NOTES Chapter One Iof the Works Published During His Lifetime, Four

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

NOTES Chapter One Iof the Works Published During His Lifetime, Four NOTES Chapter One IOf the works published during his lifetime, four constitute Darwin's main contribution to evolution theory. These are On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. or the Preservation of the Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (1859), The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication (1868), The Descent of Man. and Selection ill Relation to Sex (1871) and The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). After initial work in the late 1830s and the early 1840s, Darwin returned to work on his theory of evolution in 1856, and had produced over a thousand pages of text when the letter from A. R. Wallace arrived presenting Wallace's very similar theory of evolution. After the joint presentation to the Linnean Society of London of excerpts from Darwin's 1842-44 work and Wallace's articles and letters of the 1850s, Darwin then produced an "abstract" of his own work, which became the Origin of Species. The much longer work that he was producing at the time has subsequently been published in several parts. Two chapters of Darwin's 1856-58 manuscript were published during Darwin's lifetime as The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication, while the rest was published by R. C. Stauffer under the title Charles Darwin's Natural Selection (1975). This work is of interest because it contains many footnotes by Darwin referencing the source of his ideas and facts. These, along with many digressions, were not included in the shorter Origin of Species, in keeping with its role as an "abstract." 2Darwin accepted that characters acquired during the life of an individual could be transmitted to its progeny. Unlike Lamarck, however, he rejected the notion that in the higher animals this was mediated by an act of willing. Rather, he sought a physiological mechanism of inheritance capable of producing such a result, and the theory of pangenesis was the result. According to this theory, as set out in The Variation of Plants and Animals under Domestication (1868), tiny particles, or "gemmules" are produced by each bodily organ and encapsulate its state of development. These gemmules congregated in the sexual organs, to be passed on through procreation and activated in progeny. Activation resulted in the parental character being reproduced in the children, providing the basis for a belief in the acquisition of acquired characteristics. Darwin was concerned about the speculative nature of his thesis, and referred to it in letters as a "working hypothesis." He maintained it because it allowed him to include a large number of facts of heredity under a general hypothesis. The subsequent demonstration by August Weismann 185 186 NOTES FOR PAGES 5 TO 7 and others that the theory of pangenesis was false provides an example of a part of Darwin's theory that has been refuted. 3Darwin provided lists of factors of variation in his Essays of 1842 and 1844, Natural Selection, Origin of Species, and Variations of Plants and Animals. In the chapter "Laws of Variation" in Natural Selection, his list was as follows: the immediate or direct action of external conditions, acclimatization, effects of use and disuse of structure, correlation of growth, and compensation or balancing. In the Origin of Species, a similar, but not quite identical list was given at the head of the chapter on laws of variation. Darwin also considered that wide-ranging, much diffused, and common species varied most, as did species in larger genera as compared to those in smaller ones. 4In An Essay on the Principle of Population (1803), Malthus argued that human population increased more rapidly than food supply, resulting in over­ population, and the consequent lowering of the living standard. Malthus took this as an argument against revolution, the French in particular, as there was no way to permanently improve the living conditions of the mass of the population. Whereas Malthus restricted his work to human populations and was concerned mainly with political implications, Darwin extended the concept to all species, and drew the biological conclusion that the ensuing struggle for existence was the condition upon which natural selection acted. 5In a hypothetical and simplified example, the characteristic might be the length of the claws of an animal that procured its food by digging it up from the ground. If the claw length were too small, the animal would not be successful in feeding itself, while those animals with longer claws would succeed and "prosper," as measured by the number of their progeny. 