A discussion on “The origin of species by means of natural selection” by Charles Darwin.

By upbringing and personal decision I am a Christian, but a Mormon specifically. Therefore the biases of my attitudes in life strongly lead to prejudice when considering evolution as introduced by this remarkable man, Charles Darwin.

There is the joke where it is said that when we are young we are broad minded and narrow waisted but when we get older we become broad waisted and narrow minded. There is truth in that and at 57 years old I feel that I am in the latter category.

MY CHALLENGE IS TO BE IMPARTIAL AND OPEN TO CONSIDERING OTHER IDEAS.

CAN I DO IT AND BE FAIR? YOU BE THE JUDGE!

Another consideration is that so often argument closes the capacity of a mind to receive fresh ideas from another that may contradict previously held opinions (often cherished).

Then the concept where humans are naturally lazy and hate change, be it physical improvement or the introduction of new ideas or study where discipline and sacrifice are required.

So many people either accept or reject the above book without even having opened its pages. Without doubt the most guilty party are the Creationists/Christians who vilify the book on second hand opinion. However the other side, the Evolutionists, also seem to be locked into their idea-set and not prepared for rational consideration of other ideas. I was amused to read my daughter’s biology textbook which she is currently studying. It is quite dismissive of other alternative explanations such as ID (Intelligent Design), which is claimed to be driven by the philosophy of Creationists. There is no reasonable discussion to dismiss the approach of these scientists relating to “irreducible complexity”, “specified complexity” and “fine tuned universe”.

Another problem in my opinion is that the Empirical Approach to Evidence is mingled into Metaphysics, where sometimes, the opinions of eminent scientists become considered as factual, yet the Empirical Approach is ill suited to Metaphysics where philosophical argument is the primary process of developing ideas.

By profession I am an accountant, in my opinion, the key elements of my field are impartiality, strict conformity to accounting standards and logic.

So I am a strange mingling of logic and faith.

So here it goes...

for my source I am using the following:

Charles Darwin. The origin of species by means of natural selection, or, The preservation of favored races in the struggle for life (Kindle Locations 24-32). Random House, Inc.. 

No one can doubt that this book has had a major impact on Society since its publication in 1859. At the time society was beginning to escape the tyranny of political Christianity where thinking outside the fold was not tolerated and severe punishments imposed.

“Darwin was one of history’s towering geniuses and ranks with the greatest heroes of man’s intellectual progress.” —George Gaylord Simpson in The Meaning of Evolution

when reading the introduction by Darwin, I came upon this paragraph:

“This Abstract, which I now publish, must necessarily be imperfect. I cannot here give references and authorities for my several statements; and I must trust to the reader reposing some confidence in my accuracy. No doubt errors will have crept in, though I hope I have always been cautious in trusting to good authorities alone. I can here give only the general conclusions at which I have arrived, with a few facts in illustration, but which, I hope, in most cases will suffice. No one can feel more sensible than I do of the necessity of hereafter publishing in detail all the facts, with references, on which my conclusions have been grounded; and I hope in a future work to do this. For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I have arrived. A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question; and this is here impossible.”

I was struck by the humility of the author and the manner in which he strives for an impartial approach – to me this is extremely appealing and evidences a well grounded mentality where the quest for improvement was never ruled out.

“It is, therefore, of the highest importance to gain a clear insight into the means of modification and co-adaptation. At the commencement of my observations it seemed to me probable that a careful study of domesticated animals and of cultivated plants would offer the best chance of making out this obscure problem. Nor have I been disappointed; in this and in all other perplexing cases I have invariably found that our knowledge, imperfect though it be, of variation under domestication, afforded the best and safest clue. I may venture to express my conviction of the high value of such studies, although they have been very commonly neglected by naturalists.”

One must never forget the limitations of the time for equipment and that Darwin, like many other scientists of his day, had to use observation and deduction as his primary tools. Correspondence and discussion between fellow scientists opened many avenues of exploration.

To me the difference between the ordinary intellect and the more advanced intellect is the ability to grasp and evaluate information in previously unconsidered avenues.

Darwin used available fields that were there to used but which other scientists had neglected. A key area of study was in the important field of the development of the domesticated animal and the cultivated plant.

The vital nature of these fields cannot be over emphasised, where, for example, maize was brought to Europe from the Americas. It enabled the common man to break the shackles of the Middle Ages; of the life struggle to grow sufficient food for his own use and to feed animals. Meat was a higher form of food, wild game was generally the reserve of royalty and not for the use of common man. So with the greater availability of grain, domesticated animals could be raised for products such as milk, eggs and even meat.

Now to the concluding paragraph of Darwin’s introduction:

“No one ought to feel surprise at much remaining as yet unexplained in regard to the origin of species and varieties, if he make due allowance for our profound ignorance in regard to the mutual relations of the many beings which live around us. Who can explain why one species ranges widely and is very numerous, and why another allied species has a narrow range and is rare? Yet these relations are of the highest importance, for they determine the present welfare and, as I believe, the future success and modification of every inhabitant of this world. Still less do we know of the mutual relations of the innumerable inhabitants of the world during the many past geological epochs in its history. Although much remains obscure, and will long remain obscure, I can entertain no doubt, after the most deliberate study and dispassionate judgment of which I am capable, that the view which most naturalists until recently entertained, and which I formerly entertained—namely, that each species has been independently created—is erroneous. I am fully convinced that species are not immutable; but that those belonging to what are called the same genera are lineal descendants of some other and generally extinct species, in the same manner as the acknowledged varieties of any one species are the descendants of that species. Furthermore, I am convinced that Natural Selection has been the most important, but not the exclusive, means of modification.”

Darwin now clearly states that his judgement is deliberate and dispassionate and he rejects his formerly held view that each species has been independently created and that they are not immutable. He is convinced that natural selection is the most important (but not only) process where modification of varieties of species occur. This was a fundamental shift in the approach of science in his day.

My concluding thoughts on the introduction by Charles Darwin:
1 – I am impressed at his approach, it is certainly not dogmatic (arrogant).
2 – Observation and deduction are key elements of his approach.
3 – Discussion and correspondence with fellow scientists of new findings, so similar to his process of natural selection, discarding the irrelevant and retaining the advantageous elements.
4 – Society as a whole has evolved to allow discussion of new and radical ideas regardless of previously accepted norms.
5 – Too many in established societal structures seem to automatically oppose the introduction of new ideas.
6 – Science ought to be able to re-examine previously held concepts when new scientific processes introduce new and conflicting ideas.
7 - Whether Charles Darwin is correct or not, his work has certainly stimulated great human effort in the field of science and he has assisted considerably in human development.
8 – I was wrong in rejecting the man (Charles Darwin) without the slightest personal effort to read and consider the monumental life work he placed at the altar of Human Endeavour.

Charles Darwin’s grave located in Westminster Abbey, London

**

• Next article will be chapter 1 commentaries.

**