Lecture 12: Victorian Naturalism PDF

Lecture 12: Victorian Naturalism? What is naturalism? ● Only natural laws and forces exist and can be detected in nature ● A system of morality or religion having a purely natural basis ● Not just these 2 kinds of naturalism, this is just an overview of what it means ● Without external forces or pow...

Lecture 12: Victorian Naturalism? What is naturalism? ● Only natural laws and forces exist and can be detected in nature ● A system of morality or religion having a purely natural basis ● Not just these 2 kinds of naturalism, this is just an overview of what it means ● Without external forces or power or manipulation or control, no control of the God ● Some kinds of naturalism do believe in God, but nevertheless believe that divine intervention does not happen in nature. This is not incompatible with religion at all. ● Opposes supernaturalism French revolution (in Britain) ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Naturalism associated with French revolution, radical, against religion 1788 French rises up and throw down their government and monarchy Radical and nasty people in charge (against religion) Chop heads of royalist or anyone else they do not like. The guillotine got blunt. A period in history that is especially brutal. Most famous political revolution but also have other consequences for us in history of science. (In Britain, they saw what happened in France and thought that is the consequence without religion) In this period, they overthrew everything that represents the old way. The old regime. Including the church. Abolished the church. Turn churches and cathedrals into temples of reason. Palaces of reason. o Claim to worship reason rather than god or Christianity Reasons and science were the new things set up to opposition. Loads of radical philosophers and thinkers go along with revolution. A couple of them were some of the first atheist, writing in European tradition. Radical also in thinking and theories. Britain saw what happened and thought this is what will happen to people who don’t believe in religion Pierre Simon Laplace, French astronomer. (1749 – 1827) ● Napoleon conquered Europe. ● Legend: Laplace presented Emperor Napoleon with astronomy book on function on universe. Napoleon like to ask people difficult questions. ● His astronomy was very radical from all previous centuries, left out God. According to law of nature, his version of the universe works by itself according to natural laws. (Laplace say he has no need for God) ● People believed in a clockwise universe. Every era, people have tendency to compare nature or human mind to the most complicated technology of that day. E.g. electric telegraph followed by telephone, computers (brain is like a hard drive) etc. ● The latest technology of that day is clockwork. Things can work on their own. Autometer in the past or robots today. Jean Baptiste Lamarck ● Lamarck and Laplace were associated with the French revolution, especially in Britain. In Britain, all of Europe conquered by Napoleon. Lamarck had nothing to do with French revolution, but his theory was tainted by the revolution. o Thus, any theory of evolution was tainted by this radical secular ● Reforming a type of political ideology would become tabooer after that. The establishment believe that something like French revolution can also happen in Britain. ● Firmer crackdown of radical ideas that questioned hierarchy or the church, the church’s authority. For instance: Lamarck evolutionism ● Lamarck’s theory, first substantial theory of evolutionism. Considered not okay. All ideas of biological evolution are labelled radical and not okay. ● Making fun of French radicals – saying that they are drunk. ● French radicals are killing church, religion, faith, government, society. Everything – that kind of image portrayed in Britain during the revolution. The argument from design ● In Britain, safer philosophies and sciences are more welcomed. ● Adopted ideas from John Ray and Carl Linnaeus. Rev William Paley is old fashioned by early 19th century 🡪 “There cannot be design without a designer” But more welcomed in Britain because it is safe. Can study nature but not undermining belief on faith in God. Can study nature and back up religion. ● Natural theology – Paley is the poster boy, study of nature to find evidence of God. ● Revealed theology – the information that people get from studying the bible. The Bridgewater Treatises 1833-1840 (Power, Wisdom and Goodness of God, as manifested in the creation) (as apparent and visible in nature) ● Funded by Earl of Bridgewater ● Different works published by leading man of science to show God. ‘Paley’ program ● By 1830, a lot of people were sniggering at this after French revolution. Sniggering at this safe or pious (very religious) science. But Britain more accepting ● Books o The Adaptation of External Nature to the Moral and Intellectual Condition of Man, by Thomas Chalmers, D.D. o On the adaptation of external nature to the physical condition of men, by John Kidd, M.D. o Astronomy and general physics considered with reference to Natural Theology by William Wewell o The hand, its Mechanism and Vital Endowments are evincing Design by Sir Charles Bell o Animal and Vegetable Physiology considered with reference to Natural Theology by Peter Mark Rooget o o Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology, by William Buckland On the History, Habits and instincts of animals, by William Kirby Charles Babbage, The Ninth Bridgewater Treatise (1837) *making fun of religion, man of science ● One critic of the Bridgewater treatise ● Known as the inventor of computer (first) o Computer used to be a title 🡪 person who computes number ● He designed a machine to calculate ● In those days, English word ‘computer’ means