6In Natural Selection, Darwin was explicit in indicating that Milne-Edwards' concept of biological division of labor suggested his notion of divergence of character: "The doctrine is in fact that of the 'division of labour,' so admirably propounded by Milne Edwards, who argues that a stomach will digest better, if it does not, as in many of the lowest animals, serve at the same time as a respiratory organ; that a stomach will get more nutriment out of vegetable or animal matter, if adapted to digest either separately instead of both." (1856-58: 223) Nonetheless Darwin rejected Milne-Edwards' opposition to evolution, and he noted that the same concept, that of division of labor, could be used in both an evolutionary and non-evolutionary context. Biological division of labor, which Darwin also referred to as the "law of economy," reappeared in modified guise as divergence of character in Darwin's mature theory, adding an element that was absent from his 1842 and 1844 Essays, though present in Wallace's 1855 paper. At least one commentator (Brackman, 1980) argued that Darwin took the notion of divergence of character NOTES FOR PAGES 7 TO 14 187 from Wallace without acknowledgement, and that Wallace, rather than Darwin, was the "true" inventor of the modern theory of evolution. But if Darwin took the idea of divergence of character from Wallace, then he also took it from Milne-Edwards, and on this point the acknowledgment was explicit in Natural Selection. 7Darwin stated in his text accompanying the diagram of the tree of evolution: "But I must here remark that I do not suppose the process ever goes on so regularly as is represented in the diagram, though in itself made somewhat irregular, nor that it goes on continuously; it is far more probable that each form remains for long periods unaltered, and then again undergoes modification." (1859, 1: 168) The term "continuous" referred to the rate of change, rather than the process of change, and Darwin admitted that periods of stasis might be followed by periods of rapid change - as Eldredge and Gould (1972) would generalize in their theory of punctuated equilibrium. At no time did Darwin recognize non-continuity in the process of change, since this would amount to saltationist leaps which he held to be inimical to his theory. 8Darwin's main writings on plants were: On the Various Contrivances by which British and Foreign Orchids are Fertilised by Insects (1862), On The Movements and Habits of Climbing Plallfs (1865), Insectivorous Plants (1875), The Effects of Cross and Self-Fertilization ill the Vegetable Kingdom (1876), The Differellt Forms of Flowers on Plants of the Same Species (1877), and The Power of Movement in Plants (1880). 9The term "biopsychism" was used by Ernst Haeckel in "Our Monism: The Principles of a Consistent, Unitary World-View" (1892), where he distinguished between panpsychism, biopsychism, and zoopsychism as three theories of the scope of the mental - ranging from panpsychism as universality of mind to zoopsychism which restricted mind to animals alone. 10 Aristotle's theory analyzed terrestrial matter in terms of the four basic elements - earth, air, water, and fire - while a fifth element - aether - was reserved for celestial phenomena. Each of the four earthly elements was based on two non­ contradictory qualities - hot or cold, wet or dry. For example, water was wet and cold, and could be transformed into air by replacing the quality of cold with that of hot, producing the element which was both wet and hot - air. The quantity of "hot" or "cold" required was irrelevant, since all that counted was the fact of the qualitative replacement. llDarwin's quantitative view of the character of change was related, though not the same, as his defense of the thesis of gradualism. Gradualists hold that species form slowly over very long periods of time. This is an empirical consideration, and can be confirmed or refuted by measuring rates of speciation. 188 NOTES FOR PAGES 14 TO 16 Rapid speciation followed by long periods of stasis can occur within a continuous evolutionary process, as in the punctuated equilibrium of Eldrege and Gould (1972). The condition is that rapid speciation occur over a finite, albeit small period of time, and not occur in an "instant" or just one generation, as hypothesized by the saltationism of Goldschmidt's (1940) "hopeful monster." It is possible to have a continuous but non-gradualist theory of evolutionary change, and the Gould-Eldredge punctuated equilibrium theory need not be considered as saltationist. 12The problem of the status of "species" has been the subject of considerable debate, an example of which is Michael T. Ghiselin, "Species Concepts, Individuality, and Objectivity" (1987), as well as the reply by Ernst Mayr, "The Ontological Status of Species: Scientific Progress and Philosophical Terminology" (1987), both in Biology and Philosophy. The problem of the status of species has also been the subject of a long lasting debate in the pages of Journal of Systematic Biology. 13A simplified example of Darwin's quantity-quality distinction can be illustrated as follows: consider two populations of animals co-descended from a single parental stock, which differ in that members of population X are on the average 2" taller than members of population Y.
Recommended publications
  • A Companion to Analytic Philosophy
    A Companion to Analytic Philosophy Blackwell Companions to Philosophy This outstanding student reference series offers a comprehensive and authoritative survey of philosophy as a whole. Written by today’s leading philosophers, each volume provides lucid and engaging coverage of the key figures, terms, topics, and problems of the field. Taken together, the volumes provide the ideal basis for course use, represent- ing an unparalleled work of reference for students and specialists alike. Already published in the series 15. A Companion to Bioethics Edited by Helga Kuhse and Peter Singer 1. The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy Edited by Nicholas Bunnin and Eric 16. A Companion to the Philosophers Tsui-James Edited by Robert L. Arrington 2. A Companion to Ethics Edited by Peter Singer 17. A Companion to Business Ethics Edited by Robert E. Frederick 3. A Companion to Aesthetics Edited by David Cooper 18. A Companion to the Philosophy of 4. A Companion to Epistemology Science Edited by Jonathan Dancy and Ernest Sosa Edited by W. H. Newton-Smith 5. A Companion to Contemporary Political 19. A Companion to Environmental Philosophy Philosophy Edited by Robert E. Goodin and Philip Pettit Edited by Dale Jamieson 6. A Companion to Philosophy of Mind 20. A Companion to Analytic Philosophy Edited by Samuel Guttenplan Edited by A. P. Martinich and David Sosa 7. A Companion to Metaphysics Edited by Jaegwon Kim and Ernest Sosa Forthcoming 8. A Companion to Philosophy of Law and A Companion to Genethics Legal Theory Edited by John Harris and Justine Burley Edited by Dennis Patterson 9. A Companion to Philosophy of Religion A Companion to African-American Edited by Philip L.
    [Show full text]
  • SOHASKY-DISSERTATION-2017.Pdf (2.074Mb)
    DIFFERENTIAL MINDS: MASS INTELLIGENCE TESTING AND RACE SCIENCE IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY by Kate E. Sohasky A dissertation submitted to the Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Baltimore, Maryland May 9, 2017 © Kate E. Sohasky All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Historians have argued that race science and eugenics retreated following their discrediting in the wake of the Second World War. Yet if race science and eugenics disappeared, how does one explain their sudden and unexpected reemergence in the form of the neohereditarian work of Arthur Jensen, Richard Herrnstein, and Charles Murray? This dissertation argues that race science and eugenics did not retreat following their discrediting. Rather, race science and eugenics adapted to changing political and social climes, at times entering into states of latency, throughout the twentieth century. The transnational history of mass intelligence testing in the twentieth century demonstrates the longevity of race science and eugenics long after their discrediting. Indeed, the tropes of race science and eugenics persist today in the modern I.Q. controversy, as the dissertation shows. By examining the history of mass intelligence testing in multiple nations, this dissertation presents narrative of the continuity of race science and eugenics throughout the twentieth century. Dissertation Committee: Advisors: Angus Burgin and Ronald G. Walters Readers: Louis Galambos, Nathaniel Comfort, and Adam Sheingate Alternates: François Furstenberg
    [Show full text]
  • Balanced Biosocial Theory for the Social Sciences
    UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations 1-1-2004 Balanced biosocial theory for the social sciences Michael A Restivo University of Nevada, Las Vegas Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/rtds Repository Citation Restivo, Michael A, "Balanced biosocial theory for the social sciences" (2004). UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations. 1635. http://dx.doi.org/10.25669/5jp5-vy39 This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BALANCED BIOSOCIAL THEORY FOR THE SOCIAL SCIENCES by Michael A. Restivo Bachelor of Arts IPIoridkijSjlarrhcIJiuAHsrsity 2001 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillm ent ofdœnxpnnnnenkfbrthe Master of Arts Degree in Sociology Departm ent of Sociology College of Liberal Arts Graduate College University of Nevada, Las Vegas M ay 2004 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 1422154 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
    [Show full text]
  • Taylor & Francis Not for Distribution
