 |
George Levine is the author of Darwin Loves You: Natural Selection and the Re-enchantment of the World and editor of the forthcoming volume The Joy of Secularism: 11 Essays for How We Live Now. His point of view is unique among our authors because his background is not in the biological sciences or evolutionary studies. He is an English professor. In fact, he was one of my English professors at Rutgers University.
In this brief article, Dr. Levine questions whether Darwin would have ever (as has been reported) repented his beliefs. He also addresses the question of “how does one live now with [Darwin's] well-tested theory?” |
I was once challenged by a very kind and gentle woman. “You know,” she said, “that Darwin repented on his deathbed.” No, of course I didn’t know that, but I did shortly after learn that the idea is part of a whole series of total misconceptions about Darwin that are designed to demonstrate that Darwin had been wrong about evolution, and thus that it hadn’t happened and wasn’t happening. The wrongness of all of these ideas is so absolute that they are beyond contradiction, which is part of the problem. Evidence will do nothing to change that gentle woman’s view. Nevertheless, there is a wonderful little book by James Moore that investigates the myth of Darwin’s repentance in all seriousness, and totally confutes it. Although Darwin is now probably the most thoroughly documented historical figure in the history of the English speaking world, there isn’t a whimper of evidence that he “repented.”
What is striking about the current continuation of mid nineteenth-century attacks on Darwin’s ideas (nobody dared attack him as a man, he was so meticulously respectable, and likeable, and buried in Westminster Abbey) is that anyone thinks that one can continue to fight about evolution as one fights about strategies to overcome our current economic problems. Do you “believe” in evolution? It is like asking, “Do you believe in gravity?” There are of course many disagreements and uncertainties among scientists about precisely how evolution works, but the problem is not whether it works. That is a given of all modern biology, as the great biologist Theodosius Dobzhansky argued half a century ago. Modern biology has taken Darwin and run with his ideas so that even his secret deathbed repentance would not affect in the slightest the developments in evolutionary biology since his time.
For lay people, the real question is, how does one live now with his well-tested theory? The fact that its most important founding father was such a nice guy and that so many of its early proponents were so eminently respectable (T. H. Huxley, for example), and even religious (Charles Kingsley and Asa Gray, for example) probably shouldn’t be taken as quite sufficient evidence that there’s no necessary connection between belief in evolution and wickedness. Nor even Stephen Jay Gould’s elaborate theorizing that science and religion are not conflicting ways of seeing and feeling, but belong to “non overlapping magisteria.”
But reading Darwin should do it. While some of his work might, for the lay reader, be a little dry, with lots of “dry facts,” as he put it, On the Origin of Species is a book full of wonder, and, as Adam Gopnik wrote recently, makes the whole world “vibrate.” Darwin had nothing to repent for, except, as he gently and sadly complained in his Autobiography, he hadn’t done enough good things in the course of his amazingly productive life. There is no reason that Darwin’s vision of the world should threaten anyone’s idea that life is meaningful. He described the world as it is, full of the bad things we see around us every day, and miraculously beautiful and diverse, and endlessly worth preserving; it is a world that has produced people capable of real generosity – “altruism” – which, as Frans de Waal, among others has been showing us, is built into our worldly human bones. Darwin’s determination to face the world as he found it has helped us grow up, and to seek meaning right here in the extraordinary world he described with such fidelity. He told us the truth as he knew it, and he had nothing for which to repent.
Continued »