on April 18, 1906, a violent earthquake wrecked many of the new buildings and caused considerable damage to others. Jordan had been offered the position of secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, a job he now declined as he looked forward to rebuilding the university: "I am sure that my place is here," he wrote to a friend. "I can now, I believe, weld this institution together. I need some years to complete this. Then the institution will be beautiful, with a great library, adequate apparatus, a strong and well-paid faculty and a small but selected and effective body of students. . . . I shall stay with the poppies, the perfect sunshine and the shadow of the great temblor."

Stanford University's western, entrepreneurial spirit was evident through and beyond the period of rebuilding that followed the earthquake. Jordan's early faculty appointees became eminent in their fields, and in places far from California, Stanford graduates were earning reputations in their professions that reflected well on their alma mater.

In 1913, Jordan assumed the new post of chancellor, so that he could devote himself to the peace movement. When he died in 1931, he had spent half of his 80 years at Stanford.-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.64.170.57 (talk) 11:15, 19 February 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Appleton's

[edit]

I originally composed this from scratch so as to avoid the dreaded Appleton's material, now hard to tell how much it's been "infected". Should be scrubbed at some point. Stan 16:19, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Not to rain on the parade, but Stanford's emergence had more to do with Ronald Reagan than Jordan. When Ronald Reagan became Governor of California, he slashed the University of California budget. Stanford University benefited from the resultant brain drain, much of it at the expense of UC Berkeley.EdwardG 19:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletions

[edit]

This used to be a longer article - in September 2007, looks an anon deleted about 1/3 of it, and nobody noticed... Stan (talk) 21:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan Hall at Butler University was named for local businessman Arthur Jordan--not David Starr Jordan.12.186.80.1 (talk) 18:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)Misemici[reply]

Article?

[edit]

Lulz, looks little more than a C.V. to me.67.190.86.13 (talk) 00:55, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on David Starr Jordan. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 00:33, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Update Needed for Jordan Middle School in Palo Alto

[edit]

The school has been renamed after a campaign to change the name due to DSJ's views on eugenics. http://padailypost.com/2018/03/28/board-renames-2-schools-terman-become-fletcher-jordans-new-name-greene/ I still need to learn how to edit properly so that is why I'm writing it here (and probably making a mistake)

It has been taken care of. WolfmanSF (talk) 15:10, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"A Study of the Decay of Races Through the Survival of the Unfit"

[edit]

This (quote) is the subtitle of Jordan's book from 1902 and it suggests he would have been proud to be identified as a racist. Influential promoters, pushing a view from the top, were an important pathway by which racism flowed into our culture and became systemic during this period after the civil war and the end of slavery. Our world was further broken by this mistake and we are still trying to recover. These racists talked about fish and farm animals but never took the time to define the goal of what an ideal human being from such a breeding project should be like: Jesus Christ or Augustine or Emily Dickinson or Joan of Arc or Homer or Isaac Newton or Ellen Craft or Tolstoy or Gandhi or Sacajawea or Frederick Douglass or Jane Austen? Why would hair and skin color (denoting so-called "race") be considered nearly as important as the cultural contributions that came thru the exchange of different narratives and ideas? Looking back at human evolution, isn't it obvious that ideas (including the exchange of ideas) were always far more important than the physical traits of our awkward and vulnerable bodies? With their impoverished imaginations and stunted yet zealous view of human "progress", these racists were certainly unable to envision so many thousands of wonderful and influential people who would become popular in their dawning 20th century.

Instead of racism, "eugenics" seems to be the term greatly favored in the article in its current form (June 22,2020). This word carries some negative connotations but it also retains the soft quality akin to the word that describes what it is: a euphemism. It was appealing at the time because it was a euphemistic and expert-sounding way to describe murder and forced sterilization. Additionally, in the current article this word has been carefully surrounded by other warm expressions, such as that Jordan was a "peace activist." WWII suggests the results of applied racism were not peaceful. We can also find many critics of these racist ideas in the same time period (see, for instance, Tolstoy's letter to Gandhi in 1908).

