On On the Origin of Species

It is an argument that would no longer be considered scientific. I was surprised to learn upon reading On the Origin of Species for the first time, (Yes, I know I am late in coming to it, but it always seemed daunting.) that Darwin, like his critics and contemporaries, both religious and secular, presented his argument “from reason” rather than “from fact.” So I can see why Darwin was reluctant to publish and only did so with Wallace’s spur in his side. It’s not just that he didn’t want to offend his religious wife or associates. His argument just wasn’t all that strong. The critics act as though the argument “from fact” has never been made; they continue to argue “from reason.”

So it is a remarkable tribute to the power of Darwin’s insight that his argument stuck at all. It is actually more revealing to read the Voyage of the Beagle because not only is the writing much more lively, but you can actually see how the insight began to form around the kernels of hard data. In hindsight it all seems like an intellectual flashing neon arrow pointing the way to evolution. But had we been in Darwin’s place, given his knowledge and expectations, would any of us have come to the same conclusions?