Tuesday, July 06, 2010

Darwin's Horrid Doubt

*Update*  Welcome readers of Apologetics 315!

"With me, the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?"

Darwin was the first and apparently only darwinist to be plagued by such a doubt.

The whole letter, showing context -- including Darwin's view of a purposeless universe.

"Dear Sir

I hope that you will not think it intrusive on my part to thank you heartily for the pleasure which I have derived from reading your admirably written `Creed of Science,’ though I have not yet quite finished it, as now that I am old I read very slowly. It is a very long time since any other book has interested me so much. The work must have cost you several years and much hard labour with full leisure for work. You would not probably expect anyone fully to agree with you on so many abstruse subjects; and there are some points in your book which I cannot digest. The chief one is that the existence of so-called natural laws implies purpose. I cannot see this. Not to mention that many expect that the several great laws will some day be found to follow inevitably from some one single law, yet taking the laws as we now know them, and look at the moon, what the law of gravitation — and no doubt of the conservation of energy — of the atomic theory, &c. &c. hold good, and I cannot see that there is then necessarily any purpose. Would there be purpose if the lowest organisms alone destitute of consciousness existed in the moon? But I have had no practice in abstract reasoning and I may be all astray. Nevertheless you have expressed my inward conviction, though far more vividly and clearly than I could have done, that the Universe is not the result of chance. But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind? Secondly I think that I could make somewhat of a case against the enormous importance which you attribute to our greatest men: I have been accustomed to think, 2nd, 3rd and 4th rate men of very high importance, at least in the case of Science.

Lastly I could show fight on natural selection having done and doing more for the progress of civilisation than you seem inclined to admit. Remember what risks the nations of Europe ran, not so many centuries ago of being overwhelmed by the Turks, and how ridiculous such an idea now is. The more civilised so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilised races throughout the world. But I will write no more, and not even mention the many points in your work which have much interested me. I have indeed cause to apologise for troubling you with my impressions, and my sole excuse is the excitement in my mind which your book has aroused.

I beg leave to remain | Dear Sir | Yours faithfully and obliged Charles Darwin."

3 comments:

Joe_Agnost said...

Keep beating that strawman RK_Ball... it sure beats actually learning science eh?!

P@J said...

Interesting how an idea as profound as Evolution by Natural selection works on a mid-19th century Christian and Eurocentric mind. It would have been an interesting turn of events if Natural Selection had been developed by a person raised in the Buddhist tradition, or the Jane tradition, where the separation between “us” (the Christian human) and “them” (all other animals, including non-whites and pagans) was not so strong, or so hierarchical. But that was the society into which he was born, and the society that some would like us to return to...

Interesting that the route of his horror is not his idea, it is the impact on his faith. He recognized that it was to be the end of his faith.

RkBall said...

Try Jain for Jane, root, for route, and as for the last paragraph, that's eisegesis, my friend.

His faith ended with the death of his daughter and his observation of the cruelties of nature. His was "faithlessness seeking understanding".

"... nothing intellectually compelling or challenging.. bald assertions coupled to superstition... woefully pathetic"