Examine the Darwin's theory and its impact on Scientific thinkings.
Answers
Answered by
0
The social effects of evolutionary thoughthave been considerable. As the scientific explanation of life's diversity has developed, it has often displaced alternative, sometimes very widely held, explanations. Because the theory of evolution includes an explanation of humanity's origins, it has had a profound impact on human societies. Some have vigorously denied acceptance of the scientific explanation due to its perceived religious implications (e.g. its implied rejection of the special creation of humans presumably described in the Bible). This has led to a vigorous conflict between creation and evolution in public education, primarily in the United States.

Darwin's dangerous idea
Daniel C Dennett
The Sciences 35 (3), 34-40, 1995
When Iwas A SCHOOLBOY, MY FRIENDS and I used to amuse ourselves with fantasies about an imaginary chemical we called universal acid. I have no idea whether we invented it or inherited it, along with Spanish fly and saltpeter, as part ofunderground youth culture. Universal acid is a liquid so corrosive that it will eat through anything. The problem with universal acid, of course, is what to keep it in. It dissolves glass bottles and stainless-steel canisters as readily as it does paper bags. What would happen ifsomehow you came upon a dollop ofuniversal acid? Would the entire planet eventually be destroyed? If not, what would be left? After everything had been transformed by its encounter with universal acid, what would the world look like? Our speculations were a diverting joke; none ofus expected to come in contact with such corrosive material. Yet in only a few years I would encounter something bearing as close a likeness to universal acid as anyone could wish. It was not a chemical but an idea-one that eats through virtually every traditional concept, leaving in its wake a revolutionized world view, with most of the old landmarks still recognizable but transformed in fundamental ways. It was the idea that Charles Darwin, in 1859, unleashed on an unsuspecting world. I was not the first to realize that I was dealing with dangerous stuff. From the moment ofpublication of The Origin ofSpecies, Darwin's fundamental idea has inspired intense reactions, ranging from ferocious condemnation to ecstatic allegiance, sometimes tantamount to religious zeal. Darwin's theory has been abused and misrepresented by friend and foe alike. It has been misappropriated to lend scientific respectability to appalling political and social doctrines. It has been pilloried in caricature by opponents, some of whom would have it compete in the schools with" creation science," a pathetic hodgepodge ofpious pseudoscience. Almost no one is indifferent to Darwin, and no one should be. The Darwinian theory is a scientific theory, and a great one, but that is not all it is. The creationists who oppose it so bitterly are right about one thing: Darwin's dangerous idea cuts much deeper into the fabric of our most fundamental beliefs than many of its sophisticated apologists have yet admitted, even to themselves. Even today, more than a century after Darwin's death, many

Darwin's dangerous idea
Daniel C Dennett
The Sciences 35 (3), 34-40, 1995
When Iwas A SCHOOLBOY, MY FRIENDS and I used to amuse ourselves with fantasies about an imaginary chemical we called universal acid. I have no idea whether we invented it or inherited it, along with Spanish fly and saltpeter, as part ofunderground youth culture. Universal acid is a liquid so corrosive that it will eat through anything. The problem with universal acid, of course, is what to keep it in. It dissolves glass bottles and stainless-steel canisters as readily as it does paper bags. What would happen ifsomehow you came upon a dollop ofuniversal acid? Would the entire planet eventually be destroyed? If not, what would be left? After everything had been transformed by its encounter with universal acid, what would the world look like? Our speculations were a diverting joke; none ofus expected to come in contact with such corrosive material. Yet in only a few years I would encounter something bearing as close a likeness to universal acid as anyone could wish. It was not a chemical but an idea-one that eats through virtually every traditional concept, leaving in its wake a revolutionized world view, with most of the old landmarks still recognizable but transformed in fundamental ways. It was the idea that Charles Darwin, in 1859, unleashed on an unsuspecting world. I was not the first to realize that I was dealing with dangerous stuff. From the moment ofpublication of The Origin ofSpecies, Darwin's fundamental idea has inspired intense reactions, ranging from ferocious condemnation to ecstatic allegiance, sometimes tantamount to religious zeal. Darwin's theory has been abused and misrepresented by friend and foe alike. It has been misappropriated to lend scientific respectability to appalling political and social doctrines. It has been pilloried in caricature by opponents, some of whom would have it compete in the schools with" creation science," a pathetic hodgepodge ofpious pseudoscience. Almost no one is indifferent to Darwin, and no one should be. The Darwinian theory is a scientific theory, and a great one, but that is not all it is. The creationists who oppose it so bitterly are right about one thing: Darwin's dangerous idea cuts much deeper into the fabric of our most fundamental beliefs than many of its sophisticated apologists have yet admitted, even to themselves. Even today, more than a century after Darwin's death, many
Similar questions