Darwin's Troubled Legacy

Darwin’s Descent of Man was dominated by the theory of sexual selection, which Darwin used to explain peacock’s tails, but also to argue that white people were as superior to black ones as men were to women. For Darwin and his contemporaries, inequality between races and the sexes was one of the facts that science had to explain.

Ever since Darwin, biology has been used to support racial prejudice and gender inequality, but – happily – has also been used to challenge both in the 150 years since the Descent.

A lecture by Jim Endersby

The transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website:

[alancrabb]

Very stimulating, thank you. The job of history is not to sanctify iconic heroes, but to see them 'in the round'. It should not diminish Darwin to demythologize him and understand him as an exceptional man of his time. We do this also with Galileo, Newton and Einstein : their greatness lies not in their infallibility but in the originality and enduring value of some of their insights.

[jonrich]

I can't help think this lecture was more about contemporary political issues than about Darwin's scientific ideas and their importance. Darwin should not be judged by today's 'progressive' values. It's his core revolutionary scientific concept which is selection together with variation producing adaptive change that marks his importance and even greatness. The incredible power of his ideas to create the natural world that we observe is what should make Darwin's legacy secure.

[sidneytoole]

Love the emphasis on the importance of context! This was such a great talk

[scotimages]

What a great series of lectures. It was a pleasure to hear about Darwin in a historical and cultural context.

[georgenorris]

This lecture was a real eye opener to me. I have often considered that Darwin's work on evolution led, at least indirectly, to serious misunderstandings amongst those inclined to actively pursue ideas of natural selection and supremacy. I have heard these links refuted and dismissed so often by devotee and documentary alike that I began to think that I was putting two and two together and making ten. Of course, I should have read his texts myself. Finally they are being read to me in a non-selective way and my original suspicions about Darwin's real legacy seem to be more or less correct. Yes, he was a man of his time. Certainly a great man but tarred, as we will all prove to be, by the prejudices of his age. Thank you so much for this important lecture.

[rushabhlovesu]

Interpreting multifaceted aspect of influencial historic figures such as 'Darwin' is really important work. It can teach us a lot about our past and put present in a much larger perspective.
The decolonisation of narratives, such as that of individuals like Darwin, Hookers and institutions like Kew which benefitted from imperialism
is certainly a welcome step, I, a botanist from India is able to understand this narrative now is very testimony to the successful direction it is heading. Thanks to Mr. Endersby for this lecture series, much appreciate your work also thanks to the organizers who promote it.

[markharris]

I'm all in favour of telling it how it was. It's just a bit of a shame that the "dead white guys" (no word stressed) are doing more than their fair share of heavy lifting in this most excellent and laudable endeavour. Embodying, as I do, two of the three attributes of infamy, and expecting sooner or later to embody the remaining one, I wonder whether my memory will be vilified because I happened to be fairly typical of my time?

[Wilkins_Micawber]

Wonderful lecture. I am following the recent “Cancel Culture” movement and find that the violent aspects of it are disturbing. However, I do agree with some of the sentiments. This lecture puts it in a moderate form that agrees with my stance. As a society we in the west have been subjected to a version of history and our culture that written in another time where the white civilisation considered themselves supreme. And indeed was evident in my life time to a horrible extent. I have there experienced a moderation in racial attitudes. The history was was written for our consumption is now being exposed as nothing but propaganda to keep the people of the west in order while allowing the Elite to rule. Had the people known of the atrocities committed on behalf of the monarch and the rich history would now have told a different story. This revisiting of Darwin is certainly a revelation.

[wonder]

Seems that we are reverting back to those times with women taking a step back and reevaluating the types of men we date, paying closer attention to not so much on how much money but by consistent high quality traits and core values. Responsibility, integrity, fair, supportive, hard working, able to self reflect. There seems to be a bit of a narcissistic personality disorder pandemic at the moment

[jamesconner]

I think a "racist" is someone who is prejudicial. I think Darwin thought his opinions/theories were based on science as it was know in his time. So I don't think he was a racist in the way we use that word today.

[alexnorth]

Thank you for this continuing series. Informative and interesting.

