charles_darwin

Darwin, Darwinism, and Evolution in the Twentieth Century
eye, for example, could not work as an eye unless the retina, pupil,
and cornea evolved at the same time; such an occurrence was
unlikely and mechanisms such as sight were ‘‘irreducibly complex,’’
that is, they had basic components that could not work without the
other components. Furthermore, the theoretical and experimental
problems with the theory of evolution meant that scientists should
search for an alternative theory. Because the proponents of Intelligent
Design were unwilling to state who the designer was, this movement,
which began in the late 1980s, has been labeled an inferior version
of Creationism.
The opposition by some Christians to evolution has been to the
larger theory rather than to Darwin or The Origin of Species. The
varieties of opinion among scientists about the precise nature of
evolution—some taking a position closer to Darwin’s theory, others
further away—has been of little interest to these mainly Protestant,
mainly fundamentalist, and mainly American opponents of evolution.
Darwin is the symbol of evolution. Opponents of evolution objected
to the ideas in The Origin of Species only because Darwin was the
‘‘father of evolution.’’
81
The Neo-Darwinist Synthesis and Beyond
Commenting on the future of Darwinism and the efforts of scientists
to work out the precise mechanism of evolution, William
Bateson wrote, in 1913,
That species have come into existence by an evolutionary process
no one seriously doubts; but few who are familiar with the
facts that genetic research has revealed are now inclined to speculate
as to the manner by which the process has been accomplished.
Our knowledge of the nature and properties of living
things is far too meagre to justify any such attempts. Suggestions
of course can be made: though, however, these ideas may have a
stimulating value in the lecture room, they look weak and thin
when set out in print. The work which may one day give them a
body has yet to be done. 5
Less than thirty years later the situation had changed. In 1942, Julian
Huxley wrote, ‘‘Biology at the present time is embarking upon a
phase of synthesis ... nowhere is this movement toward unification
more likely to be valuable than in this many-sided topic of evolution;
and already we are seeing the first-fruits in the re-animation of
Darwinism.’’ 6 By 1970, the ‘‘work’’ Bateson wrote about had been