Darwin's Humble Presentation of Natural Selection

One of the most intellectually significant quotes I found in On the Origin of Species is Darwin’s following concession: “To suppose that the eye… could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree” (186). I found this quote significant because he demeans his own theory by calling it profoundly ridiculous in this situation which could easily fuel a counterargument against it and because he leaves the ultimate decision of belief up to the reader. A counterargument could be, “Darwin, you yourself label such magical abilities of natural selection ridiculous, and a scientist uncertain in his or her own theory is not convincing in the slightest.” However, Darwin proceeds to present a possible explanation as to how natural selection can be such a magician. On page 187, Darwin begins ocular evolution with an “optic nerve coated with pigment” and leaves the rest up to natural selection via descendants with modifications over the course of “millions on millions of years” so that “a living optical instrument might thus be formed as superior to one of glass” (189). Darwin offers an explanation to a problem he himself thinks nearly surmountable, and simultaneously allows an opponent who may disagree to weigh his conjectures accordingly. Darwin could easily have claimed his theory absolute fact and not have worried about the complexity of sight, but he does nowhere do so. In the abstract, he often states “If it could be demonstrated that” ___ “could not possibly have been formed by [natural selection], my theory would absolutely break down,” leaving his positions up to the rigorous debate of science (189). Near the end of the novel, he states the abstract lays down the “chief facts and considerations with have thoroughly convinced [him] that species have changed,” not that these facts should convince everybody. By leaving the ultimate decision whether to believe in the power of natural selection or not up to his readers, Darwin embodies the noblest of noble scientists.

Evolution in Humans

In Darwin’s Origin of Species, he argues that the most fit creatures will be the ones who are most likely to survive and produce offspring.  This notion makes perfect sense. When a creature is given a genetic characteristic that makes it easier to feed itself or flee from its predator this characteristic will likely be passed on to future generations.  However, when Darwin’s concept is applied to current humans it is very confusing.  In other words what unique traits in humans are allowing them to survive better than other humans.  Things that once mattered such as good eyesight, strong bones, or any other physical or mental traits no longer appear to affect a persons chance at reproduction.  If these traits no longer matter then what factors affect the evolution of humans?   Darwin’s theory is based on the idea that the most fit creatures will survive but with advances in medicine and the ability to correct physical deficiencies no characteristics seem to matter to a humans chance for reproduction.  However, economic status appears to have become a major factor in reproduction.  Lower income households are likely to have more children than a higher income house.  Economic situation is not determined by genetics so it is difficult to determine how this situation is affecting the gene pool.  

Regardless, Humans are no longer struggling to survive in many parts of the world.   Without this struggle for survival is evolution still occurring?  When all beings of a group regardless of their specific genetic traits all have an equal chance to reproduce does evolution cease? Then again maybe it is just a matter of time.  I think that there is a sweet spot for many species where there is no real direction of evolution because they are nearly perfectly suited for their environment.  Once there is a drastic change in the environment evolution in humans will once again continue because specific traits will once again allow certain humans to survive.  

The Concept of Time

In the second section of our readings in On the Origin of Species, I noticed Darwin touches a lot upon the concept of the passage of time. In fact, in his Chapter “Imperfection of the Geological Record” he has a section titled “On the Lapse of Time” (282). In this section Darwin seems to want to impress upon us the importance of the passage of time. He says, “It is highly important for us to gain some notion, however imperfect, of the lapse of years” (287). Continually, Darwin seems awed by the amount of time that life has existed on earth. He exclaims, “What an infinite number of generations, which the mind cannot grasp, must have succeeded each other in the long roll of years” (287)! At times, Darwin is so refreshingly human in his writing—especially in this last quote where he seems so mind-boggled by this huge concept of time. He seems to strip away the well-informed scientist for a moment and wonder with us all at this vast concept. 

I have often felt the same way as Darwin does about time. I think about what my grandfather lived through and it includes The Great Depression, WWII, the Cold War, the Vietnam War, Korean War, 9/11, the first African-American president, and more. This was all only in a lifetime, and that lifetime was but a century of the billions of years that have elapsed since the beginning of earth. 