[aqe]

24:00 “And among His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth and the difference of your tongues and colors. Surely in this there are signs for the persons having knowledge.”
Quran 30:22

“l: O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted.”
Quran 49:13

Who would have thought 7th century book would be against racism while Mr Darwin scientifically tries to prove it?

[joshuas]

53:10 "We're obviously living in a time when too many statues of dead white guys is an obvious problem in the world"

I think this statement really highlights an important insight into the perspective through which this examination was undertaken. It is always dangerous to judge and disregard the past, and relegate the attitudes of other cultures, based on our modern contemporary standards. Incedentally, that is exactly what the lecturer here does while criticising the Victorian attitudes for doing just that - judging other groups based on the standards they held as superior during their time. Being introspective enough to recognise this would certainly be helpful, but was not something I saw presented here.

[orglancs]

All very well and true, I am sure much needed, this compassion for slaves and exploited colonial subjects, but at the same time British workers were also becoming slaves in the brutal industrial system that was shattering families and rural cultures and forcing children into factories and down mines. When I first started reading about the history of the industrial revolution I came across a book of eye-witness accounts of this revolution and one account in this book was by a rich West Indian sugar-plantation owner, a man who owned slaves and befitted from their labour. He had come back to the mother country to have a look at all these technological wonders that he had read about. He was horrified at the working conditions of the workers in the new mills in the north!

[pfscpublic]

Certainly Richard Dawkins heavily promoted Darwin during his time as Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science and avoided Darwin's darker story. I don't know if Dawkins actively avoided the topic of Darwin's views on race or preferred to focus exclusively on lionising Darwin's work on evolution. 

I do hope the Natural History Museum will sponsor a new look at its collection rather than just pitching itself as a free Walt Disney like destination for school children, that would be exciting and drive tabloid readers to distraction!

For the British who like to only be nostalgic about their historical heroes, Darwin's views on race will be another hit on what we once thought was true about him and that Jane Austen has now replaced Darwin as our £10 banknote just in time for these revelations.

[neildonaldson]

Thank you. I guess from this we must reflect on whether the huge advances made in understanding both ourselves, mankind and the rest of the natural world as articulated by Darwin. Should be set against disappearing the man from history. To me, we have been far to willing of late, to erase the images, views and comments of those with whom we disagree. Honest appraisal, such as you have made. Should of course be considered. However, on balance I think the statue of Darwin should remain in place a a fitting reminder of the conceptual changes made manifest by mankind.

[SirAntoniousBlock]

I hope Disney don't purchase the publishing rights to the descent of man. 😅

[TheLeonhamm]

Ah! Evolution .. actually at work in one neat, plausible, and mere or less accurate presentation of the data available (at present), that is, a major shift in understanding 'us' can be achieved by devolving the human sense of moral responsibility aka moral reason reasoning in 'others' (and then revolving it, to suit one's perspective). So "Was Darwin 'racist'" is asked with a particular answer being expected (or required): "Yes, of course, patently" .. but I, no, no, I am not. Clearly, I take care to critique (white) Euro-centric ideas of variety within racial progress in favour of (politically corrected) - erm - globalist (liberalised and sanitised Marxian-Socialist) dialectic to make the ideal of one-race (ahm, racism) seem more palatable .. as a form of 'progress' (in, let me think - Ah! - human culture, e.g. society, politics, education, and taste).
What we really need to ponder is this: Was Darwin wrong (and his contemporaneous ilk with him), i.e. in the specific artificially selected methodology, assessment, and propagation used for the making of the theories then popularly associated with them, e.g. as thereafter, generically, manufactured on an industrial scale for enforced education - imposed, by the then governing elites, on the European masses (also on the non-European masses that these elites later controlled)?
The answer demanded by this non-question has to be : No! Hardly, well, I mean, that would entail accepting that we too are wrong in our currently accepted forms of uniform education, and that would never do; you know, progress, and all that ..
Ho! Hum! And a fiddle-de-dee. ;o)

[theohopkins]

If only Darwin had been just a tad more woke we could fully honour him. <smile>.

[domusdiana]

This talk is as close to academia, as PragerU is to university.