Today marks the 200th birthdays of two incredibly influential men in history. Charles Darwin, the man who used science to give a more rational answer to the origin of life than 'divine creation', the celebration has taken on a new meaning. The concept of evolution has become ingrained in our understanding of the world. And yet, to this day there are many who seek to interject the idea of creationism, or the versions into which it has evolved, "creation science" or "intelligent design" into science class (and yes, the pun is intended).
Interestingly, the idea of "evolution" has crept into virtually every aspect of modern life. There are the obvious connections, like genetics, in which we essentially speed up evolution (or perhaps create our own version of evolution) through genetic engineering in pharmaceuticals, crops, and other applications. But evolution is understood as we talk about first and second (and third) generation innovations, where first generations are often unwieldy and later generations are more user friendly. Think iPhones, iPods, computers, and everything from communication to transportation. Essentially, Darwin changed forever the way scientists, ecologists, sociologists and political thinkers view the world.
Abraham Lincoln, who also would have turned 200 today, was another thinker who made his mark on the US and the world. As the first of his new political party to become President, Lincoln presided over both the splitting, and the reunification, of the United States. The additional powers that he brought to the federal level set the stage for many of the national regulations that we have today. By keeping the United States united, he positioned us to grow into a leader of the free world, and perhaps the entire world. Of course, what we do with that power and leadership is another matter.
Lincoln's influence stretches forward through many President's hence, and takes on special significance in the current administration. Besides being elected from Lincoln's adopted home state, President Obama clearly was influenced by Lincoln's history and Lincoln's struggles. Obama admitted to reading Doris Kearns Goodwin's book, Team of Rivals, about Lincoln's ability to pull together his archest rivals for the presidency, all to lead the country through its most troubling period. Even the Lincoln bible was used in the swearing in ceremony for the new president.
Born on the same day in very different parts of the world, Darwin and Lincoln never met, and perhaps never even knew about each other. Darwin spent five years traveling the world on The Beagle and eventually defined how we think about life. Lincoln spent four years staying pretty much in Washington DC and eventually came to define how we think of leadership.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 60
thanks David.
Anna del C.
Author of "The Silent Warrior Trilogy"
http://www.annadelc.com
Lincoln moved the belief in the worth and dignity of each person from theory to practice, and set a new standard for human rights in the civilized world.
Darwin established a scientific theory, albeit an important one, that is still being contested in major ways to this day. We still lack proof that one species can evolve into another species. Over the last 200 years, Darwin's theory has been used to justify eugenics and the Nazi Germany extermination of the Jews as an "inferior race.
So, Lincoln advanced human rights in a tangible way, and Darwin advanced a field of scientific thought that is still contested and led to atrocities. Who would you award the Nobel Prize to?
1. Conflicts with their fathers which spurred them to prove their self-worth.
2. Being largely self-taught (Darwin studied theology and liberal arts at Cambridge, not science).
3. Having an extended period of self-exploration (both waited until their third decade of life to marry, which was unusual in those days).
4. Suffering from bouts of depression.
5. And, lastly, being in the right place and time to break free of a predominate paradigm of their age-- slavery in the case of Lincoln, creationism in the case of Darwin.
Source: Rebel Giants: The Revolutionary Lives of Abraham Lincoln & Charles Darwin by David R. Contosta.
I would vote Darwin more important on the world stage. Without his insights and writings, science would not have accomplished much that it did. People who think evolution a 'theory' do not understand the usage of the term in science (as we have discussed before) and those who contest this 'theory' might as well be contesting the fact that the earth revolves around the sun. This 'theory' has contributed much - to medicine, agriculture, animal science, etc.
Two great leaders in their respective areas - two people to admire and emmulate.
Both had influence, Darwin more on scientific thought...Lincoln more on political thought. But I very much agree with you, Randy, that Lincoln "moved the belief in the worth and dignity of each person from theory to practice, and set a new standard for human rights in the civilized world." While he didn't go so far as to acknowledge equality, he did clearly avow that "if slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong."
Randy did *not* blame Darwin for Hitler's atrocities. He said that Darwin's theory was just to justify those actions (and others in the U.S. back in the 20s and 30s).
Randy is right. The theory of evolution was misused in that way. (Like many other theories.)
I agree that Lincoln's influence was generational in impact. He took some big steps toward making the federal government stronger and bigger (ironic, given the mantra of his fellow Republicans today, or perhaps not, given the reality) and eventually that led to the strength that made us an international power [and yes, I do understand that others including FDR, Nixon, Reagan, and now Bush also contributed hugely to expanding the centralized power of the federal government]
Happy Birthday to both!!! (or rather, birth anniversaries well noted!)
Darwin had many amazing contributions, in addition to his work on biological evolution (natural selection), and most likely contributory to his work on evolution (the publication of his ideas)...
