My Darwin Slave Challenge

[AV1611VET]

In your opinion, did Darwin approve of slavery?

And I'll say this ahead of time for those of you who think unilaterally:

Just don't assume I'm talking about Homos.

Hint: Polyergus rufescens.

 

[JackRT]

In your opinion, did Darwin approve of slavery?

And I'll say this ahead of time for those of you who think unilaterally:

Just don't assume I'm talking about Homos.

Hint: Polyergus rufescens.

Taken from Darwin on race and slavery

I have watched how steadily the general feeling, as shown at elections, has been rising against Slavery. What a proud thing for England, if she is the first European nation which utterly abolish is it. I was told before leaving England, that after living in slave countries: all my options would be altered; the only alteration I am aware of is forming a much higher estimate of the Negros character. It is impossible to see a negro & not feel kindly toward him; such cheerful, open honest expressions & such fine muscular bodies; I never saw any of the diminutive Portuguese with their murderous countenances, without almost wishing for Brazil to follow the example of Haiti; & considering the enormous healthy looking black population, it will be wonderful if at some future day it does not take place. ― Charles Darwin to Catherine Darwin (May 22 - July 14 1833) The Correspondence of Charles Darwin Vol. 1 1821-1836 (1985), pp. 312-313

This web site has many more quotes from Darwin on the subject of slavery. In summary, he was vehemently against slavery but by todays standards he, like most Englishmen of the 19th century, would be considered at least mildly racist.

 

[AV1611VET]

In summary, he was vehemently against slavery but by todays standards he, like most Englishmen of the 19th century, would be considered at least mildly racist.

Did ... um ... you read my OP?

 

[JackRT]

Did ... um ... you read my OP?

I read the first question and simply assumed you were speaking of humans. My fault for paying you any attention whatsoever. I'm going to try to quit.

 

[DawnStar]

Taken from this site Darwin slavery and abolition - creation.com
In his Origin of Species, Darwin devotes several pages to what he called the “slave-making instinct”. He refers to the ant species Formica (Polyerges) rufescens (of Switzerland that he had read about) and Formica sanguinea (the one he observed in southern England), both of which make slaves of the ant species F. fusca. Darwin begins by “doubting the truth of so extraordinary and odious an instinct as that of making slaves” (p. 220). Then after giving his own observations he says: “Such are the facts … in regard to the wonderful instinct of making slaves” (p. 223).
Darwin then suggests that
“the habit of collecting pupae for food might by natural selection be strengthened and rendered permanent for the very different purpose of raising slaves. When the instinct was once acquired … I can see no difficulty in natural selection increasing and modifying the instinct—always supposing each modification to be of use to the species—until an ant was formed as abjectly dependent on its slaves as is the Formica rufescens.” (p. 224). “ … it is far more satisfactory to look at such instincts as … ants making slaves … not as specially endowed or created instincts, but as small consequences of one general law, leading to the advancement of all organic beings, namely, multiply, vary, let the strongest live and the weakest die” (pp. 243–244).

Thus, for Darwin, slavery was the result of natural selection and an absolute necessity in the case of F. rufescens. He wrote: “This ant is absolutely dependent on its slaves: without their aid, the species would certainly become extinct within a single year” (p. 219).
____________________
Then, in the 2nd edition of Descent (1874), which Darwin described in his Autobiography as “a largely corrected edition”, he wrote:

“Slavery, although in some ways beneficial during ancient times, is a great crime; yet it was not so regarded until quite recently, even by the most civilized nations. And this was especially the case, because the slaves belonged in general to a race different from that of their masters. As barbarians do not regard the opinion of their women, wives are commonly treated like slaves.”

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Taken from this site Darwin slavery and abolition - creation.com
In his Origin of Species, Darwin devotes several pages to what he called the “slave-making instinct”. He refers to the ant species Formica (Polyerges) rufescens (of Switzerland that he had read about) and Formica sanguinea (the one he observed in southern England), both of which make slaves of the ant species F. fusca. Darwin begins by “doubting the truth of so extraordinary and odious an instinct as that of making slaves” (p. 220). Then after giving his own observations he says: “Such are the facts … in regard to the wonderful instinct of making slaves” (p. 223).
Darwin then suggests that
“the habit of collecting pupae for food might by natural selection be strengthened and rendered permanent for the very different purpose of raising slaves. When the instinct was once acquired … I can see no difficulty in natural selection increasing and modifying the instinct—always supposing each modification to be of use to the species—until an ant was formed as abjectly dependent on its slaves as is the Formica rufescens.” (p. 224). “ … it is far more satisfactory to look at such instincts as … ants making slaves … not as specially endowed or created instincts, but as small consequences of one general law, leading to the advancement of all organic beings, namely, multiply, vary, let the strongest live and the weakest die” (pp. 243–244).

Thus, for Darwin, slavery was the result of natural selection and an absolute necessity in the case of F. rufescens. He wrote: “This ant is absolutely dependent on its slaves: without their aid, the species would certainly become extinct within a single year” (p. 219).
____________________
Then, in the 2nd edition of Descent (1874), which Darwin described in his Autobiography as “a largely corrected edition”, he wrote:

“Slavery, although in some ways beneficial during ancient times, is a great crime; yet it was not so regarded until quite recently, even by the most civilized nations. And this was especially the case, because the slaves belonged in general to a race different from that of their masters. As barbarians do not regard the opinion of their women, wives are commonly treated like slaves.”

Note that in the top passage, Darwin is not saying 'wonderful' as in 'it is brilliant'. He's using it in the Victorian phrasing of 'it is interesting'.

 

[DawnStar]

Note that in the top passage, Darwin is not saying 'wonderful' as in 'it is brilliant'. He's using it in the Victorian phrasing of 'it is interesting'.

