Defending the Christian Worlview, Creationism, and Intelligent Design
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Defending the Christian Worlview, Creationism, and Intelligent Design

This is my personal virtual library, where i collect information, which leads in my view to the Christian faith, creationism, and Intelligent Design as the best explanation of the origin of the physical Universe, life, and biodiversity

You are not connected. Please login or register

Defending the Christian Worlview, Creationism, and Intelligent Design » Origin of life » Charles Darwin and the Origin of Life

Charles Darwin and the Origin of Life

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1Charles Darwin and the Origin of Life Empty Charles Darwin and the Origin of Life Wed Jan 23, 2019 1:36 pm


Charles Darwin and the Origin of Life

When Charles Darwin published The Origin of Species 150 years ago he consciously avoided discussing the origin of life. However, analysis of some other texts written by Darwin, and of the correspondence he exchanged with friends and colleagues demonstrates that he took for granted the possibility of a natural emergence of the first life forms. As shown by notes from the pages he excised from his private notebooks, as early as 1837 Darwin was convinced that “the intimate relation of Life with laws of chemical combination, & the universality of latter render spontaneous generation not improbable”. Like many of his contemporaries, Darwin rejected the idea that putrefaction of preexisting
organic compounds could lead to the appearance of organisms. Although he favored the possibility that life could appear by natural processes from simple inorganic compounds, his reluctance to discuss the issue resulted from his recognition that at the time it was possible to undertake the experimental study of the emergence of life.

In a now famous paragraph in the letter sent to the same addressee on February 1st, 1871, he stated that

«it is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living being are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sort of ammonia and phosphoric salts,—light, heat, electricity present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present such matter would be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed [...]». 1

Darwin wrote in a letter to Haeckel in 1872 [Letter 8506] (Strick 2000) that
«[O]ur English Dr. Bastian has lately published a book on so-called Spontaneous Generation, which has perplexed me greatly. He has collected all the observations made by various naturalists, some of them good observers, on the protoplasm within the cells of dying plants and animals becoming converted into living organisms. He has also made many experiments with boiled infusions in closed flasks; but I believe he is not a very careful observer. Nevertheless, the general argument in favor of living forms being now produced under favorable conditions seems to me strong; but I can form no final conclusions»

As for myself I cannot believe in spontaneous generation & though I expect that at some future time the principle of life will be rendered intelligible, at present it seems to me beyond the confines of science»

Although he insisted over and over again that there was no evidence of how the first organisms may have first appeared, he was firmly convinced it was the outcome of a natural process that had to be approached from a secular framework.

letter mailed on March 28, 1882, near the end of his life, to George Charles Wallich (de Beer 1959). In it Darwin wrote that,

«My dear Sir, You expressed quite correctly my views where you say that I had intentionally left the question of the Origin of Life uncanvassed as being altogether ultra vires in the present state of our knowledge, & that I dealt only with the manner of succession. I have met with no evidence that seems in the least trustworthy, in favour of the so-called Spontaneous generation. I believe that I have somewhere said (but cannot find the passage) that the principle of continuity renders it probable that the principle of life will hereafter be shown to be a part, or consequence of some general law; but this is only conjecture and not science.

1. file:///D:/Desktop/A%20science/Evolution/11084_2009_Article_9172.pdf

Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum