We live in time when the nonsensical essence of religious worldview became obvious to just about anyone capable of utilizing its sense of rationale. However, it is namely the publishing of Charles Darwin’s “The Origin of Species” in 1859, which marks the beginning of a new historical era, associated with the pace of scientific progress adopting exponential subtleties. The reason for this is simple – by publishing his book, Darwin had exposed the conceptual absurdity of Christianity, as metaphysical foundation, upon which Western civilization has been built. Therefore, it is not a coincidence that namely the second half of nineteenth and the first half of twentieth centuries, which is now being referred to by many today’s Western intellectuals as the “golden age of science” – after having freed itself out of Christian imprisonment, empirical sciences had received a powerful developmental boost, which lasted up until the time when the hawks of political correctness had found themselves in position of imposing intellectual censorship on variety of scientific pursuits that they consider “immoral”.
Thus, the actual importance of “The Origin of Species” simply cannot be underestimated, because of sheer universality of ideas, contained in it, which explains why this Darwin’s book did not only revolutionize biology, but also philosophy and political science. In his book “The Selfish Gene”, Richard Dawkins articulates the same idea even more dramatically: “Living organisms had existed on Earth, without ever knowing why, for over three thousand million years before the truth finally dawned on one of them. His name was Charles Darwin” (Dawkins 1976, p. 3). In its turn, this explains the utter hostility, on the part of Christian clergymen, which continues to define their attitude towards the name of Charles Darwin even today – apart from outlining biological mechanisms of evolution, Darwin’s theory also exposes professional “moralists” from religion as being nothing but social parasites, who have ceased developing intellectually and therefore, represent humanity’s burden. Ever since the time when Darwin had published his revolutionary book, it will always be religion trying to adjust its outdated notions to science and not the other way around, as it used to be the case during the course of “Dark Ages”. In this paper, we will aim at discussing Darwin’s “The Origin of Species” in terms of intellectual revelation as to humankind’s actual destiny, because it is namely the fact that the Theory of Evolution has revealed the process of species becoming ever-more complex as being anti-entropic in its essence, which provides us with an answer to the question of what is the point of one’s life.
Despite the fact that nowadays so-called “scientific” Creationists and “progressive” Bible-thumpers are trying their best to reconcile the notions of biological evolution with the notions of religion, they will never be able to succeed with it, simply because evolutional theory explains different degrees of biological complexity among species as result of these species being subjected to the process of natural selection, which implies the absence of “creator”, within a context of how living organisms came into being, in the first place: “It may metaphorically be said that natural selection is daily and hourly scrutinising, throughout the world, every variation, even the slightest; rejecting that which is bad, preserving and adding up all that is good; silently and insensibly working, whenever and wherever opportunity offers, at the improvement of each organic being in relation to its organic and inorganic conditions of life” (Darwin, Ch. IV, p. 70). In other words, it is the fact that some species were able to take advantage of being continuously affected by spontaneous genetic alterations, which allowed them to assure their biological survival. Being a true European intellectual, Darwin was able realize that organisms’ biological variety is nothing but the result of “productive” genetic mutations (the ones that increase species’ chances of survival in a particular environment) assuming genetically dominant subtleties. In other words, what Christians traditionally used to refer to as “great mystery of creation”, while talking about seemingly intelligent design of organic life’s different emanations, has nothing to do with the concept of creation, in the first place, but rather with the concept of life’s continuous biological evolvement from simpler to more complex forms.
What gives individual a right to be referred to as genius? It is the fact that such individual understands so much more then he could have possibly known. Unlike ordinary people, geniuses are capable of grasping the essence of a particular scientific phenomenon within a matter of a split of a second, as if actual truth has been revealed to them in some supernatural manner. For example, it only took Isaac.
Newton to sustain one hit in the head by falling apple (as legend claims), to discover the Law of Universal Gravitation. The same can be said about Charles Darwin. During the course of his trip on H.M.S. Beagle, he used to observe an extensive biological variety among representatives of single species, such as Galápagos tortoise, for example. Yet, it was not until the time when Darwin had applied a great deal of effort, while classifying Bramblings (Fringilla montifringilla), that it had dawned upon him that variations in these birds’ appearance directly correspond to particularities of natural environment. In its turn, this allowed Darwin to conclude that the very notion of biological variety is functionally purposeful and that we cannot refer to it as simply the consequence of God’s desire to please Adam and Eve’s eyes. Therefore it is absolutely explainable why “The Origin of Species” contains literary epithets, the presence of which seems to be hardly appropriate, within a context of scientific work – apparently, Darwin was well aware of utter importance of his discovery of principle of biological evolution.
