The reluctant Mr. Darwin: an intimate portrait of Charles Darwin and the making of his theory of evolution

2007 ◽  
Vol 44 (10) ◽  
pp. 44-5638-44-5638
Author(s):  
Derek Partridge

The decade from 1844 to 1854 in which Charles Darwin first published two books and then studied barnacles for the final eight years has long been a puzzling digression from the development of his theory of evolution. This essay proposes that it was a conjunction of two quite different activities: a three-year pause initiated to assess and hopefully finalize the editorial completion of his 1844 Essay for publication, followed by a step-change decision to redirect his primary research activity in late 1847. A disenchantment hypothesis is proposed; it presents the step-change decision as a consequence of weighing up the accumulated unencouraging prospects for species-theory development in competition with the emergence of promising projections associated with a broad study of marine invertebrates. Recognition of the triumph, as Darwin initially saw it, of his Essay, followed by years of hostile inputs, opens this new route to understanding this decade. Within it Joseph Hooker emerges as a significant causal force. Many of the customary ‘postponement’ explanations of this digression can be integrated with this pause-and-step-change explanation, whereas explanation of the interval as a gap due to a pre-planned activity cannot, and is revealed to be seriously faulty.


Author(s):  
Samir Okasha

In 1859 Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species, in which he set out his theory of evolution. The book marked a turning point in our understanding of the natural world and revolutionized biology. ‘Evolution and natural selection’ outlines the theory of evolution by natural selection, explaining its unique status in biology and its philosophical significance. It considers how Darwin’s theory undermined the ‘argument from design’, a traditional philosophical argument for the existence of God; how the integration of Darwin’s theory with genetics, in the early 20th century, gave rise to neo-Darwinism; and why, despite evolutionary theory being a mainstay of modern biology, in society at large there is a marked reluctance to believe in evolution.


2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 333-350
Author(s):  
BILL JENKINS

AbstractThis paper draws on material from the dissertation books of the University of Edinburgh's student societies and surviving lecture notes from the university's professors to shed new light on the debates on human variation, heredity and the origin of races between 1790 and 1835. That Edinburgh was the most important centre of medical education in the English-speaking world in this period makes this a particularly significant context. By around 1800 the fixed natural order of the eighteenth century was giving way to a more fluid conception of species and varieties. The dissolution of the ‘Great Chain of Being’ made interpretations of races as adaptive responses to local climates plausible. The evidence presented shows that human variation, inheritance and adaptation were being widely discussed in Edinburgh in the student circles around Charles Darwin when he was a medical student in Edinburgh in the 1820s. It is therefore no surprise to find these same themes recurring in similar form in the evolutionary speculations in his notebooks on the transmutation of species written in the late 1830s during the gestation of his theory of evolution.


Author(s):  
Michael Ruse

The modern usage of the term Darwinism dates from the publication of On the Origin of Species, by Charles Darwin, in which he argued for evolution through natural selection. Very soon after the appearance of the Origin (in 1859), Darwin’s great supporter Thomas Henry Huxley introduced the term Darwinism. The term—together with the related terms Darwinian and Darwinist—took root. The codiscoverer of natural selection, Alfred Russel Wallace, used the term as the title of a book expounding evolution: Darwinism: An Exposition of the Theory of Natural Selection, with Some of Its Applications. Note that there seems to be a fuzziness about the term. Some identify Darwinism with evolution through natural selection. Others suggest that the essence of Darwinism is not selection per se but change or variation. Late in the 19th century, George Romanes coined the term neo-Darwinism to cover those for whom natural selection is basically the only significant cause of change. In 1930 Ronald A. Fisher, in his Genetical Theory of Natural Selection, argued that the newly developed theory of Mendelian genetics offered the required foundation for a perspective that made natural selection the central force of evolutionary change. Although the British were happy to call the Darwin-Mendel synthesis neo-Darwinism, in America the synthesis was known as the synthetic theory of evolution. This reflects that in the New World it was Sewall Wright who did the foundational work in bringing Mendelian genetics into the evolutionary picture and that he never thought of natural selection as being the force that Fisher took it to be. For Wright and his followers, especially Theodosius Dobzhansky, genetic drift was always a major component of the evolutionary picture, and as Fisher pointed out nonstop, this is about as non-Darwinian a notion as it is possible to have. By 1959 professional evolutionists (on both sides of the Atlantic) agreed that Darwin had been right about natural selection: it is the major cause of evolutionary change. Neo-Darwinism fell into disuse, as everyone now used the term Darwinism for evolution through natural selection. Mention should also be made of so-called social Darwinism, the application of Darwinism to persons and groups within society. The earliest use apparently was during Darwin’s own lifetime, by a historian discussing land tenure in Ireland. However, it was not a popular or general term, coming into widespread use only in the 1940s, with the publication of the American historian Richard Hofstadter’s book Social Darwinism in American Thought.


