It’s the birthday of evolution, how far have we come?
Darwin hot takes from the mid 1800s to today
157years ago today Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species was published, his theory of evolution had entered the public domain for the first time. Reactions were strong.
Darwin’s theory questioned intelligent design and purpose in nature; to accept his theory meant questioning religious scriptures. Not surprisingly, fundamentalist Christians hated it. But a surprising number of believers fit it into their existing religious views, through what is termed “theistic evolution.” Like many religious people today, they didn’t take the bible literally, but as a set of metaphors.
People often see Darwin’s theory as antithetical to the notion of a creator, and modern atheists use acceptance of it as a lynchpin of rational pro-science secularism, but Darwin himself stated in the conclusion of the book:
“…probably all the organic beings which have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first breathed by the Creator.” (Page, 428)
That’s right, militant atheists, Darwin was not one of you, he practiced theistic evolution. He said he had “no intention to write atheistically” and admitted he couldn’t bring himself to “view this wonderful universe and especially the nature of man” and conclude that “everything is the result of brute force.”
The theory did undermine religious authority and gave people alternative answers to how things came to be, however, leading to more atheism. It also opened up discourse around many things that people didn’t think to question. The most famous formal debate happened seven months after publishing, at Oxford. The participants included Thomas Henry Huxley, who was known as “Darwin’s bulldog” for being such a ferocious defender and promoter of his theory. One person on the anti-evolution side was Bishop Samuel Wilberforce.
Huxley and Wilberforce had famously cutting and insulting exchanges in the debate. A report from The Morning Chronicle had Wilberforce asking why “anyone would be so jubilant that his great great grandfather was an ape or a gorilla.” It was also recounted in an October 1898 issue of Macmillan’s Magazine that he turned to Huxley “with a smiling insolence, he begged to know, was it through his grandfather or his grandmother that he claimed his descent from a monkey?” to which Huxley replied “He was not ashamed to have a monkey for his ancestor; but he would be ashamed to be connected with a man who used great gifts to obscure the truth.” A woman was said to have fainted as a result of that sick burn.
Darwin didn’t suggest that humans had evolved from monkeys explicitly in his first book, but people made that logical leap. A decade later he would explore the idea in the The Descent of Man. The most iconic reaction to it was an illustration depicting Darwin’s head atop an ape’s body.
Other reactions were strong and damning. A 1871 New York Times headline asked: “Is Man Merely an Improved Monkey?”
The proceeding article was not kind. The author stated flatly, “There is nothing in Mr. Darwin’s book to shake the faith of any man, unless that faith already rests upon sand.” Clearly he was not aware Darwin himself was a man of faith. He went on to point out that “the boundless arrogance of some of Mr. Darwin’s followers may lead them to assert that they have proved everything.” Missing the fact Darwin did not set out to do any damage to Christianity, he triumphantly declared that:
“Their efforts to overthrow the whole structure of the Christian religion have not by any means succeeded.”
The writer was furious Darwin didn’t address the notion of an immortal soul, which evolutionary theory called into doubt. After all, if animals didn’t have souls, and we evolved from animals, then how could we? He lamented that Darwin’s followers dismissed the soul as “one of those “old wives’ fables” which it is our duty, in this age of progress, to discard.” What do they offer in place of it, he asked? “The sublime theory that monkeys were our progenitors, and that we were once gifted with ‘caudal appendages.’”
A few years later, in 1887, the uncle of future president Woodrow Wilson was tried for heresy at the religious college where he worked, for believing in and teaching evolution. The verdict was “not guilty, but be careful not to do it again.” Skip to the 20s and a pro-evolution sermon stated, “Those who oppose the true teaching of evolution therefore are hurting Christ. They may not mean to do it, but they are doing it.” Fast forward to 1939 and one church leader called it “A greater danger to our country than the dictators who were keeping the world in turmoil,” and given the situation in Europe at the time, that was quite a statement.
Now, in 2016, Trump is President-elect and considering Ben Carson, who is anti-evolution, for a high-level cabinet position. Clearly the human race has some more evolving to do.
