04.03.2017 Views

charles_darwin

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

2<br />

CHARLES DARWIN AND THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES<br />

believed transmutation could not and never had occurred. The species<br />

were fixed: the same number and type existed at the present<br />

time as had existed one or two thousand years earlier. Each species<br />

had appeared or been created at a fixed point in time. Most likely, so<br />

the thinking went, all species had been created at the same time.<br />

Special creation and the fixity of the species, as these ideas were<br />

called, were the standard explanations in the Western world for<br />

the origin and existence of life on Earth until the late-nineteenth<br />

century.<br />

It may have been the traditional view of the origin of life, but<br />

the plausibility of the fixity of the species had also been challenged.<br />

Was it really possible for thousands of years to have passed and organic<br />

life to remain exactly the same? Had nothing changed? To answer<br />

these two questions ‘‘yes’’ seemed to defy logic. Thinkers as far<br />

back as the Ancient Greeks discussed the merits of the theory. As<br />

Darwin noted in his Historical Sketch at the beginning of The Origin<br />

of Species, Aristotle (B.C.E. 384–322) wrote in one of his best-known<br />

books that, ‘‘In cases where a coincidence created a combination<br />

which seems as though it might have been arranged on purpose, the<br />

creatures, it is urged, having been suitably formed by the operation<br />

of chance, survived; otherwise they perished, and still perish....’’ 2<br />

Darwin, who was told about the statement by the British philologist<br />

Claire Grece (1831–1905), latched on to the fact that Aristotle recognized<br />

that some change occurred in nature. 3 In fact, Darwin had<br />

misunderstood Aristotle: Aristotle was quoting a philosopher with<br />

whom he disagreed. Aristotle was no proponent of evolution. He was<br />

better known for his theory of ‘‘The Great Chain of Being,’’ the idea<br />

that living organisms could be organized from the simplest to most<br />

complex and that no organism could change its place in this ladder<br />

of progression.<br />

By the beginning of the nineteenth century, the fixity of the species<br />

was a major problem in science. Geologists and paleontologists<br />

had discovered fossils of animals and plants but could not find contemporary<br />

living examples of these organisms. Scientists such as<br />

Georges Cuvier (1769–1832), who worked on classifying the species,<br />

grouping similar and related species into families and subfamilies,<br />

calculated that some species were extinct. Perhaps it was stretching<br />

credulity to argue that all life on Earth remained as it had been six<br />

thousand years before. 4<br />

In the 1830s, the authors of the Bridgewater Treatises tried to<br />

counter challenges to the fixity of species idea by arguing that God<br />

allowed a ‘‘useful and purposeful decline’’ in nature. The publication<br />

costs of these books were paid for by the Reverend Francis Henry

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!