1999 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 483-484
Author(s):  
GEORGE BECCALONI

BSHS members might be interested to learn that an organization named the ‘A. R. Wallace Memorial Fund’ has recently been established in order to restore and protect the hitherto neglected grave of Alfred Russel Wallace (1823–1913), one of the greatest tropical naturalists of the nineteenth century. Wallace is best known as being the co-originator, with Charles Darwin, of the theory of evolution by natural selection, and for his book The Malay Archipelago, which is regarded as one of the most important of all Victorian travel works.Wallace is buried together with his wife Annie in Broadstone Cemetery, Dorset. The grave is marked by an unusual and striking monument: a seven-foot tall fossilised conifer trunk from the Portland beds mounted on a large cubic base of Purbeck stone. Unfortunately, the monument has not been properly maintained for many years and it is now in poor condition. Furthermore, the lease on the grave has only fourteen years left to run before it expires, after which there is a danger that the plot could be used for another burial.The primary aims of the Wallace Memorial Fund are to restore the monument, apply for it to be officially listed by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, and to extend the lease on the plot. A. R. Wallace's grandson Mr Richard Wallace (who is the treasurer of the Fund) plans to transfer the lease to the Linnean Society of London once the restoration work has been completed. This will ensure the grave's long-term protection.A secondary aim of our project is to commission English Heritage to produce a commemorative ceramic plaque and install it on ‘The Dell’ (Grays, Essex), where Wallace lived from 1872 to 1876. This is the only surviving one of three houses which Wallace built (it is currently a convent) and he wrote his important book The Geographical Distribution of Animals there. It is also notable in being one of the first houses in Britain to have been constructed of concrete.The total cost of the project will be approximately £4955. Contributions to date total £3000 leaving £1955 still to be raised. If any members of the Society would like to make a donation then cheques should be made payable to ‘The A. R. Wallace Memorial Fund’ and sent to Dr G. W. Beccaloni, A. R. Wallace Memorial Fund, c/o Entomology Department, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, South Kensington, London SW7 5BD (Tel. 0207 942 5361, E-mail: [email protected]).


Joseph Dalton Hooker was eight years the junior of Charles Darwin (1809-82) and lived twenty-nine years after Darwin’s death. He was, for a long period, the personal friend of Darwin and the frank critic of many of Darwin’s researches and of the botanical aspects of Darwinian theories. Hooker was a botanist and, since he had an extensive first-hand experience of many branches of botany, above all of plant taxonomy and phytogeography, it was naturally the botanical aspects of evolutionary problems which both interested him and concerning which he was best able to help Darwin. Such help was gratefully and fully acknowledged by Darwin, as is shown by published correspondence. Numerous letters passed between Darwin and Hooker and the latter visited his friend at Down and stayed there for periods of varying length. A considerable amount of living material was obviously supplied from Kew for the later botanical experiments Darwin carried out at Down. The assistance given by Hooker in the accumulation of facts and in criticism of theories preparatory to the publication of the Origin of species and later works of Darwin, his presenting (with Lyell) and reading Darwin’s communication to the Linnean Society of London on 1 July 1858 introducing the theory of natural selection, and his influence in gaining the speedy general acceptance of the theory of evolution are well known and it is not necessary to consider them here in much detail. It is proposed, instead, to outline very briefly the salient facts in the life of J.D. Hooker and then to devote the major part of this essay to a consideration of the development of his views on the problems of species, phytogeography, and evolution. In part at least, this means considering the influence of Darwin on Hooker but, from a wider viewpoint, it is possible to form some conception of the clarifying and unifying effects of the acceptance of the general theory of evolution on biological thought.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-70
Author(s):  
Đorđe Petronić ◽  
Igor Vujović

In a joint publication with Alfred Russell Wallace, Charles Darwin presented the theory which stated that all life forms were developed by natural selection in which the fight for survival had the effect similar to artificial intelligence applied to selective breeding. Despite a coincidence of views concerning the origin of life, these two scientists had their disagreements. Wallace argued that intelligence could have never arisen through the process of natural adaptation, but rather as a consequence of intelligent design. On the other hand, Darwin insisted that human intelligence could only be explained by the theory of evolution. This difference in point of views on the matter is a manifestation of the difference in the efforts to answer the question: "Why are people so intelligent?" In this context, the main aim of the study is to present a literature review concerning evolutionary psychology and to provide an explanation of the evolution of human intelligence. In other words, the study seeks to explain why people are able to accomplish such intellectual exploits as the ones found in mathematics, science, philosophy, law, etc., bearing in mind that such abilities or talents cannot be found in the original human habitat. The results have showed that evolutionary psychologists consider humans to be so intelligent due to the fact that they have evolved to fill the "cognitive niche". The cognitive niche is a survival mode characterized by managing the environment through mediating cognition and social cooperation.


2008 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven A. Gelb

When Charles Darwin turned his attention to writing about human descent in 1871 he attempted to narrow the fossil gap between human beings and higher primates by presenting persons with intellectual disabilities — "idiots" in the language of the day — as evidence in support of the theory of evolution. This paper explores the four ways that Darwin used persons with intellectual disabilities in The Descent of Man: 1) as intermediate rung on the evolutionary ladder connecting humans and primates; 2) as exemplars of the inevitable waste and loss produced by natural selection acting upon variability; 3) as the floor of a scale representing the "lowest", most unfit variety of any species when individuals were rank ordered by intelligence; and 4) as atavistic reversions to extinct forms whose study would reveal the characteristics of earlier stages of human evolution. Darwin's strategic use of intellectual disability is brought to bear on the controversy regarding the mental state of Darwin's last child.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 291-303
Author(s):  
Y. V. Subba Rao

In this study, a new hypothesis of evolution is proposed. Genetic complexity provides a plausible hypothesis of the evolution of life on Earth and is supported by ample evidence from different perspectives. The current theory of evolution and natural selection proposed by Darwin is accepted in biology, plausibly, for want of a more viable alternative in based on the recent advances made in cell biology, molecular biology, and genetics. The proposed hypothesis of evolution based on the different perspectives of genetic complexity addresses the two critical areas of advanced complex life of Cambrian explosion and the development of even more complex and intricate human brain in contradistinction to the Evolution Theory envisaged by Charles Darwin.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document