PhillyTablet Inquirer Daily News
philly.com
email
font size
options
 
Sunday, December 25, 2011

(Merry Christmas. Yes, I'm blogging, because it's traditional for me to return to California this time of year, and my circadian rhythm makes me want to get up at 5 am. What better thing to do with these lonely, dark, out-of-sync hours than read and write?)  

The popularity of creationism in the United States has been treated as a failure of education, loss of science literacy, or reluctance of religion to adapt to the modern worldview. I saw it that way too, until I started reading Loren Eiseley’s Darwin’s Century. Now I see this the country’s divisions as much more interesting, and more deeply rooted, and more connected with political views about the way human beings should organize our society.

I’ve read a number of books about evolution, but nothing has compared to this used, yellowed paperback. There’s no review of high school biology to slog through – instead there are revelations on every page, starting with the first.

The first chapters preface Darwin’s Century with the previous ones, the 1500s, 1600s and 1700s, during which revolutions in human thought gave rise to the questions Darwin answered. Those revolutions we owe to the explorers who dared sail off with just the stars to guide them, and theologians who dared rethink man’s relationship to nature.

“It has been remarked by historians that the discovery of the world by the great voyagers, and particularly their passage across the western seas, had made a tremendous impact upon the thought of Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries….as an indirect consequence of this adventure the theory of evolution, vast in its implications as a new continent, was really, in essence, glimpsed through the fog and sea wreck penetrated by the master mariners.”

 Intellectuals struggled to fit the plants and animals of America and other distant lands into their Biblical creation story. Why, they asked, did God put so many “noxious” animals in the Americans and neglect the necessary beast, the horse? As Eiseley so succinctly put it:

“Old explanations no longer hold, old philosophies are fraying at the edges.”

Important Christian theological contributions, in Eiseley’s reading of history, came in part from the arrangement of all things in a hierarchy, from rocks to angels. This “great chain of being” was fixed, and the connections weren’t considered anything like biological blood ties, but the important point was there were connections seen between plants, animals and humans and this became entrenched in the thinking of the time. Carl Linnaeus (1707-1778) turned it into a tree of life, organized by scientific observations. He was the first to correctly classify bats and whales as mammals and placed mankind with the other primates.  

Linnaeus at first decreed his tree of life a fixed product of creation, but his later writings show doubts. He wrote that he can’t decide, “whether all species are the children of time or whether the Creator from the very beginning of the world had restricted its course of development.”

Other revolutionary ideas Eiseley credits to theologian Sir John Browne. In the century before Darwin, Browne wrote that, “Nature is the Art of God,” which sounds very much like today’s “intelligent design” concept, but in the 1700s represented something fertile, wrote Eiseley, “softening the harsh orthodoxy of those who regarded the Earth and its products as vile.” By contemplating the uniqueness of his own palm print, Browne noted the variety in nature which was to become a key to Darwin’s unlocking of evolution. Darwin noticed this variety within species in pigeons, in dogs, and in plants and animals he observed on his voyages.

Look at the way Gerard Manley Hopkins, who lived in Darwin’s century, reconciles variability of nature with the ancient desire for something perfect and unchangeable behind it all.

All things counter, original, spare, strange;
Whatever is fickle, freckled (who knows how?)
With swift, slow; sweet, sour; adazzle, dim;
He fathers-forth whose beauty is past change:
Praise him.

Darwin saw the dappled things as the fuel on which natural selection drives continual evolution – an idea that would break down fixed hierarchies, set the tree of life into motion, and, eventually lead scientists to see frightening new world in which nothing is past change. Eisley describes it this way: "Time, as Humanity had never dreamed lay across that world. It was a world where water wore away the shapes of mountains, and the great bones and carapaces of vanished beasts lay hoar and rime-frosted in deep crevices and canyons."

 

 

 

 

Posted by Faye Flam @ 11:36 AM  Permalink | 6 comments
Comments   
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 12:52 PM, 12/25/2011
    And a Merry Christmas to you too.
    jmc
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 12:31 PM, 12/26/2011
    As we learned from the struggles of Galileo, there was a time that science in Europe could only be done with the blessings of the church. To do otherwise was to be branded a heretic and to be prosecuted.

    To say that evolution built on the works of creationists misses the point that at one point there only creationists. Contrast that to today where Europe is more secular than anything else. Contrast that to the US today, where most scientists are non-christian (atheists, agnostics, spiritualists, etc.)

    I think premise of this post ignores the reality of the history before Darwin.
    CRW
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 1:51 PM, 12/26/2011
    That's Thomas, not John, Browne.
    Glenn Branch
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:52 PM, 12/26/2011
    Loren Eiseley was a wonderful writer. I haven't read anything by him in a long time, but I'm still captivated by his description of looking into the hollow sockets of an early caveman skull and feeling it staring back at him through the ages,imagining its one-time owner "brooding beside the melting ice" (my memory only approximates his description).

    Pierre
    Evertson
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 6:59 PM, 12/31/2011
    My first encounter with Loren Eisley was when I read "The Firmament of Time," in the early 70s. Shelley's lines "The splendours of the firmament of time May be eclipsed, but are extinguished not..." is a great creed for an atheist or agnostic. The universe is too gorgeous to fear death, despite personal extinction. One thing that troubles me is the high percentage of these brilliant men who employed their genius in the service of racism. Charles Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton, was a one man army of exceptional research and ideas, but proposed Africa could be "saved" if its inhabitants were replaced by Chinese immigrants. It's hard to be ahead of one's time.
    jxxphilly
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 7:44 PM, 12/31/2011
    Slight glitch: Thomas Browne died in 1692, NOT the century before Darwin. But he's the theologian who espoused the "new learning," albeit a "thinker" who believed in and helped condemn witches. Jon Brown, the Scottish theologian was respected by Hume but a very devout man who did live in the century "before Darwin. I'm awaiting my own copy of the Eisley book for edification.
    jxxphilly


6 comments
About Planet of the Apes
Faye Flam - writer
In pursuit of her stories, writer Faye Flam has weathered storms in Greenland, gotten frost nip at the South Pole, and floated weightless aboard NASA’s zero-g plane. She has a degree in geophysics from the California Institute of Technology and started her writing career with the Economist. She later took on the particle physics and cosmology beat at Science Magazine before coming to the Inquirer in 1995. Her previous science column, “Carnal Knowledge,” ran from 2005 to 2008. Her new column and blog, Planet of the Apes, explores the topic of evolution and runs here and in the Inquirer’s health section each Monday. Email Faye at fflam@phillynews.com.

Tony Auth, illustrator
Tony Auth graduated from UCLA with a degree in biological illustration. He was chief medical illustrator at a large teaching hospital in southern California before joining the Inquirer as staff editorial cartoonist in 1971. Like all practicing political cartoonists, he’s gotten more than his share of both awards and hate mail. Over the years Tony has written and/or illustrated eleven children’s books.