Category: October 6 (Page 2 of 3)

Janet Browne spoke very eloquently and passionately about Darwin and his legacy. But throughout her lecture, I became more and more interested in hearing about the other evolutionists and their discoveries prior to Darwin. It is hard not to know who Darwin is and what he discovered. He has become socially understood as the “Father of Evolution.” However as Janet pointed out, his discoveries were grand, but not entirely revolutionary. His connection with the finches and theory of survival of the fittest certainly was new news, but Darwin was inspired by other evolutionists. And I am now curious as to what was discovered prior to Darwin. The picture that is painted in classrooms, history books, and society was Darwin made a discovery that was completely new to the world. Browne showed the classic image of ape gradually evolving into man. This image is heavily associated with Darwin, but much to my surprise, he did not create this image. I am still unsure who did, but at least now I know it wasn’t Darwin. Darwin’s discovery has been exaggerated and glorified immensely. The association of image with Darwin’s name an example of the exaggeration. Darwin’s name has become associated with much more than evolution.

The interest I have always personally had in Darwin is the religious ramifications of his discovery. I was surprised to learn this predominantly was an issue in the US and not in England. Having studied the Scopes Trial and studied religion in the US, evolution plays a big role in policies and laws in the US and of course Darwin is associated with them. Darwin’s discovery was scientific, but Americans managed to make it about religion. He created a theory discovering birds and Americans made it into an evil theory that refutes the word of God. Atheism then became interchangeable with evolutionist. Even though these words mean different beliefs, they are intertwined and often misused. I believe when Darwin made his discovery he did not  expect or even suspect the global ramifications it would have. Janet Browne mentioned that Darwin was most likely agnostic. However, I presume many have assumed him to be atheist. Religion and science have always had conflict particularly in the US. Darwin is one of the few to cause disputes within religions particularly within the Roman Catholic Church. The Catholic Church only relatively recently finally accepted that the Earth is not the center of the universe. I would imagine it will take a long time, a lot of evidence, and possibly a sign from God for the Catholic Church to officially accept evolution. Evolution has become much more than a scientific theory. It has become a belief to some or a threat to others. It has become its own religion to some extent. You either believe in evolutions or you don’t. There has yet to become a name for the equivalent for agnosticism in regards to evolution. I am sure there will be a term coined in the near future.

So far in the continuing revolutions course we have heard a whole range of revolution stories from elements of the scientific revolutions, to environmental revolutions, and even social/artistic revolutions. All of the speakers have demonstrated how a revolution is no streamlined, cookie cutter event, but instead can embody an enormous range of social impacts, cultures, academics, communities,  results, etc. Janet Brown’s lecture last Thursday (10/6) on Rethinking the Darwinian Revolution not only embodied an enormous amount of detail and interesting conclusions, but it also brought to light a few common threads that have run through all of the speakers we have heard from so far.

Continue reading

From today’s biology education inside and outside classroom, it is only natural for people to connect theory of evolution by natural selection with Charles Darwin and Galapagos finches in a mind map; some who worked really hard in class might also remember Darwin’s study of barnacles. However, this is only the tip of the iceberg of the theory of evolution. Today’s theory of evolution is much more than Darwin’s idea; in fact, the original Darwinian theory itself, if not complemented by other later studies, probably would not have been accepted at all: the public did not recognize or accept the theory until the development of modern molecular biology and genetics, which made the theory much more complex than what Darwin proposed. Therefore, using the term Darwinian Revolution to describe the development of the theory of evolution in today’s conversation might be a misnomer.

When attributing all the credits of the formation of the theory of evolution to Darwin, we often forget other naturalists who equally contributed to the theory. It is safe to say most people are acquainted with the Darwinian theory from their school education; however, it is equally safe to say that Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, Alfred Russel Wallace, Thomas Henry Huxley, and other naturalists who made great contribution to the development of the theory, are often left forgotten. According to Dr. Browne, much of our knowledge and vocabulary of the theory of evolution today has non-Darwin sources. However, for some historical reasons at the time, Darwin ended up reaping all the fame. Even though the increasingly independent academia grants us the necessary information to look at the development of the theory in an unbiased light, we sometimes are still limited by the historical and conventional understanding of the theory.

The misconception of the theory of evolution partly stems from the popularity of Darwinism. People use the term Darwinism arbitrarily in different contexts, such as economics and sociology. The wide adoption and adaptation of the theory in different fields are gradually included in Darwinism, rendering the theory of evolution itself less concrete and less scientific. For example, the term “survival of the fittest” has lost its original biological meaning, which concerns not only survival but also reproductive success.

Moreover, we have to think of the theory of evolution as a dynamic theory. The study of genes and the development of molecular biology, which took place about one hundred years after Darwin, have made the theory of evolution scientifically tenable. It is also possible that more rigorous research will further change the theory of evolution. For instance, the development of epigenetics, which studies the modification of gene expression rather than alteration of the genetic code itself, has caused the revival of Lamarck’s theory of inheritance of acquired characteristics and the modification of the Darwinian theory.