It is crucial to understand that Darwin lived in time when White people enjoyed an undisputed geopolitical dominance, throughout the world, which is why at that time, it would never occur to scientists to think of concept of euro-centrism in terms of “intolerance”, “racism” or “sexism”, as it is often the case nowadays. The euro-centric perception of surrounding reality is utterly rationalistic – that is, European intellectuals of 19th century used to praise the notion of rationality, while rightly considering it being a metaphysical precondition for the emergence of culture and science. Therefore, upon realization of evolution’s simultaneous “godlessness” and “purposefulness”, Darwin became emotionally excited, as it corresponded to his subconscious longing towards divinity that comes from within: “We see these beautiful co-adaptations most plainly in the woodpecker and mistletoe; and only a little less plainly in the humblest parasite which clings to the hairs of a quadruped or feathers of a bird; in the structure of the beetle which dives through the water; in the plumed seed which is wafted by the gentlest breeze; in short, we see beautiful adaptations everywhere and in every part of the organic world” (Darwin, Ch. III, p. 51). The reason why Darwin refers to the process of living organisms adapting to natural environment as “beautiful” is not only because it reassures these organisms’ physical survival, but also because it creates objective preconditions for their biological complexity to be increased, as time goes by. And, as we are all well aware of – the more biologically complex the representatives of a particular species are, the more they are capable of resisting the forces of energetic entropy.
According to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the amount of entropy in the universe increases in arithmetical progression to the flow of time. However, the biological and ultimately the intellectual complexity of life (anti-entropy) increases in geometrical (exponential) progression to the flow of time, which is why the process of evolution is essentially divine, because its ultimate purpose appears to be the creation of a God-like specie, the members of which will be able to bend the physical laws of nature – thus, insuring the continuous existence of universe. Such idea represents a common ground between Darwinism and Lamarckism.
Thus, the context of “The Origin of Species” implies that the specie of Homo Sapiens, whatever the advanced it might be, is not the final product of evolution.
As Friedrich Nietzsche had put it in his famous work “Thus Spake Zarathustra”: “What is the ape to men? A laughing stock or a painful embarrassment. And just so shall man be to the Superman – a laughing stock or a painful embarrassment” (Nietzsche 1891, p. 75). While leaving no doubt as to the fact that the members of different races do belong to humanity, regardless of their ability to advance culturally and scientifically, author nevertheless denies validity to the concept of social egalitarianism, which would have put him at odds with promoters of political correctness, if he was alive today. Moreover, “The Origin of Species” suggests that it is namely the particularities of breeding process between representatives of the same specie, which define offspring’s existential qualities (according to Darwin, they can be productive or counter-productive). It is needless to mention, of course, that such suggestion contradicts today’s neo-Liberal social theories that idealize environmental factors, within the context of one’s upbringing, as only the ones that account for individual’s ability to function as productive member of society.
In his book, Darwin makes a direct reference to the practice of cross-breeding and extensive hybridization as being generally undesirable, in biological sense of this word, because the vitality of organisms affected by it appears being significantly undermined, even though that hybridization in plants and animals often produces rather useful results: “It is known that a cross with a bull-dog has affected for many generations the courage and obstinacy of greyhounds; and a cross with a greyhound has given to a whole family of shepherd-dogs a tendency to hunt hares” (Darwin, Ch. VII, p. 174). Why is it that pitt-bulls are now being outlawed in countries of EU? It is because of these dogs’ sheer viciousness, which prompts them to even attack small children. And, why do they do this? It is because pitt-bulls are the product of extensive cross-breeding between 30 different dogs’ pedigrees, the purpose of which was to create a particularly vicious pedigree of a dog. However, since Darwinian laws equally apply to all living creatures, there can be no doubts that the practice interracial cross-breeding between humans can be discussed within the same context, and there is a plenty of objective evidence as to validity of this idea. It its turn, this explains traditionally negative attitude towards half-breeds, on the part of representatives of just about any race. Apparently, it has nothing to do with people’s bigotry or their “racism” – one can never fully understand motivations behind racial hybrids’ behavior, since there was absolutely no “purposefulness” in how they were being conceived.
