Status
Call number
Genres
Collection
Publication
Description
There is a mystery surrounding Darwin: How did this quiet, respectable gentleman, a pillar of his parish, come to embrace one of the most radical ideas in the history of human thought? Darwin risked a great deal in publishing his theory of evolution, so something very powerful--a moral fire--must have propelled him. That moral fire, argue authors Desmond and Moore, was a passionate hatred of slavery. They draw on a wealth of fresh manuscripts, correspondence, notebooks, diaries, and even ships' logs to show how Darwin's abolitionism had deep roots in his mother's family and was reinforced by his voyage on the Beagle as well as by events in America. Leading apologists for slavery in Darwin's time argued that blacks and whites were separate species, with whites created superior. Darwin believed that the races belonged to the same human family, and slavery was therefore a sin.--From publisher description.… (more)
Media reviews
User reviews
The story is fascinating and detailed, including why he spent so much time on barnacles and pigeon-breeders, as well as why he left "Man" out of the Origin. the simultaneous US Civil War makes a dramatic part of the context. Sometimes a little hard to follow with its huge cast of twitcher-clerics, propagandists and profs. But well worth the effort.
Carlyle comes out as a prize s*** as well as such an awful prose-writer. For some reason he kept a place at the fringe of Darwin's circle despite being a rabid "niggerology" firebrand.
In On the Origins of Species, Darwin was cautious about explicitly expressing the implications of his theory on the matter of man's place in existence. He was certainly aware that such a conclusion would immediately be drawn and most certainly it was. Even such a stalwart scientific supporter as Asa Gray could not abandon the anchor of divinity as the ultimate first cause.
This fascinating book focuses on the relationship of Darwin's work to his strong abolitionist beliefs and to the debate raging on the morality of slavery. Darwin, his family and circle were among the staunchest abolitionists in England, advocating vigorously for emancipation in the Commonwealth and the Americas. Darwin's scientific logic compellingly supported the notion that the races of human kind had a unitary ancestor and were not distinct species. The so-called polygenisists held that the races were created separately and as species distinct from each other could be placed in a hierarchy of superiority without moral qualms. Great store was placed on the discernible differences among the races, but Darwin's work said these were not species differentiation but rather variations caused by environmental factors. The most obvious evidence for species commonality was the success of inter-racial reproduction.
In the context of the intense and ugly racism of the 19th century, Darwin's view was scorned by other scientists and polemicists who were determined to prove the racial superiority of Caucasians and, hence, the morality of subjugating the lesser species, principally blacks. America's renowned scientist, Louis Agassiz, was the foremost of the scientists making this claim. The aura of this pseudo science was eagerly grasped by those who sought to counter the growing intensity of moral opposition to slavery. This inevitably led its adherents down the primrose path of ascribing to genetic differences the futility of the "lessor" races ever being able to achieve the lofty heights of culture and progress achieved by the Anglo-Saxon race.
Thus to Darwin we owe another debt of gratitude. By impelling us to accept our less than divine status he has opened up the potential for diminishing the effects of our hubris on the earth. Recognizing the commonality of all humans points us toward a moral stance that best positions the perpetuation of our species. After all, isn't morality a successful and highly important evolutionary trait?