History at its most elemental form can be considered instructions to future generations of what in the forest is edible and what is poison. Racists loudly promoted what turned out to be a deadly poison and their mistaken views resulted in some of the greatest human suffering this world has seen. Those of us who take on the role of being editors of this encyclopedia have a responsibility to be clear about that, especially when we find jarring examples within our own beloved institutions of learning. Lewismr (talk) 15:09, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Racism and eugenics are not the same. One could still promote (or oppose) eugenics in a world where everyone was of the same race. WolfmanSF (talk) 21:46, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm assuming you agree that it makes most sense for editors here to use the same terms Jordan used. I haven't (yet) found the term 'eugenics' in his work including the quote provided by a previous editor (in the Career section) introducing it as "his version of eugenics." Lewismr (talk) 14:38, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Are your views based on the title he used, or from actually reading the book? WolfmanSF (talk) 18:49, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've read it and it is thankfully short. Hastily written according to the author. Evidently so. More review to come.Lewismr (talk) 20:54, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I actually just made an account to join this discussion; please forgive any mistakes in wikipedia etiquette on my part (and let me know if I make any), I'm learning as I go. Lewismr, isn't the point of an encyclopedia to present facts, not opinions? As uncontroversial as it is, "racism is bad" is an opinion, not a fact, just as declaring anything "good" or "bad" is opinion. Also, the fact that Jordan didn't use the term "eugenics" doesn't mean he wasn't a eugenicist, does it? I'm not trying to be combative, I just think we need to tread carefully on sensitive topics like this one.DrPeepus (talk) 05:37, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Talk page is a forum where editors can informally express personal views. I think it helps make this encyclopedia stronger and more interesting than those that came before. But I understand that it also pulls back the veil and might be disconcerting if we prefer to think of historians as sphinx-like. I think you and I can agree that pseudo-scientific racism was consequential in the 20th c. and Jordan (like the contemporary Woodrow Wilson at Princeton) had an influential position over young scholars in the first few decades of that century. I agree with you that it is accurate to refer to him as a eugenicist but not as a substitute. Lewismr (talk) 14:10, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. I misunderstood the point of the talk page. I thought contributions here were always advocating for changes to the related article, so I read your post in that light. I agree with the points you made re racism and Jordan's influence, but the two points aren't connected until it can be shown that Jordan helped make pseudo-scientific racism consequential through his influence over young scholars. DrPeepus (talk) 02:40, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"War and Breed" (1915) contains DSJ's statements on both Race and Eugenics

[edit]

DSJ describes this publication in his autobio (p. 619) as "extended treatise on the same subject [of Blood of a Nation/Human Harvest] in which I gathered together all material then available." Further describing this work in the main article might also aid with our ongoing discussion (above, including WolfmanSF) and in some of the editorial comments, with regard to DSJ's zealous concern regarding race (aka racism) and eugenics. Unlike the various versions of Blood of a Nation/Human Harvest, where the word "eugenics" is missing, in 1915 DSJ does begin to use the term and attributes the coining of it to Francis Galton, dating a definition to 1904, and also describing the opposite of eugenics as "dysgenics." https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=XEVSAQAAMAAJ&pcampaignid=books_web_aboutlink Lewismr (talk) 16:06, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cattle and Men

[edit]

As offended as I am by much of what he said, I'm a bit baffled by the claim in the introduction that he asserted that cattle and human beings are "governed by the same laws of selection." From my knowledge of biology, all living things are governed by the same laws of selection. That was Darwin's point. Later in the article, it clarifies that Jordan was comparing "… a race of men or a herd of cattle…" He was referring to what was called "the white race." It's the way he used the word "race" that makes the idea offensive, but that word is missing from the introduction. We need to rethink that sentence, or maybe remove it completely from the introduction. (It's fine in the later exposition.) There are plenty of other examples of offensive things he said that would better illustrate his dangerous ideas. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 07:53, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious about your last sentence— examples? In current form, footnote 2 links directly to the DSJ quote you mention and it falls near the beginning of the essay that he re-worked and re-published many times and that would seem to be his best attempt to apply his biased pseudo-scientific and since-discredited theories of Social Darwinism onto human beings in a way that could only lead to murderous social policies, applied by the powerful onto the vulnerable. It seems foundational to his convoluted and wrong-headed argument. Lewismr (talk) 17:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We need more balance in the "monuments and memorials" section

[edit]

This article is very, very unbalanced when it comes to the “Monuments and memorials” section. Instead of listing the things that were named after him - names that survived in his honor for decades - it only reports on their renaming. Even the subject headings are about the renaming rather than the naming. This is recentism inappropriate for an encyclopedia. I propose to change the schools section as follows, keeping appropriate references:

Schools named or formerly named for David Starr Jordan

During the 20th century several schools were named after him or in his honor. However, most of them were renamed in the 21st century, as his eugenics activities became well known.

Comments? -- MelanieN (talk) 23:48, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since there has been no objection I am implementing this change. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:10, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Human Betterment Foundation/Committee on Eugenics membership unsubstantiated

[edit]

There are two main claims made under the "Human Betterment Foundation" section. Both claims are unsubstantiated. To the extent the claims were directly contradicted by the primary sources already cited on this page, the claims have been edited. To the extent the claims are unsubstantiated, they fall far below encyclopedic standards, and I seek help as explained below. I have not yet edited those claims, as such a change might involve removal of the entire section.