There is a rich history of the earth before human existence. It is mysterious and only through indirect clues and marks on the earth can we truly see this history. Take the Grand Canyon for example, what a beautiful and awesome part of this world. And to think that it’s formation took billions of years of erosion and gradual carving away of the land. Darwin sites similar wonders saying, “The Craven fault extends upwards for 30 miles, and along this line the vertical displacement of the strata has varied from 600 to 3000 feet... yet there is nothing on the surface [of the sea] to show such prodigious movements” (285). He then continues to remark, “The consideration of these facts impresses my mind almost in the same manner as does the vain endeavor to grapple with the idea of eternity” (285). I can understand Darwin here: sometimes there are great changes occurring over a vast amount of time and trying to comprehend these cumulative massive changes is hard to wrap the mind around.

All in all, I just wanted to highlight Darwin’a fascination with time and show that we can relate to this concept even today. Also, I wanted to suggest that this argument is great for his book because he gives all of these examples of massive changes occurring over long periods of time and this is great support for his natural selection theory.

A Powerful Presentation

Darwin was a strong debater –while reading the assigned passages I was fascinated by his masterful use of language to help pull the reader into his own views. While it might normally seem dangerous to fill an entire chapter with refutals due to the inherent grouping of claims counter to his own that that might entail, Darwin pulls it off very well. He clearly states that “if it could be proved that any part of the structure of any one species had been formed for the exclusive good of another species, it would annihilate my theory” (Darwin 201). By explicitly laying out a parameter by which his experiment can be refuted, he both sets himself a safety net, a way of keeping credibility should the whole notion of natural selection be disproved, and sets a specific goal for opponents of his theory to achieve, keeping them focused on a single way of disproving the theory that he has already researched deeply (as evinced by his comment about the falseness of the “many statements” (Darwin 201) that have already been made).

By way of his unprepossessing attitude, Darwin also manages to draw in a strong audience. He presents his own theory at arm’s length, and then brings in example after example to prove it, all the while speaking as if one with the audience in skepticism. His use of sentences such as “we can hardly believe that the webbed feet of the goose [] are of special use to [this bird]” (Darwin 200) is just strong enough to count as argumentative, without giving off a confrontational vibe.

Darwin also uses religious language to keep more religious people interested. Wheras a person who firmly believed in the Bible in a literal sense would normally be immediately put off his theory completely, his introduction of phrases such as “[work as superior] as the works of the Creator are to those of man?” (Darwin 189) and “Have we any right to assume that the Creator works by intellectual powers like those of man?” (Darwin 188), allow people with such convictions to consider his theory, while giving protection to those who were already on questionable ground with the church and didn’t want to contradict religious teachings outright.

In effect, Darwin’s presentation of a possible alternative instead of a unyielding, definitive view on life allowed his work to spread and his arguments to gain much more sway than they might have otherwise.

Nature's "Peer Pressure" Towards Perfection

Within the Darwin’s discussion of transitional varieties and habits, I found his points quite fascinating on the ways natural selection has modified the different variations of species towards a natural “perfection.” Throughout time on this earth, supposedly nature has continually somehow changed the rules of the “game,” and everyone playing this game must conform and essentially alter one’s self to keep on playing in order to survive. As one thing in nature changes like the climate, food source, or competition, the inhabitants have to give in to the changes and modify themselves to survive. Such as the example of the squirrels, Darwin states that when “climate and vegetation change, let other competing rodents or new beasts of prey immigrate, or old ones become modified, and all analogy would lead us to believe that some at least of the squirrels would decrease in numbers or become exterminated, unless they also became modified and improved in structure in a corresponding manner” (180-181).

Darwin explains that this is what nature does for its living beings and thus alters them so that natural selection can play its course. I was almost caught “off-guard” by this analysis. Why would nature, which makes its creatures strive to some sort of perfection, play this “peer pressure” game on its players, when they should already have been evolved to perfection? It is like the players were almost to the end of this game, but then the rules and possibly the players changed dramatically.  It becomes a different playing field. Nature’s species has to once again go through the slow process of adaptation and conform themselves to these new “rules” and strive to the perfection nature seeks.

            “When we see any structure highly perfected for any particular habit, as the wings of a bird for flight, we should bear in mind that animals displaying early transitional grades of the structure will seldom continue to exist to the present day, for they will have been supplanted by the very process of perfection through natural selection” (Darwin, 182). Darwin points out that characteristics of these creatures may be perfect now, but when several factors change in due time, some other species will dominate unless the species by force of natural selection alters itself. This can also include human interference or immigration of other species, which will affect the surrounding ecosystems and cause the modifications of the several species found there.  Possibly, this becomes the never-ending game, which has several factors over time that inhibits nature’s processes on its living creatures towards “perfection.” 