a human being who compute. There were people who just do calculating. ● If only there were a machine to do this by stem. He set out to invent a machine called ‘difference engine’ which is like a calculator. ● He did not complete it because of lack of money and he is a perfectionist. But he had functioning smaller versions of the machine. ● Well connected. Good friend of Darwin. Talked about laws of nature. E.g. orbit of visible planet is askew, predict there is another planet and they discovered a new planet. ● Babbage would show off his machine in science meetings. ● He will say to his visitors in his drawing room.: you can compute things with his machine, it’s a kind of calculator. He wound turn on with a crank, and every time he does so, numbers on the display would advance by 10,000. He turned a lot of times, then he asked his visitors what would happen if he turns it again, his visitors said it will advance by 10,000 again, but it advanced by another integer. His visitors said his machine is probably spoilt, but he explained: no, I programmed it to be this way, I designed it. And we know that nature runs in the same way, by natural laws, in an incredible predictable way. ● His point: Nature is run by regular natural laws in predictable ways. He was actually undermining miracles. If something changes, people assume that its miracles, a divine intervention. Another possibility: you don’t understand the natural laws. Irregularities might seem to undermine the perfection of the law of nature but rather it might show that the law of nature are more perfect than we thought that they might appear to be altered. But rather a deeper law. The law is more complex that it seems. o Miracles are not by god 🡪 due to complexity of laws ● Vestiges also talked about this in his book. ● ***Babbage was a friend of Darwin ● There was another instance where they proved how powerful the laws of nature were, with planets where they proved law of gravity was due to another planet, not god John Pringle Nichol’s Architecture of the heavens 1837 ● Astronomer ● Wrote this book. He was following Laplace. ● No longer so radical to follow French revolutions thinker. ● Nichol rejuvenates Laplace astronomy to a wider audience. ● Nebula – spinning clouds in space. They believed that they have seen any stages of these spinning clouds – broad thin ones and smaller tighter ones. Nebular hypothesis basically suggests that the solar system was formed from these spinning discs of dusts and gases by laws of gravity. o No planets, no sun but materials were moving in the same way 🡪 argued that it is evidence of a solar process in formation o Particles swirl and get bigger, eventually forming planets (he was saying it was like evolutionary (GRADUAL PROCESS OF CHANGE) though he didn’t use this term) ● That is why our solar system is like one place spinning like the clockwork machine. Mr Vestiges also talked about this. ● Once again prove things work by nature laws, does not need anything outside nature. Consistent with Babbage’s calculating machine – all claiming that nature work by nature laws – this idea getting more and more common. ● There were certain people who were allied towards the idea that the natural world works by itself without the intervention of God. Whereas there are those who believe that God affected nature from time to time. ● THERE WAS NO SEGREGATION BETWEEN BELIEFS IN SCIENCE OR RELIGION THEN. Franz Joseph Gall ● Phrenology (science of the mind) o Book: Physiognomical system (published by his assistant in Britain after he left –> become controversial as it differs from their belief of religion) o A book review of it (harsh) when that time people were very polite got many to buy the book and read it ● Begins around the time of French revolution ● He believed that the bumps on the head showed the structure of the brain. Naturalistic and scientific way to determine human tendencies or intelligence. The first scientific psychology. Reflect human intelligence or behaviour. o Brains were divided into chunks (organs), which shows one ability each specifically (27) o Shows mathematical abilities, how perceptive you are, etc. ● His insistence on the brain, mind but he is not a materialistic 🡪 scientific (even human mind is under power of science) ● Successful lecture tour all over Europe. Hugely popular. ● Napoleon was one of the few who was not impressed. Johann Gaspar Spurzheim ● Gall’s disciple, a doctor. ● They 2 eventually had a falling out after Gall made loads of money and ended up in Paris. ● Spurzheim got bored of this as it was not as fun as following his master on the lecture tour, and his master is in the limelight while he was not. Hence, he left for Britain and has been learning English. ● Wallace is related, paid money to get his personality read. The Phrenological (Physiognomic) System (book) ● Spurzheim went to Britain and published this book in English, introducing the philosophy of the mind of the English-speaking world with this book. Published in 1815. ● Put Gall’s name as he was more well-known. ● Gall always used skull to show the different of brain, while Spurzheim used real human head with human face, something people can engage more. ● This became hugely controversial in magazines. Scientific people found this completely absurd. People think that he was just a quack and should not be getting these attentions. ● The most annoyed people were the brain anatomists (one in Scotland), they believed that you cannot feel the bump on people’s head and infer their personalities. ● He got a lot of fame, but also many caricatures making fun and saying how stupid Spurzheim was and how stupid those people who believed in it are. ● Phrenology died down mostly before the end of the 19th century, but it has few little bits linked to it on the