    Template: Royal A, Font: , Date: 11/07/2011; 3B2 version: 9.1.406/W Unicode (May 24 2007) (APS_OT) Dir: //integrafs1/kcg/2-Pagination/TandF/RCRS/ApplicationFiles/9780415492447.3d 3URRI (iii) Complexity, emergence, and eliminativism 7D\ORU )UDQFLV 1RWIRUGLVWULEXWLRQ 3URRI Template: Royal A, Font: , Date: 11/07/2011; 3B2 version: 9.1.406/W Unicode (May 24 2007) (APS_OT) Dir: //integrafs1/kcg/2-Pagination/TandF/RCRS/ApplicationFiles/9780415492447.3d 3URRI 7D\ORU )UDQFLV 1RWIRUGLVWULEXWLRQ 3URRI Template: Royal A, Font: , Date: 11/07/2011; 3B2 version: 9.1.406/W Unicode (May 24 2007) (APS_OT) Dir: //integrafs1/kcg/2-Pagination/TandF/RCRS/ApplicationFiles/9780415492447.3d 3URRI 18 ELIMINATIVISM, COMPLEXITY, AND EMERGENCE Terrence Deacon and Tyrone Cashman The emergence paradox The evolutionary perspective turned the classic worldview on its head. Since Roman times, the world was understood to be hierarchic in structure, explained by a transcen- dent mind at the top. From there, the great chain of being cascaded down through angels, humans, frogs, protozoa, and finally stones. Inverting the chain of being switched mind from being7D\ORU )UDQFLV the ultimate explanation of things, to being the mystery to be explained. As an early critic of Darwin protested, this theory assumes that “Absolute Ignorance” is the ultimate artificer, even of life and mind (MacKenzie 1868). However, the1RWIRUGLVWULEXWLRQ notion that the distinctive properties of life and mind were pro- duced by a blind mechanism from inanimate matter runs counter to a fundamental assumption of Western thought. It is expressed in the oft-quoted dictum of the Roman poet–scientist Lucretius: “ex nihilo nihil fit,” from nothing, nothing [can be] produced (1994 [n.d.]).
    [Show full text]
  • The Strange Survival and Apparent Resurgence of Sociobiology
    This is a repository copy of The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/118157/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Dennis, A. orcid.org/0000-0003-4625-1123 (2018) The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology. History of the Human Sciences, 31 (1). pp. 19-35. ISSN 0952- 6951 https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695117735966 Dennis A. The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology. History of the Human Sciences. 2018;31(1):19-35. Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695117735966. Article available under the terms of the CC- BY-NC-ND licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology Abstract A recent dispute between Richard Dawkins and Edward O. Wilson concerning fundamental concepts in sociobiology is examined.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution, Politics and Law
    Valparaiso University Law Review Volume 38 Number 4 Summer 2004 pp.1129-1248 Summer 2004 Evolution, Politics and Law Bailey Kuklin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Bailey Kuklin, Evolution, Politics and Law, 38 Val. U. L. Rev. 1129 (2004). Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr/vol38/iss4/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Valparaiso University Law School at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Valparaiso University Law Review by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. Kuklin: Evolution, Politics and Law VALPARAISO UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW VOLUME 38 SUMMER 2004 NUMBER 4 Article EVOLUTION, POLITICS AND LAW Bailey Kuklin* I. Introduction ............................................... 1129 II. Evolutionary Theory ................................. 1134 III. The Normative Implications of Biological Dispositions ......................... 1140 A . Fact and Value .................................... 1141 B. Biological Determinism ..................... 1163 C. Future Fitness ..................................... 1183 D. Cultural N orm s .................................. 1188 IV. The Politics of Sociobiology ..................... 1196 A. Political Orientations ......................... 1205 B. Political Tactics ................................... 1232 V . C onclusion ................................................. 1248 I. INTRODUCTION
    [Show full text]
  • Free Will of an Ontologically Open Mind
    Free Will of an Ontologically Open Mind Jan Scheffel Division of Fusion Plasma Physics, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden, [email protected] Abstract The problem of free will has persistently resisted a solution throughout centuries. There is reason to believe that new elements need to be introduced into the analysis in order to make progress. In the present physicalist approach, these elements are emergence and information theory in relation to universal limits set by quantum physics. Furthermore, the common, but vague, characterization of having free will as "being able to act differently" is, in the spirit of Carnap, rephrased into an explicatum more suitable for formal analysis. It is argued that the mind is an ’ontologically open’ system; a causal high-level system, the future of which cannot be reduced to the states of its associated low-level neural systems, not even if it is rendered physically closed. We believe that a positive answer to the question of free will is outlined. Downward causation is supported and Kim’s problem of causal overdetermination is resolved. Keywords Free will, determinism, downward causation, emergence, ontologically open, mind-body problem, consciousness, subconsciousness. 1 Introduction and background Must we have the thoughts we have? Do our thoughts only happen, rather than being created by ourselves? Does determinism hold our will into an iron grip? The free will problem presumably is the most important existential problem and has generated shelf kilometers of literature throughout the centuries. One reason for the problematic situation can be traced to the common definition of free will as ’the ability to act differently’.