Thus, it will be absolutely appropriate to suggest that it is “The Origin of Species” purely scientific essence and the fact that it does not contain any moralistic overtones, which account is its objective value. Unfortunately, this is also something that might result in this Darwin’s book being eventually banned from public libraries in Western countries, simply because it exposes pseudo-scientific nature of Liberal social and political doctrines (“multiculturalism” for example), which are being jammed down citizens’ throats, as we speak. In his book “Darwin’s Spectre: Evolutionary Biology in the Modern World”, Michael Rose provides us with the insight onto the possible line of argumentation, which might be utilized by the hawks of political correctness, while justifying their intention to ban Darwinism: “Darwinism tends to have a pernicious effect on debates about biology and polity for two reasons. The first is that it emphasizes patterns of common descent as defining biological lineages. Fish are fish because their ancestors were fish; frogs are frogs… , and so on. The second problem with Darwinism was even worse. The view that there were human races each with their own ancestry and a shared destiny led many biologists and virtually everyone else to the view that human evolution was bound up with the competition of the races” (Rose 1998, p. 142). While reading these lines, one can hardly escape the feeling that we live in time of “New Dark Ages”, when the validity of scientific notions is being evaluated within a context of whether they correspond to currently dominant political (religious) doctrines or not. Yes, “The Origin of Species” does imply the existence of fierce competition between biological species and sub-species, which it is turn, implies competition between races. However, under no circumstances can this work be affiliated with White racism, because in it, Darwin discusses the concept of biological vitality as having value in itself.
Nowadays, in such cities as Paris and London, not a single night goes by without at least a few cars being set on fire by newly arrived immigrants from Third World, as their unique way of “celebrating diversity”. In today’s America, no sober-minded citizen of European descend would even consider venturing into the “ghetto”, especially after it gets dark. And there is only once explanation to this – the original creators of Western civilization had been deprived of their biological vitality (low birth rates), which is why it is only the matter of very short time, before Darwinian laws will reduce them to second class citizens in their own countries, while eventually putting them on the brink of physical extinction: “He who believes in the struggle for existence and in the principle of natural selection, will acknowledge that every organic being is constantly endeavouring to increase in numbers; and that if any one being vary ever so little, either in habits or structure, and thus gain an advantage over some other inhabitant of the country, it will seize on the place of that inhabitant, however different it may be from its own place” (Darwin, Ch. VI, p. 152). Contemporary realities of multicultural living Western countries leave no doubt as to validity of this Darwin’s idea.
As we have mentioned earlier, Charles Darwin was a true European intellectual of its time, which is why he was perfectly aware of “everything has to do with everything” principle. It is namely this fact which explains “The Origin of Species” universality – it is not only that reading of this book provides us with better understanding as to what defines evolutional dynamics in the world of flora and fauna, but also prompts us to adopt a scientific stance, while addressing various life’s challenges. Darwin book’s context points out to the fact that, in order for individual to be able to lead a meaningful life and to remain the subject of evolution, he or she must continuously strive to broaden its intellectual horizons, while never ceasing to work on keeping its body in good physical shape, simply because when being applied to humans, Darwinian laws do not tolerate biological and intellectual imperfection. Whatever cruel the law of natural selection might appear to Liberally-minded individual, who has been brainwashed to believe that the era of “universal love and tolerance” is just about the corner, it does not make this law less actual. Therefore, despite being written in the middle of 19th century, “The Origin of Species” continues to represent an intellectual masterpiece of an enormous value, along with Darwin’s other works.
Bibliography
Dawkins, Richard “The Selfish Gene”. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976.
Darwin, Charles “The Origin of Species”. Oxford: Oxford University Press, (1859)1996.
Nietzsche, Friedrich “Thus Spake Zarathustra: A Book for All and None”. New York: Algora Publishing, (1891) 2003.
Rose, Michael “Darwin’s Spectre: Evolutionary Biology in the Modern World”. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998.
Francis, Keith “Charles Darwin and the Origin of Species”. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2007.