Darwin and religion
Sir: Mr Benny Green's articles are always a pleasure to read, and full of stimulating ideas. But this week he has someone 'grinding the lens of thought to the point where it reflects the facts.' This neatly dislocated metaphor appears the more contorted the more one looks at it. Does he mean 'grinding the mirror of thought'? Concave or convex? Or is the lens ground `to the point where it focuses on the facts'? But that is a different kind of idea altogether. More importantly, Mr Green has got it wrong about Charles Darwin.
Darwin avoided religious controversy for personal reasons — his , love for his pious wife, his friendship with the fundamentalist Captain Fitzroy; for scientific reasons—he had too much work to do to have time to spare for fruitless argument, and did not wish to prejudice the acceptance of his ideas; and no doubt tor political reasons too — he was a member of a privileged class which knew, or thought it knew, that the church was essential to its survival. To this end he was even prepared to include empty pious references to the Creator in later editions of On the Origin of Species. But Darwin knew, probably more clearly than any other man in history, exactly what he was doing. If we must use the word, we can truly say that his only deity was reason. And Samuel Butler, with his otiose remark about 'banishing mind form the universe' had got it wrong too. Frank H. Brightman 59 Rosendale Road, London.SE21.
Previous page