    [Show full text]
  • Reflexive Monism
    Reflexive Monism Max Velmans, Goldsmiths, University of London; email [email protected]; http://www.goldsmiths.ac.uk/psychology/staff/velmans.php Journal of Consciousness Studies (2008), 15(2), 5-50. Abstract. Reflexive monism is, in essence, an ancient view of how consciousness relates to the material world that has, in recent decades, been resurrected in modern form. In this paper I discuss how some of its basic features differ from both dualism and variants of physicalist and functionalist reductionism, focusing on those aspects of the theory that challenge deeply rooted presuppositions in current Western thought. I pay particular attention to the ontological status and seeming “out- thereness” of the phenomenal world and to how the “phenomenal world” relates to the “physical world”, the “world itself”, and processing in the brain. In order to place the theory within the context of current thought and debate, I address questions that have been raised about reflexive monism in recent commentaries and also evaluate competing accounts of the same issues offered by “transparency theory” and by “biological naturalism”. I argue that, of the competing views on offer, reflexive monism most closely follows the contours of ordinary experience, the findings of science, and common sense. Key words: Consciousness, reflexive, monism, dualism, reductionism, physicalism, functionalism, transparency, biological naturalism, phenomenal world, physical world, world itself, universe itself, brain, perceptual projection, phenomenal space, measured space, physical space, space perception, information, virtual reality, hologram, phenomenological internalism, phenomenological externalism, first person, third person, complementary What is Reflexive Monism? Monism is the view that the universe, at the deepest level of analysis, is one thing, or composed of one fundamental kind of stuff.
    [Show full text]
  • ETHOLOGY NEWSLETTER Continue to Give Us the Benefit of Their Experience
    BONDINGz A UNITARY PROCESS? To those whose term on the Executive Board ended with this issue, 1. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, William McGrew, William Charlesworth, and Cheryl Travis, I am certain that the entire membership is grateful for the vital roles you have played in the founding of ISHE! It is with equivalent enthusiasm that we welcome our new Board members: Michael McGuire, Esther Ian Uine, and Ronald Weigel. They will serve for two years, overlapping in 1982 with Robert Adams, Gordon Burghardt, En Fa.ce Mut..uat Gaze Wade Mackey, and Gai 1 Zivin. Committee aSSignments will be especially easy this time since most of our Board members are already serving in some capaCity. It seems fitting that we ask Michael McGuire to chair the committee for term requesting simultaneously that Bill Charlesworth and I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt ETHOLOGY NEWSLETTER continue to give us the benefit of their experience. Gail Zivin and Ron Weigel have their work cut out for them with .IClfVi 8. LllCKMD.. EDl TCft VOLUME 3 l.HlVER8IlY Of VASHIHGTOH the upcoming international meeting in Atlanta. Bob Adams Rfif(Qt, 1562 ISSUE 5 6EATTLE, WAOOIHGTDi 98195 will continue to handle our recent literature section, Wade Mackey our human ethology abstracts, and Gordon Burghardt our membership. If Esther Thelen would take over the nominations committee and if Ian Uine, with Bill McGrew's 18. .E..!::..a§. EQB. SPRIHG I continued help, would be willing to spearhead the European theater of our book review committee, then all immediate tasks would be covered. The masthead of this issue is flying the topiC for our next I have asked Nick Blurton-Jones to coordinate the responses.