OK. Just posting what he said. Interpret it however you want.

 

[AV1611VET]

Note that in the top passage, Darwin is not saying 'wonderful' as in 'it is brilliant'. He's using it in the Victorian phrasing of 'it is interesting'.

I wonder how Darwin would have interpreted this passage:

Proverbs 6:6 Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise:

Personally, I think he abhorred Homo slavery, but accepted Animali slavery.

(Unless he thought humans were animals. But then, maybe he made an exception for Homos. Dunno.)

 

[Jimmy D]

Taken from this site Darwin slavery and abolition - creation.com
In his Origin of Species, Darwin devotes several pages to what he called the “slave-making instinct”. He refers to the ant species Formica (Polyerges) rufescens (of Switzerland that he had read about) and Formica sanguinea (the one he observed in southern England), both of which make slaves of the ant species F. fusca. Darwin begins by “doubting the truth of so extraordinary and odious an instinct as that of making slaves” (p. 220). Then after giving his own observations he says: “Such are the facts … in regard to the wonderful instinct of making slaves” (p. 223).
Darwin then suggests that
“the habit of collecting pupae for food might by natural selection be strengthened and rendered permanent for the very different purpose of raising slaves. When the instinct was once acquired … I can see no difficulty in natural selection increasing and modifying the instinct—always supposing each modification to be of use to the species—until an ant was formed as abjectly dependent on its slaves as is the Formica rufescens.” (p. 224). “ … it is far more satisfactory to look at such instincts as … ants making slaves … not as specially endowed or created instincts, but as small consequences of one general law, leading to the advancement of all organic beings, namely, multiply, vary, let the strongest live and the weakest die” (pp. 243–244).

Thus, for Darwin, slavery was the result of natural selection and an absolute necessity in the case of F. rufescens. He wrote: “This ant is absolutely dependent on its slaves: without their aid, the species would certainly become extinct within a single year” (p. 219).
____________________
Then, in the 2nd edition of Descent (1874), which Darwin described in his Autobiography as “a largely corrected edition”, he wrote:

“Slavery, although in some ways beneficial during ancient times, is a great crime; yet it was not so regarded until quite recently, even by the most civilized nations. And this was especially the case, because the slaves belonged in general to a race different from that of their masters. As barbarians do not regard the opinion of their women, wives are commonly treated like slaves.”

I think you've hit the nail on the head!

Reading through that article I was surprised how reasonable it was considering that it was on creation.com..... until I got to the conclusion -

Desmond and Moore fail in their attempt to canonize Darwin, and whitewash the social effects of Darwinism, which led to the Holocaust,30(if this was their motive). Darwin did indeed have a cause, but hardly a sacred one—not the abolition of slavery, but the abolition of God.

Hardly subtle is it? I appreciate that it's meant as propaganda, but it must take a special sort of idiot to blindly accept such a blatant falsehood.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

OK. Just posting what he said. Interpret it however you want.

He's saying that it's interesting that animals practice a form of slavery, which was not something many people of at the time.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I wonder how Darwin would have interpreted this passage:

Proverbs 6:6 Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise:

Personally, I think he abhorred Homo slavery, but accepted Animali slavery.

(Unless he thought humans were animals. But then, maybe he made an exception for Homos. Dunno.)

If you want to know how Darwin interpreted that verse, you'd have to ask him.
And I'll ask again: what is the point of this 'challenge'?

 

[AV1611VET]

OK. Just posting what he said. Interpret it however you want.

I don't think they realize it's a simple YES or NO question.

James 3:5b Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!

 

[AV1611VET]

And I'll ask again: what is the point of this 'challenge'?

Just stirring the pot.

 

[DawnStar]

I don't think they realize it's a simple YES or NO question.

And if they had simply answered YES or NO you would have inevitably asked "why".

 

[TLK Valentine]

In your opinion, did Darwin approve of slavery?

And I'll say this ahead of time for those of you who think unilaterally:

Just don't assume I'm talking about Homos.

Hint: Polyergus rufescens.

We need not restrict ourselves to opinions when we have facts.

He certainly would've had no choice but to acknowledge its existence, and, like any good scientist, would've thought it a subject worth studying, especially in the case of Polyergus rufescens and the like... which he eventually concluded was an absolute necessity for that species' survival. Now, if you want to pass moral judgments on ant behavior, you might have too much time on your hands.

Regarding human slavery, the Darwin family were staunch abolitionists who lobbied for the passing of the Slave Trade Act of 1807 (which made it illegal for British ships to carry slaves), and the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833 (which made slavery illegal throughout the British Empire). So it seems most likely that Darwin was raised with some strong antislavery sentiments.

Next time, AV, don't telegraph your "gotcha!" questions.

 

[AV1611VET]

Regarding human slavery,

Let's don't.

This isn't about human slavery.

I thought I telegraphed that in my OP with the "unilateral" remark?

 

[quatona]

In your opinion, did Darwin approve of slavery?

I have no clue.
I don´t care about his private moral views. They have no bearing on the validity of his scientific findings (or lack thereof).

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Let's don't.

This isn't about human slavery.

I thought I telegraphed that in my OP with the "unilateral" remark?

Darwin said that slavery in animals was interesting since it was not something people in the Victorian era expected to see.

 

[AV1611VET]

I have no clue.
I don´t care about his private moral views. They have no bearing on the validity of his scientific findings (or lack thereof).

Do you think MOHER NATURE approves of slavery?

 

[quatona]

Do you think MOHER NATURE approves of slavery?

I don´t know that MOTHER NATURE is a conscious entity with moral convictions, in the first place.