inter-war period before the second world war. The fate of phrenology went from something at least debated at the highest social level and soon became completely ridiculed and dropped down to utter obscurities. It is not completely extinct, there has not been any phrenologists for many decades. It is dead. George Combe ● A lawyer in Edinburg. ● Early convert of Spurzheim to phrenology. ● Phrenology became his entire life. Key to solve every ill society, debates. Anything etc. ● Phrenology is just the context. What he did is more important. He published a book (phrenology) The Constitution of Man (what constitutes man) (not about phrenology) ● Combe published his book in 1828. Combe’s “doctrine of the natural laws.” Man is subjected to natural law as the rest of nature. o Book: Constitution of man 🡪 what constitutes man o Laws of nature applied to humanity ● Sold around 350,000 copies. ● He argued that human beings are subjected to natural laws and he developed his own sort of philosophy of natural laws, mostly ripped off from Spurzheim, who ripped it off from a brunch of French philosophers – copying, plagiarism. o Most important is laws of nature ● Combe’s book was very radical, in terms that people were angry with this book. His main opponents were other phrenologists. There was quite a split in the phrenology ● ● ● ● ● ● society or club at that time in Edinburg where some of them were Christian evangelicals that put bible and Christianity on top although they agree that phrenology is interesting, and some of them were cool minds who were more sceptical that put natural laws above everything – power of struggle between these two groups of people. So, there was clubs and societies set up to oppose this book (and vestiges as well). Book could replace religion. Combe’s book 🡪 stated that laws of nature are what you need to follow in order to live a good life. He illustrated it with this example: Imagine we have a ship full of good, moral, religious men, maybe missionaries, but the ship was in a really bad shape, the person owning the ship has not been taking good care of it, not well maintained. In the middle of the ocean, everything started to go wrong, he asked: will the ship sink or not sink as they are really good and moral men? He answered it will sink as although they are good and moral men, they didn’t pay attention to the laws of nature, that’s why the ship is broken, found in pieces in the middle of the ocean. He is trying to say no matter how good, moral and religious one can been, you cannot get out of the power of nature and science. Many says if there’s a ship full of really bad people, but ship was well maintained, the ship will not sink, although they deserve to. It shows that there’s nothing to do with morality as natural laws have been attended to by these ppl. He also argued that pain exists to inform you that you are not following the law of nature. Eg. waking up with a hangover, nature is telling you overdid it, drank too much alcohol and too little water. Another story: If you fall off the ship into the ocean, very painful process, but eventually you will drown, he argued that this is because there is no point of informing that you are breaking the laws of nature already. Death ensues as there’s no longer in any point for the nature to teach you that you should be following the laws of nature. He had this system of 3 laws: physical, organic, moral – different kinds of laws of nature in different departments. This book became the best-selling book apart from novels of the entire century. But now, on one has heard or remembered about this book anymore as it is so old and not respectable since it is about phrenology, unlike Darwin’s theory. Publicly burnt in at least one occasion. No one burnt Origin of Species. Not even vestiges, such a hated book, was burnt. Another book (Popular Phrenology, tried by the word of God, proved to be an Antichrist, and injurious to individuals and families, by Philip Jones) by someone else who cannot resist copying the title “The constitution of man”, just that he broke it down into 3 different types – soul, mind and brain. Combe was so influential that even his critic cannot resist copying him. o Picture showing a bust, the book ‘constitution of man’ roasting in hell fire – very radical book. o So radical that combe is set on fire in the imagery of the book But the sale of constitution of man is much higher than the other 2 books (Vestiges and Origin). Darwin’s book is like nothing compared to the other two. The sales are so high as they got a good printing, spent some money to print cheap copies, available everywhere: and because it was very widespread such that his 3 laws of nature were being copied by a lot of different sources. In the literature of that period – you have more and more people talking about the laws of nature, organic law, moral law etc. ● However, as Combe is not well respected since he was a phrenologist (people think it is silly), many people copied the way of talking in a lot of books but Combe was soon brushed down off the cockpit. Hence although the influence of his book and philosophy is huge, the philosophy became completely detached from the person who write it. It is utterly distanced. ● Prepared people for Darwin’s book. ● His book was so radical that when he died, London News, 28 August 1858 illustrated that “No book published within the memory of man… has effected so great a revolution in the previously received opinions of society… The influence of that unpretending treatise has extended to hundreds and thousands of minds which know not whence they derived the new light that has broken in upon them” o Book was so radicial and widely known that people know the book but don’t even know the author o Suggests that a lot of people imitated him and tried to