From: Ted Davis (TDavis@messiah.edu)
Date: Fri Nov 07 2003 - 10:23:52 EST
I'll respond to Gary below. Michael may wish to do likewise,
ted
>>> "Gary Collins" <gwcollins@algol.co.uk> 11/07/03 02:00PM >>>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 19:16:24 -0000
From: "Michael Roberts" <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
I am afraid to say that Darwin's views were not "> reductionist,
atheistic,
and chance-oriented. " as you claim. He was never an atheist and hovered
between some kind of theism and agnosticism. It helps to read his books,
notebooks and correspondence.
-----------------
Hi Michael,
My understanding is that Darwin's loss of faith to agnosticism was not
due to his theory of evolution nor to any of his work as a scientist, but
rather arose because he lost his favourite daughter to an illness, and
as a result became bitter and unable to accept that a loving God would
allow his daughter to die. Is this right?
Ted: Mainly correct, but his faith story (like those of many others) is
complicated and the loss of his faith took several years. The deaths of his
daughter and father, in close proximity, coupled with his view that
damnation is a "damnable doctrine," were instrumental in this.
I have heard it suggested that his reference to the creator at the end of
Origin was mainly an aside to placate the church (or the academia who
were rather more tied up with the church then than would be the case
today, and would be sitting in judgement on his work).
Ted: Again, much controversy. The Origin was drafted in a short version in
the early 1840s, then extended in 1858-9 for publication. I don't know what
D says expressly about God in the early manuscript version. THe most famous
reference in the published version is at the end, in the final paragraph.
In the first edition, he the final sentence reads:
"There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having
been orignally breathed into a few forms or into one..." By the sixth
(final) edition, the words "by the creator" are added after "breathed."
Who knows what exactly to make of this? At the time he first wrote out a
draft, he was still a theist; he was an agnostic in 1859 and for the rest of
his life. The Origin has no theory of spontaneous generation, and I do not
know whether he ever offered one elsewhere. I've recently found a book
"quoting" an 1871 passage about spontaneous generation, but no source is
identified. That's the year of Descent of Man, but Darwin did not say what
he is quoted as saying in that work. So I regard this for the time being as
doubtful.
And that his reluctance in publishing was not because he was
unconvinced by his own theory but rather wishing to avoid the kind of
reception and opposition that Chambers' Vestiges met with.
Ted: Yes. He was also probably worried about the effect it would have on
his pious Unitarian wife.
Is this pretty close to the mark? Or way wide of it?
/Gary
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Nov 07 2003 - 10:24:45 EST