It is very likely that the “Darwinian theory of evolution” will continue to change in the future, drifting further apart from Darwin’s opinions. Therefore, in using the term “Darwinian Revolution”, we should keep in mind that it is much more than Charles Darwin.

Naturalist, geologist, and scientist, Charles Darwin, is often accredited with is contributions to the scientific field with his ideas on evolution. His book, “On the Origin of Species”, published in 1859, was innovative in it’s introduction of his new theory of evolution. While initially not well received by the general public, evolution is now widely accepted by the public as well as the scientific community. Darwin’s contributions had supposedly revolutionized the way we looked at species development, religion, and the story of creation. He was heavily praised and became the face of innovative thinking and evolution. He remains one of the most studied, talked about, and applauded scientist to date.
During Thursday’s talk with Dr. Janet Browne some of these beliefs about Darwin and all of his contributions to science were overturned. Notably, his publication was joined with Alfred Russel Wallace. Yet, Darwin is the one who is typically accredited with the development of this theory. Both men had independently developed the same theory, yet only one reaped the benefits of notoriety. Dr. Browne noted that Darwinism may indeed be romanticized to an unworthy degree. Evolution as a theory was made as successful as it is today with the assistance of many other notable scientists. It is unfair that Darwin should receive all of the glory for a collaborative effort.
The disparity in notoriety between Charles Darwin and other scientists encourages us to question what was different about the two. Dr. Browne questioned many important details of Darwin’s life and upbringing that may have isolated him from other scientists. Darwin received incredible support from his family, which may have ultimately led to his success over other scientists. During, and even after his life, his family’s support helped to push him further into the eyes of the public. Ultimately, they gained him the publicity that he needed to gain notable credit for his ideas.
During his life, Darwin’s theories weren’t even accepted to the point where they were impactful in the grander societal scheme. Only after his death and only due to his family’s constant publishings and encouragements did his ideas finally take flight. Finally, religious notions were replaced by scientific evidence suggestive of evolution and natural selection concepts. The fact that Darwin’s ideas (which others also had), did not even impact the thinking of society during his lifetime says something about what he actually contributed to his field. He was reliant upon his family to spread his theories after his death. Why we credit Darwin with these ideas is largely due to the fact that he was the only one that was heard about. However, that by no means justifies the lack of recognition that other scientists had.
Darwin’s evolutionary theories did transform the concepts of creation that previously existed. Natural selection unearthed many fundamental creationist beliefs. However, while these theories while transformative to science, they shouldn’t be accredited solely to Darwin. There were multiple scientists who developed similar ideas who deserve if not the same amount, more credit than Darwin receives. Revolutions are very rarely the result of only one man’s thinking.

Charles Darwin was one of the greatest minds in human history, and his theory of evolution and his idea of natural selection are some of the most incredible discoveries of the modern era of science. Darwin is recognized for his accomplishments today, but this was not always the case especially during his time. The religious controversy that he sparked by making these claims about the history of mankind was unbelievable, and many of his ideas were not truly recognized as substantial and valid for close to 100 years. Now he has become a household name and is recognized all over the world for his contributions to human history. There is a college named after Darwin, a city, multiple mountains, movies, and he was pictured on the British currency. This makes it clear that he is very well recognized today for his major discoveries and ground breaking research and studies, however it is very interesting to hear about the controversy around his work during his life time.

The cultural assimilation that his book and his studies caused was very substantial. Many of the well known scientists of his time period were not in support of his work because they were so grounded in their beliefs about religion and about the history of humans. Sometimes even after hearing his studies and theories he had formed after many years of studying they still chose not to fully believe or validate his claims just because even the major scientists of the time were so religious and so grounded in their prior thinking. As you can imagine, the general public acted similarly and was also dedicated to their religious beliefs and refused to accept any other way of thinking for the most part. This led to much of the public writing to Darwin with many major philosophical questions about religion and about life as a whole. Darwin for the most part was humble and polite with people when they asked him questions that he didn’t have the answers to.

A major part of the history of Darwin as a naturalist and a evolutionist is the fact that he did not have a job and was living off of an inheritance from his parents. He also married a wealthy woman named Emma Wedgwood and they had many kids together which greatly contributed to his happiness in life. This happy home environment and lack of an occupation allowed him to fully invest himself into his work and spend many years researching and examining various species of animals and plants. Of course this is not the only thing that contributed to his success and incredible discoveries, because he also was extremely brilliant and compulsive. This led to him breaking down every action or thought he ever came up with and fully considering every positive and negative consequence. This included things in his life such as marriage, where he fully broke down all the pros and cons of getting married and eventually decided that it was a good idea and he would enjoy being married. Another interesting fact I learned during this lecture was that there were many other evolutionists at this time along with Darwin, who had similar lines of thought, but clearly did not have some of the major theories or discoveries that Charles Darwin had himself. Some of these evolutionists were Herbert Spencer, Robert Chambers, and Alfred Russel Wallace. It is very interesting to think that people read the Origin of Species at this time and saw and read other works and studies from other evolutionists and yet for 100 years his work was not recognized as what it truly was.