He contributed to the scientific knowledge on earthworms, barnacles, and the formation of coral reef atolls. He passed by the Chagos Archipelago on the voyage across the Indian ocean aboard the HMS Beagle and later corresponded with Captain Moresby (namesake of Port Moresby, etc,) about his exploration of the amazing islands of the Chagos and its reef formations.
Essentially, his work on atolls, (published as "Coral Reefs - the structure and distribution of coral reefs") discussed how some oceanic islands sink over time while their coral reefs remain near the surface creating the classic atoll form.
He discussed reefs and geological formations of Diego Garcia and the other atoll islands of the Chagos Archipelago with Capt. Moresby.
He was also a very strong abolitionist (as were most of his relatives).
I'd say Charles Darwin put his ideas and "theory" of life into "action" in his own every day life and cherished the wonder of life itself...
Best,
DJE
Wallace was of course a great thinker too. He did much of his exploring and his dawning evidence came from his travels in Indonesia and the "Wallace line" demarcates "Australian" type animals from other continental types... like Darwin's Galapagos Islands...
Anyhooo...
Peace
Best,
DJE
Lincoln lived in another space and time. Regardless of our silly and pathetic attempts to judge him by the standards of the 21st century, he was far advanced in his empathy and intelligence.
Later in the Civil War, he sat down with Frederick Douglass as two equals, and let himself be convinced that it was far too late to allow slavery to survive even in the states that had always considered it a birthright. In his second inaugural he voiced the idea that we still hold onto, that the terrible bloodshed of the War had to be about something more than re-establishing a miserable status quo; that it had to be about a rebirth of freedom. And so it was.
I am damned tired of people spreading the canard that Lincoln was a racist or pro-slavery. He was at first hesitant to advocate the total destruction of the Southern way of life for reasons of civility, but he soon realized that it was inevitable, so he let it happen so that something better could take its place.
Cheers!
Lincoln's views on slavery were quite complex. He always abhored the idea of enslaving others. He has several quotes that clearly show that:
"Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it."
"As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy."
And I like this one:
"Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally."
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause."
It pretty much sums up his political views, which were pragmatic and focused on the bigger picture - saving the Union. Shortly after this letter he issued the Emancipation Proclamation that freed the slaves in any Confederate state that didn't rejoin the Union by January 1, 1863. But even in issuing the Proclamatin he was pragmatic. He gave an opportunity to the southern states to rejoin the union, and if they did before the deadline then the slaves in those states would not have been freed. The Proclamation also didn't include the slaves in the border states. So effectively the Proclamation covered only the slaves in states in which Lincoln didn't currently have much control. As an Executive Order, it's effect wasn't direct or immediate. It did, however, change the political dynamics. As others have suggested already, Lincoln used the Proclamation as a political tool to effect the prospects of the war. He did not free the slaves until he after there were some Union victories to provide some political weight behind it.
So Lincoln was definitely anti-slavery, but not an abolitionist. He strongly believed slavery should not be allowed to spread to new states as they entered the Union, but also felt that it should not, or could not, be abolished in states where it had already existed. He felt this both from a legal standpoint and from simple pragmatism. But he also felt strongly that slavery was such an archaic institution that it would simply die out in the south as more and more states that didn't allow slavery joined together.
I suspect a lot of geniuses (or at least mildly smart) people were born on that day, Paul, thought not many would have become the household names these two did.
Would either of these esteemed gentlemen have approved of our behaviour today? I wonder?
That would depend on what behavior you asked them about. We are a construct of many behaviors, and not everyone behaves alike. They might marvel at how some of us waste the vast communication capacity we have, preferring instead to think two-dimensionally. Or they might marvel at how much we have in fact learned, and accomplished. There were people back then just as dense (if not moreso) as some people today, and just as surely there were people back then who could outthink our contemporaries.
David, thanks for the reminder about these two great people.
I think its interesting that every time I've pressed an intelligent argument about evolution in animals, it's not hard to convince most anyone that evolution is a viable theory - then when you bring human evolution into the argument - you get a different opinion from your audience.
What I'm saying is that it's not hard for folks to see and understand the evolution obvious in plants and animals, but humans are somehow more special.
We are a centric species!
nevermind...
Larry - I don't think Lincoln could be characterized as a racist in the present day sense, not by any stretch of the imagination. Back then everyone lived with a different perspective on the relationships between whites (owners) and blacks (slaves or freemen). Slavery was an every day reality, not some abstract historical reference.
Lincoln, while not considering blacks to be "equal" in all ways, always abhored slavery. He felt that all men should be treated in accordance with the Declaration of Independence, that "all men are created equal" in terms of the law and the right to pursue happiness. He was not an abolitionist, instead being more of a pragmatist. He felt the Constitution tacitly allowed slavery in the states where it existed, but felt that the founders wanted to restrict its spread to other territories so that it would eventually die away. His "Coopers Union Speech" epitomizes his beliefs in this regard.
I think he may have opposed slavery from early in his adulthood, but I don't see how he could have avoided thinking that blacks were a different, and inferior, race. I distinguish sharply between slavery and racism.