At the beginning of the semester, when we read about the discovery of polyps, we discussed classification and whether the polyp is indeed an animal or a plant. From here, we discussed the human desire to classify things and the order or hierarchy that almost inherently follows. In a letter to Charles Lyell, Darwin states that, “Note-book after note-book has been filled with facts which began to group themselves clearly under sub-laws.” (p. 475) These sub-laws, as Darwin refers to them, allow for very specific and detailed classification and grouping of almost everything surrounding us.
This ability to put things into “boxes” clearly makes the ideas that Darwin is presenting very appealing to the reader; however, as Janelle mentioned in class yesterday, what made Darwin’s presentation of these ideas the one that has stood out even after the test of time? I would argue that the literary, non-scientific nature in which Darwin presented his findings is the main factor propelling him forward as the “inventor” of natural selection. Presenting the material in such a way makes it more approachable to the population as a whole. Because the average person doesn’t have a scientific background on which to challenge his ideas, they were accepted in spite of the lack of evidence he provided for many of his claims.
What do you think makes Darwin the sole person to whom we attribute the discovery of natural selection?
Furthermore, if Darwin had published the same work, even years earlier, but in a scientific context, do you think it’s possible he would not be attributed the same fame because scientists/natural philosophers would have questioned his work?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLindsay, I like how you talked about why Darwin's theory is appealing to the general population. I agree that we are always obsessed with knowing exactly how to identify things. In answer to your question, I think the reason we attribute natural selection to Darwin is because he included humans into his theory. Take my theory with a grain of salt because I have not researched the validity of this claim but it sounds like it makes sense. The other scientists we have read about in our class have avoided including humans into their theory. Either they put humans into a separate category or they avoid talking about them completely. Darwin does includes humans into the crux of this theory. Hearing for the first time that your ancestors are the same as bugs, snakes, and WORMS would freak me out too!
ReplyDeleteI agree that Darwin took claim for his theory of evolution because of its facility to be read and understood by the general public. In fact, today when scientific literature is presented to the public, it is presented in a simplistic form without complicated ideas or complicated supporting examples. Papers that contain strictly scientific content and that are written for an audience comprised of scholars would for obvious reasons not be exposed to as large an audience. A scientific paper such as Darwin's would also be heavily criticized because of its very controversial ideas, which would not help its popularity. In this way, Darwin's decision to promote his theory of evolution through a more literary medium allowed his ideas to reach a much larger audience than his peers, which allowed him to claim the discovery of the theory. In answer to your second question, I believe he would not have achieved the same fame because his work would have been presented to a smaller audience. The fame would, consequently, have gone to the first scientist who presented the theory of evolution to a larger audience.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Darwin's literary form makes his material more accessible, but it is also important to take into account what he said about his fame. When he talks about Wallace he says that it is "necessary...that any view should be explained at considerable length in order to arouse public attention." Darwin seems to attribute his success to the pure extent of his work. Because he took the time to fully elaborate his idea and respond to any counter arguments he believes that he gained more fame than Wallace. I also think it is important to remember that Darwin developed his ideas over a period of decades, just as species develop over a long period of time, Darwin's theories developed over a long period of time on the average human scale. Darwin presented his ideas in a very methodical, well thought out way, accounting for possible rebuttals, and so his work was more complete and satisfactory than the works of previous natural philosophers.
ReplyDeleteDarwin was thorough and complete in the explanation of his work, and was able to communicate a new idea in a way that others would be able to understand. He had an understanding, as Audrey said, to communicate to the public something that, if not explained in a clear way, would cause tremendous upheaval. Trying to convince and explain to others that the world was not created by a god, but that we have become the humans we are was not an easy feat, and Darwin's clear explanation is what convinced us, and made us more confident in his argument.
ReplyDelete