Was Darwin a Eugenicist?

Was Darwin a Eugenicist?Aiden TamasauskasCharles Darwin is often cited as iodin the most pivotal contributors to the kind-hearted understanding of evolution. His magnum opus On The Origins of Species, documents his groundbreaking observations and theories from his voyage on the HMS Beagle. Darwins solve on essential pick lead to the view of evolution as being a growth of deviations, the academic degree to which stems from an original organism. The varieties of organisms that amaze survived oer time have done so beca intention of their specific aptness for their environment, and energy else. Essentially Darwin helped introduce the theory of excerpt of the fittest-in some other words, fate, as a central property of biological development. At the time Darwin released his theories, the nonion of chance was hugely controversial, and lead to questions concerning the rattling sanctity and precariousness of animal liveness. It was not until the publishing of The Descent of M an that Darwin dealt explicitly with the subject of the evolution of homosexuals. Darwin resolutely solves that benevolents are descendants of less complex livelihood reachs and that the fussy routes in which they have adapted to their environment is the paramount feature of their survival. Some scientists took from Darwin the theory of natural selection, and sought to synthesize it or rig it. The field of eugenics essentially claims that by contractable intervention the human raceway can be improved. in that location are some who would claim that by making human race less essential-or important-biological figures, and by putting their destiny in the hands of chance, Darwin somehow advocates for a type of eugenics or a genetic intervention or modification in the service of human life. This typography will demonst mark by dint of an analysis of The Descent of Man, that Darwin was emphati confabulatey not a eugenicist. This will be argued by contrasting the claim that Darwin was a eugenicist with an in-depth examination of Darwins understanding of human affectionateity desire, fellow feeling, and natural and sexual selection.To begin, Darwins treatment of how edict and societal values contributed to anthropogenesis shows an initial incongruence between Darwin and eugenicists. Darwin claims, man is a social being. We see this in his dislike of solitude, and in his wish for inn beyond that of his own family. (Darwin, Descent of Man, Carroll,529). Already, we can see that Darwin wants to highlight the way in which society is a product of both an aversion to closing off and a calculated ratiocination to stay amongst others. But why? There are sets of values (whether they be morals or behavioural norms) that at some point the ancestors of humans developed and began performing. Darwin clarifies, enjoining, although man, as he without delay exists, has few special instincts, this is no reason why he should not have retained from an extremely rem ote period some degree of distinctive sock and sympathy for his fellows. (Darwin, Descent of Man, Carroll,530). This quote explains that man has acquired a sense of obedience and love for his community, but by chance. This uncertainty of how these senses of love and obedience came about(predicate) should be read as an embracing or acknowledging of the unknow processes of deep time and natural selection, not a call to learn how to synthesis and produce genetic changes to these sensations. In other words, if one tribe included a great number of courageous, sympathetic and crease members, who were always ready to warn each other of danger, to aid and support each other, this tribe would without a doubt succeed best and arrogate the other (Darwin, Descent of Man, Carroll,535). Here Darwin shows that sentiments that were beneficial to tribes were often used to the utility of the most successful tribes, which shows that the group mentality of society has come about by virtue of bot h instinctual sentiments and the adopting of qualities that increase the success and decrease the bother of survival. Ultimately survival is a product of battling and adapting to ones environment.What sets human community isolated from that of lower animals is the sensation of regret they feel when having not acted in consonance with certain moral conduct. This is an appeal to humanitys concern with mental contents. If a human enacts, Darwin says, any desire or instinct, leading to an action opposed to the nigh(a) of others, he will feel no keen regret at having followed it but he will be conscious that if his conduct were known to his fellows, it would meet with their disapprobation and few are so destitute of sympathy as not to feel discomfort when this is realized. (Darwin, Descent of Man, Carroll,532). This is essentially what structures human morality. This conclusion agrees well with the belief that the so-called moral sense is aboriginally derived from the social instinc ts, for both relate at first exclusively to the community. (Darwin, Descent of Man, Carroll,532) This is to say that humans have a certain sensitiveness to acting in accordance with past impressions (this includes acting nobly and acting out of native desire) whereas other animals act instinctually without a moment of remembrance, regret, sympathy or empathy. Darwin as well as thinks that primeval man, at a very remote period, was influenced by the plaudit and blame of his fellows, meaning that he highly values mental enthral and virtues (Darwin, Descent of Man, Carroll,537, 559). Whether acting as a society in retort to their environment (natural selection) or choosing a mate (sexual selection) Darwin believes that humans have a special concern for each other that is not possible to treasure through eugenics. What is of the utmost importance to this discussion is the way in which Darwin believes that this predisposition accumulated over the long span of anthropogenesis-it ha s no intrinsic or necessary meaning other than its haphazardness.Darwins most notorious development, natural selection, is a theory that arguably serves as the antithesis of eugenics. Darwin explicitly explains that all the social qualities, were no doubt acquired by the progenitors of man in a similar manner, namely, through natural selection, aided by inherited habit. (Darwin, Descent of Man, Carroll,535). Besides instinctual habit-based decision making, social attributes in humans are a product of natural selection that is, sociality has been selected as the most beneficial arrangement for human lifes survival against its environment. It is an intellectual fallacy to equate the work done on the theory of natural selection to a secularized teleology, or blueprint of nature. Rather, natural selection is the unpredictable work of nature, not an objective plan. It is a law that is as random as it is inevitable. As opposed to being the law of a god, natural selection follows from the struggle for existence and this from a rapid rate of increase had he not been subjected to natural selection, assuredly he would n invariably had attained to the rank of manhood. (Darwin, Descent of Man, Carroll,540). In the same way that humans construct their society and its value judgments, natural selection is a process created by the struggle for life. This means that natural selection is a process that requires life to exist. A eugenicist would seek to interfere in the making of life in order to produce a life that is better. And thus, eugenics strives to prevent the very life that makes conceivable natural selection-the possibility for evolution-from ever coming about. It is unambiguous that Charles Darwin, the father of natural selection, would never endorse a means to intervene in the highly conditional, random work of natural selection.In conclusion, at his time, many were outraged by Darwins theories. But what the most extreme misinterpretations of Darwin conclude abo ut his theory of evolution is that he would ever endorse a preemptive intervention in the unraveling of life. That is, Darwin cannot be read as ever endorsing a eugenics program, as natural selection is literally the process of pre-established life fighting and adapting with its unpredictable environment. Darwins conclusion is that man descended from a lower form of life, and is marked by a difference in degree not kind from other species. This is not to insist upon the interference in the advance or evolving of humans as a species, but rather privledges the fibre that chance places in the struggle for life. By paying close financial aid to some of the tenants of his thought, this paper has shown that Darwins Descent of Man is a work that in no way advocates eugenics. In fact, his work resists any call to think or calculated interference in human life.BibliographyDarwin, Charles. Descent of Man. Ed. Joseph Carroll. On the Origin of Species. Broadview Press, 520-600. Print.Certif ication of AuthenticityI certify that I have read the Statement on Intellectual Honesty for this course, agree to endure by them and herewith confirm that this essay is wholly my own fresh and original work except where I directly quote from or allude to other sources, in which cases these sources are acknowledged through the use of full bibliographic citations and in no cases are the words of other writers placed in my essay verbatim without a clear attribute that they constitute direct quotations.Signature ___________________________