Thomas huxley: Fossils, persistence, and the argument from design

Journal of the History of Biology 26 (3):545-569 (1993)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In struggling to free science from theological implications, Huxley let his own philosophical beliefs influence his interpretation of the data. However, he was certainly not unique in this respect. Like the creationists he despised, he made many important contributions to the issue of progression in the fossil record and its relationship to evolutionary theory. Certainly other factors were involved as well. Undoubtedly, just the sheer inertia of ideas played a role. He was committed to a theory of type and was heavily influenced by von Baer, who argued that one could not rate the different types as being higher or lower than the others. By the mid-1850s his animosity toward Owen had become extreme and he tried to discredit the man whenever possible; yet, as I have pointed out, he also was more than willing to cite Owen's early work when it suited his needs.But I believe the crucial factor in Huxley's eventually accepting progression was that he finally disassociated it from the idea of divine plan. This happened gradually through the 1860s and 1870s, as more and more fossil finds provided support for Darwin's theory. In evaluating this new evidence that supported gradualism, Huxley also realized that progression was an intrinsic part of Darwin's theory:The hypothesis of evolution supposes that at any given period in the past we should meet with a state of things more or less similar to the present, but less similar in proportion as we go back in time... if we traced back the animal world and the vegetable world we should find preceding what now exist animals and plants not identical with them, but like them, only increasing their differences as we go back in time, and at the same time becoming simpler and simpler until finally we should arrive at that gelatinous mass which, so far as our present knowledge goes, is the common foundation of all life.In concluding his first lecture to the Americans, he told them: “The hypothesis of evolution supposes that in all this vast progression there would be no breach of continuity, no point at which we could say ‘This is a natural process,’ and ‘This is not a natural process.’”85 Finally for Huxley, progression was no longer linked to Divine Plan

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Thomas Henry Huxley: The Evolution of a Scientist.Sherrie Lyons - 2000 - Journal of the History of Biology 33 (3):594-597.
Sherrie L. Lyons, Thomas Henry Huxley: The Evolution of a Scientist.M. Ghiselin - 2002 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 23 (2):309-309.
Touchstone for ethics, 1893-1943.Thomas Henry Huxley - 1947 - Freeport, N.Y.,: Books for Libraries Press. Edited by Julian Huxley.
Paley’s Argument for Design.Graham Oppy - 2002 - Philo 5 (2):161-173.
The Laws of Physics and the Design of the Universe.Stephen M. Barr - 2010 - In Melville Y. Stewart (ed.), Science and Religion in Dialogue. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 893--910.
What was Huxley's epiphenomenalism?Neil Campbell - 2001 - Biology and Philosophy 16 (3):357-375.
Indeterminism and persistence.Thomas Müller - 2011 - Philosophia Naturalis 49 (1):113-136.
The essence of T. H. Huxley: selections from his writings.Thomas Henry Huxley - 1967 - New York,: St. Martin's Press. Edited by Cyril Bibby.
Collected Essays 9 Volume Set.Thomas Henry Huxley - 2011 - Cambridge University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-05-29

Downloads
33 (#470,805)

6 months
10 (#257,583)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references