The Monist 55 (3):442-503 (1971)

Abstract
It is not too great an exaggeration to claim that On the Origin of Species was, along with Das Kapital, one of the two most significant works in the intellectual history of the nineteenth century. As George Henry Lewes wrote in 1868, ‘No work of our time has been so general in its influence’. However, the very generality of the influence of Darwin’s work provides the chief problem for the intellectual historian. Most books and articles on the subject assert the influence but remain very imprecise about its nature. It is very difficult indeed to assess what it was about the Darwinian theory which was so influential and how its influence was felt. This problem in Victorian intellectual history intersects with a related one in the history of science. There has been a tendency on the part of historians of science to isolate Darwin in two related ways. The first is to single him out from the mainstream of nineteenth-century naturalism in Britain and allow ‘Darwinism’ to stand duty for the wider movement of which it was in fact but a part. The second is the tendency to single out his evolutionary theory and to demarcate it sharply from those of his predecessors and contemporaries. According to this interpretation Darwin stood alone as a real, empirical scientist and provided the first genuinely scientific hypothesis for the process by which evolution might have occurred. The theories of the other main evolutionists—Erasmus Darwin, Lamarck, Chambers, Spencer, and Wallace—were more or less besmirched by ideological, anthropomorphic, or other ‘non-scientific’ factors or by the uses to which they were put by their authors. Charles Darwin is thus made to stand out as a figure of comparatively unalloyed scientific status and is treated in relative isolation from the social and intellectual context in which he worked and into which his theory was received.
Keywords Analytic Philosophy  Contemporary Philosophy  General Interest  Philosophy of Mind  Philosophy of Science
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0026-9662
DOI 10.5840/monist197155322
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,089
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Economic Consequences of Philip Kitcher.Philip Mirowski - 1996 - Social Epistemology 10 (2):153 – 169.
The Unseen Universe: Physics and the Philosophy of Nature in Victorian Britain.P. M. Heimann - 1972 - British Journal for the History of Science 6 (1):73-79.

View all 25 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Objects of Metaphor.Samuel D. Guttenplan - 2005 - Oxford University Press.
Darwin’s Place in the History of Thought: A Reevaluation.Robert J. Richards - 2009 - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106 (Supplement 1):10056-10060.
Darwin Was a Teleologist.James G. Lennox - 1993 - Biology and Philosophy 8 (4):409-421.
Pictorial Metaphor.Sun-ah Kang - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 1:121-127.
Causation as Metaphor.Robert C. Robinson - 2011 - Rupkatha Journal On Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities 3 (1):181—190.
Metaphor and Film.Trevor Whittock - 1990 - Cambridge University Press.
Perspectives on the Animal Mind.Robert A. Skipper - 2004 - Biology and Philosophy 19 (4):483-487.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-01-09

Total views
68 ( #167,033 of 2,498,995 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #279,629 of 2,498,995 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes