Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Judge on Darwin’s Origin of Species, “No book dealing with a scientific subject had ever, I suppose, been so largely read by people who were not scientific.”

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email
Evolution News and Views

And embraced, and turned into a cult. He wrote that around 1910.

In “How Was Darwin’s Theory Accepted? The Curious History of a Secular Creation Myth, or, Darwin’s Cultural Armor, pt. 2”, science historian Michael Flannery explains, (Evolution News & Views July 27, 2011):

As I suggested in my earlier post, the enduring power of Darwinism rests not primarily in its purported science but in its cultural aspect. Here ETA is in strong evidence as Darwinism was embraced by Darwin’s affinity group, the relatively small but influential Victorian elites who served as rapid conduits for unprecedented idea transmission. The English jurist, politician, and historian James Bryce best characterized the Darwin phenomenon reminiscing 50 years after the publication of Origin of Species:

No book dealing with a scientific subject had ever, I suppose, been so largely read by people who were not scientific. I was an undergraduate at Oxford at the time, and I recollect very well that many of my fellow undergraduates who never opened–I will not say a scientific, but hardly even a serious book before–procured the treatise and read it with avidity. We all talked about it. We discussed it with the greatest ardor, indeed, with a positiveness which was in inverse ratio to our knowledge; and it was the same all over England. The Origin was not only the subject of constant comment in magazines and newspapers as well as at meetings of scientific societies, but it furnished a theme for constant jests in the comic papers, and it was an unfailing topic for conversation in all cultivated private houses. (Glick, p. 38)

So much for claims about Darwin scandalizing society!

And what about the suggestion that the Church of England apologize for not understanding Darwin?

Part I is here.

File under: Real history, not the cult’s version, taught in school

Comments
AMEN. Darwins stuff was accepted by a Anglican elite to throw off the historic Protestant moral and intellectual influence on British civilization especially the middle class. There was a anti religious motivation behind all this acceptance. They wanted Darwin too be true beyond being persuaded by it. It really was about debunking Genesis and Jesus. Then they insisted that the upper class was more intelligent and had settled Darwin was true. Evangelical christians would be sure satan was blinding people on this especially those most hostile to christian civilization.Robert Byers
July 29, 2011
July
07
Jul
29
29
2011
12:08 AM
12
12
08
AM
PDT
What is extraordinary to me about the book is how accurate those predictions were.
The predictions that weren't in the book?
Origin is the book that expounds the theory that Darwin derived, based on observation. It made predictions, but those aren’t in the book, because they came long after.
Mung
July 28, 2011
July
07
Jul
28
28
2011
07:40 AM
7
07
40
AM
PDT
"What is extraordinary to me about the book is how accurate those predictions were." Please, please. I've thought back on his major points in the book, and it is hard to identify a single one that hasn't been completely refuted or needed major revision. Indeed, is there any specific idea in the book (other than the general assertion that minor changes can lead to all that we see around us) that is still current?Eric Anderson
July 27, 2011
July
07
Jul
27
27
2011
10:39 PM
10
10
39
PM
PDT
Well, Eric, of course you wouldn't find much of a "scientific case supporting evolution". Origin is the book that expounds the theory that Darwin derived, based on observation. It made predictions, but those aren't in the book, because they came long after. So there is no hypothesis testing - just the hypothesis. What is extraordinary to me about the book is how accurate those predictions were. He got some things a bit wrong of course. But it's a pretty amazing book IMO.Elizabeth Liddle
July 27, 2011
July
07
Jul
27
27
2011
04:54 PM
4
04
54
PM
PDT
"No book dealing with a scientific subject had ever, I suppose, been so largely read by people who were not scientific." Probably because there is so very little actual science in The Origin . . . As one of the relatively small number of folks who have actually waded through The Origin cover to cover, I will say that I was hugely disappointed. At the time, notwithstanding Darwin's polished writing style, I concluded it was one of the worst books I had ever read, possibly the worst. Thinking about it later, I have come to understand that the reason I found it so wanting is that I had approached The Origin looking for a scientific case supporting evolution. Instead, what I was treated to were speculations, ruminations, complaints about how God would not have done it this way, etc. Now I have come to appreciate Darwin as a skilled rhetorician -- able to weave a small collection of mostly-superficial observations into what is largely a philosophical and religious argument about how God wouldn't have done it. Doesn't satisfy the scientific curiosity, but hugely successful as a rhetorical tool.Eric Anderson
July 27, 2011
July
07
Jul
27
27
2011
04:30 PM
4
04
30
PM
PDT

Leave a Reply