I hoped that I could substantiate the claims myself on a search of academic materials & the Library of Congress, but could not find anything supporting the claims, hence this thread. If we cannot find primary/contemporary secondary citations, the claims will be redrafted to conform to the available evidence. As a side note: the internal Wikipedia hyperlinks are completely in conflict with accepted style and link to somewhat-related topics or incorrect pages, throughout this section.

Claim 1: Purported Human Betterment Foundation Membership: Only Primary Source is Posthumous and Interested

The linked, archived, partial newspaper clipping (current cite 35) of the purported 1928 HBF membership is from, at earliest, 1931, the year of Jordan's death -- since it lists David Starr Jordan as "(Dec'd)," i.e., deceased. The second citation (current cite 36) simply does not make or describe the claim for which it is cited: that Jordan was a member of the HBF. In one paragraph, the cited source mentions that Jordan earlier in life wrote a eugenicist article, while in another, it mentions that the HBF was an important group in American eugenics. Given that the article discusses so many figures (and organizations), and nowhere does it state that Jordan was a member of the HBF, it certainly is not properly cited for that claim. I have corrected a previously-more-egregious version that listed Jordan as serving on the Board of the HBF, which is directly contradicted by the partial newspaper clipping posthumously listing him as a lay member.

It's worth noting that the newspaper clipping is written by the HBF in order to show off its many prominent members: especially given that this necessarily comes after Jordan's death, and therefore also years after his disability, not a great source. I searched for reputable sources to back up this claim, in the hopes that I could flesh this article out myself. After some looking, I was able to find the following cite:

Briggs, Jill, "Human Betterment Foundation (1928-1942)". Embryo Project Encyclopedia ( 2013-07-10 ). https://hdl.handle.net/10776/5915. Last modified September 11, 2023.

However, the above citation only repeats this page's recent, mistaken claim: that Jordan was a member of HBF's first Board of Trustees (directly contradicted by our only piece of primary evidence, cite 35, supra). Since none of that article's citations correspond facially to this claim, I fear the claim was simply taken from Wikipedia as truth and inserted into the academic publication. None of the HBF publications in the Library of Congress list Jordan as an author or member (rather, all either E. S. Gosney or Paul Popenoe). I was able to find one other academic article that made the same claim, but again, cited only to another publication which did not actually mention Jordan whatsoever. There's a pattern here: Jordan's involvement in these organizations seems rooted only in a chain of citations that do not lead to primary or contemporary secondary sources.

All that said: with the early days of the HBF being squarely within Jordan's slow death from a series of five strokes, and his membership in other organizations (but not this one) being mentioned in his obituary (cite 55), I think we need more in order to keep this claim of his membership during life on the page, or else edit the body to reflect that Jordan was first mentioned as a member only after his death. I don't think the record supports any other claim. Please post here if you can find primary or contemporary secondary sources on his membership during life.


Claim 2: Purported Committee on Eugenics Membership and Scope of Committee Impact: No Substantiation Whatsoever

The narrative describes that David Starr Jordan "then [some time after he was deceased? or perhaps while he was disabled?] chaired the first Committee on Eugenics of the American Breeder's Association[.]" The citation that follows (current cite 37) neither mentions Starr, whatsoever, nor the Committee, at all. There is no basis for this claim. The other claim -- that the Committee is responsible for Californian sterilization programs -- is also unfounded and, based on the chronology stated by this section (HBF involvement and "then" Committee involvement), is anachronistic. California's sterilization program began around 1910, long before the HBF even existed. If the scholarship for the previous claims was thin, then the scholarship for these claims is non-existent.

As above: we need a real citation (for (1) his membership and (2) the Committee's use/existence) in order to keep this claim on the page, or else I will edit the body to remove it. I don't think the record supports any other claim. Please post here if you can find primary or contemporary secondary sources on those topics.

Thank you for your help. I will follow up after some time and, if we cannot find primary/contemporary secondary sources to justify the current drafting, I will edit the section to reflect the posthumous HBF membership claim and remove the other, unsubstantiated claims. If his HBF membership and/or Committee membership are unsubstantiated or evidently untrue, then those claims are also irrelevant to this article and would be removed. If the Committee's purported task is unsubstantiated, but Jordan was evidently a member, then participation in that Committee will be relocated to the general, "Eugenics" section. Whatever the result, I will also fix the poor internal hyperlinking in this section.

If anyone believes that the posthumous HBF membership claim should also be removed or limited further, please discuss. Although it's not my inclination, I can see how removal would be appropriate: the newspaper clipping is incomplete, and posthumous claims of celebrity/academic endorsement for an unestablished political advocacy organization should probably be approached with skepticism. I believe rewording it to say that HBF posthumously claimed him as a member seems to describe our sources fully and accurately, but as a fundamental rule of this encyclopedia, not every claim merits mention. 2603:900A:19F0:2670:F589:3DBF:5E55:D623 (talk) 21:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:David_Starr_Jordan&oldid=1243518645"