Once again we revisit Thomas Henry Huxley’s assault on the establishment, whether it be religion or those that lack the proper credentials (by his definition, and his alone) regarding what is to be accepted. His is an argument for higher education and the belief that once a person is granted a degree that person is entitled to respect far greater than the unwashed crowd that lacks this certification. (Shades of the Wizard of Oz.)
Huxley overlooked the obvious. That is, being an expert in one field hardly qualifies one to espouse from a pillar of authority ideas that for the most part can be drawn into question. A Nobel Prize Winner in one category is acknowledged to having been selected from his peers as having made a great contribution in his field of specialization, but can a winner of the Peace Prize be expected to know the intricacies of the medical profession. Or even more unlikely is it that those who “practice” medicine be expert in all the nuances of biotechnology and the advances that come day-by-day. Robert Chambers summarized this understanding (or better yet missunderstanding) on pp 43 of his Explaination (The followup to Vestiges): “Were a philosopher (supposing there could be such a being) to limit his view of mankind to juvenile schools, he might with equal rationality deny that there is any such thing in the world as infants in arms. “We speak of what we have seen”, he might say, “and, finding no specimens of humanity under three feet high, we are weak enough to bow to nature and believe that babes are a mere fancy.”” This should be borne in mind when considering the value ascribed to Darwin who after all was a geologist, not a naturalist!
At the time of his debates with Wilberforce, Huxley had the higher ground as the Episcopal minister found himself defending not only his religious beliefs but the merits of evolutionary theories. Huxley ignored those who preceded Darwin and raised Charles Darwin on a petard that could be followed by the “knowing ones”. From this view, Darwin was a humbug in that he promised more than he could deliver and the arguments supporting the Descent of Man were not fact but speculation. Then as now, evolutionary theories are in a constant state of flux and must be viewed as just that, theories. Evolution can never be proven! Yet it is not difficult to accept the premise. None better than Robert Chambers addressed the issue and in an easily understood book, Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation. Creation in his approach involves God (an organizational structure of evolution that can only exist by the hand of a superior being.) It is the process of evolution for which Darwin via Huxley gained credit, but evidence of the process documented by Chambers some fifteen or so years before Darwin made his trips and reported his findings.
To Chambers credit, he gave full recognition to Darwin, as well as many other naturalist who deserve to be remembered. But Huxley in his assault on the Church or any religion for that matter, and his socialistic viewpoint regarding higher authority based on education where logic and not obsevation is paramount, cast doubt upon those who might just be more expert in their understanding than Huxley or Darwin.
The debate continues!
****
Joe Wortham’s Home Page , About Joe Wortham , Directory
Questions? Comments? [email protected]