Darwin and Overpopulation

One point made by Darwin that I found particularly interesting was the observation that populations tend to dramatically increase with the absence of external factors that cause a struggle for existence. “Lighten any check, mitigate the destruction ever so little, and the number of the species will almost instantaneously increase to any amount,” (Darwin, 66-67). Darwin observes that the impact of the natural system of checks and balances is so substantial that the alleviation of it will lead to a dramatic bloom in population.  This claim certainly makes sense in theory. What is interesting is to see it replicated in real life. One of the largest social and environmental problems that we are dealing with today is overpopulation of the human race. This phenomenon aligns precisely with Darwin’s theory. Due to a multitude of human benefactors, namely health care and industrial development, we have significantly raised the threshold for human survival. Not only can humans live longer, but we can also support more people in terms of food manufacturing and urban living. The change in lifestyle from one of survival to one of luxury allows humans to grow beyond the limitations of nature. It appears that we have “beat the system” of natural selection.

            However, two factors that Darwin pointed out as important checks of population growth are surfacing as global issues- food and climate. The issue of food is one that is well debated in our society today. It is not that we don’t have enough food- large-scale corporations certainly take care of that- it is that we lack appropriate means or intention of distribution. There are many, many people that are starving in our world because of this. Improper distribution of food is again becoming a significant limiting factor. Climate is another pressing concern in the form of global warming. When Darwin speaks of climate, he is mainly concerned with the way it impacts food supply. This is still an issue, but in our case another of equal importance are the dangers that global warming implies. Due to rising sea levels and intensified weather patterns, the certainty of safety is diminishing. Ironically, both of these factors are human induced. It is clear that our negative impact on the natural world is conversely causing a struggle for human existence.

The human species is yet to take this information into account in terms of family planning. As Darwin would observe, the ratio of number of offspring to competitive external factors in the human race has dramatically increased. Many species produce a large amount of eggs or offspring due to the low chance of survival, such as fish or turtles. At this point, human offspring survival is practically ensured. This means that the amount of offspring created is directly proportional to the population. Most people still exceed the amount of children that would solely replace themselves- thus the steadily increasing global population. While this issue gets into ethical territory in terms of how far one can impede on others personal desires, it is clear that from an environmental and evolutionary standpoint, we should begin to stabilize our reproduction rate in response to overpopulation in order to minimize detrimental impact on both the environment and ourselves as a species. 

The Implications of Artificial Selection

In light of our recent reading of Frankenstein, I found the parallel between Frankenstein’s creation process and Darwin’s discussion of artificial selection to be haunting. Frankenstein, like the breeders described by Darwin, break with nature in order to pursue the creation of a new species that is useful to them. Darwin mentions that some breeders “speak of an animal’s organization as something quite plastic, which they can model almost as they please” (Darwin, 31), an idea quite similar to Frankenstein’s manipulation of his creature’s body. As Frankenstein selected each of the creature’s parts and installed them into his new breed as a way to improve upon the human form, breeders examine the variation among their specimen and choose which traits they wish to pass on to the next generation. This process includes “pull[ing] up the ‘rogues’”(Darwin, 32), where the specimen with the less desirable traits are kept from breeding. This selection of individual pieces is similar to Frankenstein’s process of “dabbl[ing] among the unhallowed damps of the grave or tortur[ing] the living animal” (Shelley, 81) in order to find suitable organs for his creature. In both cases, it seems that neither Frankenstein nor the breeders are able to account for problems that arise from their individual rather than holistic selection of traits.  Darwin notes that the breeders “rarely [care] for what is internal” (Darwin, 38) reflecting a preoccupation with the superficial improvements on their specimen. As we have previously examined, Frankenstein’s lack of attention toward the creation of his creature as a whole lead him to abandon the creature. The artificial selection processes described by Darwin are still practiced to a wide extent. In the context of the emerging problems with agricultural today, it is interesting to consider the problems encountered by both creators. Both Darwin and Shelley seem to have anticipated problems with choosing pieces of a species based on its appeal as in individual piece and not as a part of a whole.