The post triggered some thoughts, so here goes. The elements Loren mentions
are:
A) RISING SECULARISM.
B) PHILOSOPHICAL NATURALISM.
C) OPERATIONALISM.
D) RISING INDIVIDUALISM.
E) UNIVERSALISM.
All of these played a role. B,C and E were primarily of the intellectual
elite. But how did the "man on the street" come to accept Darwinian precepts
over time?
I would add:
F) MEDIA
The rise of popular media was taking off at exactly this same time (as was
modernism itself. See Johnson's "The Birth of the Modern"). Modernism was
"progress", "hope for millions"...and the media were champions of that idea.
Enemies of progress (e.g., the Luddites) were portrayed in the media as
enemies and extremists. We also had the birth of "the spin doctor" long before
that term was coined.
Staunch Darwinians recognized that the popular media would be crucial in this
war of ideas. The first great "spin doctor" was T. H. Huxley. Not only did he
get to review "Origin" for The Times of London, he wrote a full 5,000 word,
three and a half column ode to it. And then he arranged the now legendary
debate with Samuel Wiberforce--one that for the first time painted Darwinists
as progressive and open, and anti-Darwinists as puerile and closed.
Then next great spin doctor was H. L. Mencken. It was largely he, through his
skewed reportage of the Scopes Trial, who set the tone for the debate which
STILL HOLDS FORTH TODAY. Bible believers were "anthropoid rabble," mobbing
against the truth. You can still catch a whiff of this stuff on talk.origins,
or anywhere else the debate is hot and heavy. [This is why Phil Johnson is
such a force to be reckoned with. His charm, good humor and well reasoned
approach are not easily spun away.]
The media will continue to play a role in all this. With the decline of
critical thinking skills, the images people see dancing before them will carry
more and more weight. Unfortunate, but true. Jerry Seinfeld making fun of
Creationists for five minutes holds more power than 100,000 copies of Reason
in the Balance!
Jim