    [Show full text]
  • Theories of Personal Identity
    Dean Zimmerman Materialism, Dualism, and “Simple” Theories of Personal Identity “Complex” and “Simple” Theories of Personal Identity Derek Parfit introduced “the Complex View” and “the Simple View” as names for contrasting theories about the nature of personal identity. He detects a “reductionist tradition”, typified by Hume and Locke, and continuing in such twentieth‐century philosophers as Grice, Ayer, Quinton, Mackie, John Perry, David Lewis, and Parfit himself. According to the Reductionists, “the fact of personal identity over time just consists in the holding of certain other facts. It consists in various kinds of psychological continuity, of memory, character, intention, and the like, which in turn rest upon bodily continuity.” The Complex View comprises “[t]he central claims of the reductionist tradition” (Parfit 1982, p. 227). The Complex View about the nature of personal identity is a forerunner to what he later calls “Reductionism”. A Reductionist is anyone who believes (1) that the fact of a person’s identity over time just consists in the holding of certain more particular facts, and (2) that these facts can be described without either presupposing the identity of this person, or explicitly claiming that the experiences in this person’s life are had by this person, or even explicitly claiming that this person exists. (Parfit 1984, p. 210) Take the fact that someone remembers that she, herself, witnessed a certain event at an earlier time. When described in those terms, it “presupposes” or “explicitly claims” that the same person is involved in both the episode of witnessing and of remembering. Purging the psychological facts of all those that 1 immediately imply the cross‐temporal identity of a person will leave plenty of grist for the mills of psychological theories of persistence conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Trinitizing the Universe: Teilhard's Theogenesis and the Dynamism Of
    Open Theology 2018; 4: 158–169 Intersubjectivity and Reciprocal Causality within Contemporary Understanding of the God-World Relationship Ilia Delio* Trinitizing the Universe: Teilhard’s Theogenesis and the Dynamism of Love https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2018-0011 Received January 20, 2018; accepted January 24, 2018 Abstract: The God-world relationship bears an ambiguous relationship between God’s immanent life and God’s life in history. The development of the doctrine of the Trinity in the early Church gave rise to a distinction between theologia and oikonomia. Bonaventure’s theology sought to express an economic trinitarianism without compromising the integrity of God’s life, thus maintaining divine immutability and divine impassibility. Twentieth century trinitarian theologies challenge the notion of divine immutability in light of modern science and radical suffering. This paper develops on the heels of twentieth century theology by focusing in particular on the philosophical shifts rendered by modern science and technology. In particular, the insights of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin are explored with regard to Trinity and evolution, precisely because Teilhard intuited that evolution and the new physics evoke a radically new understanding of God. Building on Teilhard’s insights, I suggest that divine creative love is expressed in a fourth mystery which Teilhard called ‟pleromization.” Pleromization is the outflow of divine creative union or, literally, God filling the universe with divine life. Teilhard recapitulates this idea in the evolution of Christ so that theologia and oikonomia are one movement of divine love. My principal thesis is that the Trinity is integrally related to the world; the fullness of divine love includes the personalization of created reality, symbolized by the Christ.
    [Show full text]
  • Creation and the Theory of Evolution
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Boardman Lectureship in Christian Ethics Department of Religious Studies 4-24-1997 Creation and the Theory of Evolution Francisco J. Ayala University of California, Irvine Wolfhart Pannenberg University of Munich Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/boardman Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons Recommended Citation Ayala, Francisco J. and Pannenberg, Wolfhart, "Creation and the Theory of Evolution" (1997). Boardman Lectureship in Christian Ethics. 6. https://repository.upenn.edu/boardman/6 Boardman Lecture XXXV. Edited and Foreword by Susan Marks. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/boardman/6 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Creation and the Theory of Evolution Abstract The Boardman Lecture, in cooperation with the Center For Theology and The Natural Sciences and The John Templeton Foundation, funded a conference on Creation and Theory of Evolution. The conference explored religion and science by offering two different approaches to the question of human origins. Geneticist Francisco Ayala explains the present state of our understanding of evolution and argues that such human phenomena as morality and religion are by-products of the evolutionary process that cannot be explained by natural selection. His lecture appears as "The Evolutionary Transcendence of Humankind." Dr. Pannenberg stressed that the God of religious faith must be the Creator of the same nature that is studied by scientists. He explores aspects of the Genesis creation story that are compatible with the theory of evolution. His lecture is "Human Life: Creation Versus Evolution?" Disciplines Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Comments Boardman Lecture XXXV.
    [Show full text]