integrate his theories inside their books o Change Victorian society 🡪 made it more secular (less religious) so it made people more ready to new scientific theories that explain humans Vestiges of Creation (1844) by Robert Chambers ● Book is influenced by Comb’s book of Constitution of Man o Robert chambers also friends with George Comb ● This whole scene of phrenology and philosophy of Combe about natural laws go straight into Vestiges because Robert Chambers (Vestiges secret author) is a friend of Combe. He lives in Edinburg too, a great player in the phrenological society in Edinburg. He also reads on the Nichol’s nebular hypothesis, Babbage’s machine which suggests that laws of nature can explain what some ppl deemed as miracle. All these radical ideas, and most of all Combe’s philosophy that natural laws are the most important thing for you personally, human beings, are being put into Robert Chambers’ evolutionary work (vestiges). ● Combe did not seem to be interested or believe in evolution at all, not really interested in biology, so the evolution part is new to Robert Chambers. These are the intellectual legacy behind vestiges. ● What Vestiges does is that it breaks all the rules. Nichol and Babbage were still respectable although they were being slightly radical and undermining certain conservative religious ways of looking at things, they were still respectable men of science. But Vestiges was not very respectable, it went too far, it said that all living things, specifically human beings are just animals that have evolved, everyone was very angry with this. ● People were also angry at the fact that they thought book bent other works like nebular hypothesis and Babbage’s work, and banned them from being respectable, into making them show a radical intention – arguable whether or not it did, but this is one of the reason why vestiges is so hated as it brings back all the things that were hated about the French revolutionary radical period, it is now religion and sanctity of man that is on the line, that’s part of why it’s so morally charged. ● Another reason that his book was ridiculed was that Robert Chambers believed and talked about phrenology, he talked about Dr Gould, Spurtzheim, Combe, Babbage, Nichol and Lyell as respectable authorities. People think that he could not differentiate between the real respectable scientists and fakes (eg.Babbage, Combe) – so he was once again ridiculed and not trusted. Biblical Criticism (Biblical scholarship) ● Does not simply mean criticising the bible. ● Criticism – scholarly editing and study ● Started in Germany in late 17th century, early 18th century ● Analysis of the Bible by German Biblical scholars such as Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834), David Friedrich Strauss (1808-1874), Ludwig Feuerbach (1804-1872), et al o Showed many new things about these documents: Many authors, not contemporary, many inconsistencies. The ancient manuscripts have many variations. Eg. Story of the woman caught in adultery ▪ Realise is not just the work of one hand but by many writers at that point in time o These ideas were taken to England (Britain) by Samuel Taylor Coleridge and George Eliot’s translations of Strauss’s Life of Jesus (1846) and Feuerbach’s Essence of Christianity (1854) o Liberal Anglican theologians began incorporating this historical scholarship into Christian doctrine in Essays and Reviews (1860) ▪ New way of making bible after this scholarship but have controversy ● These German Biblical scholars found many interesting things by studying the books of Bible (there were many different versions, only compiled in the later century), they analysed these books (ancient greek, latin manuscripts) like other historical documents and they found out and did all sorts of things which at first were thought by other people as being very radical, eg. by analysing the writing styles in books, they were able to tell if any of the information was being added afterwards by another writer with a different style, i.e. Not the original text. o A lot of inconsistencies and variables ● [EXAMPLE] One of the substantial additions: the most amazing one would be the story of which Jesus was caught in adultery case, Jesus’ critics brought up an woman who have been caught in adultery and according to Jewish law, she should be stoned to death, they wanted to trick him, he’s known for preaching mercy, if he agrees that should stone to death, he will be accused for being a hypocrite, but if he disagrees, he will be blamed for breaking the Jewish law, which he is not allowed to do, so he was stuck. According to the story, he said let those among you who has no sin to throw the first stone. After a while, people around felt embarrassed and left, and he let the woman go. A very beautiful story, very clever, but this famous story was not in the original manuscript and was written with a different style of the author of the original book. This is an example of what can be found out from the studying of thousands and thousands of manuscripts, the type of things that Biblical scholars found out. o Story was not found in the oldest copies of the book & vocab / writing style changed [so this story had been added later] o These discoveries lead to people losing their faith ● People studying these sacred religious books would be taken by people of other places as not okay, as being too radical, and maybe trying to underlie Christianity, but they were not. ● So, when these ideas were taken to Britain, just like how the radical French revolutionary things that are brought over to Britain, people found it not okay, being seen as dangerous things, even though this is happening decades later. Brought over by Samuel Taylor Coleridge and George Eliot. Strauss’s Life of Jesus – one of the first few attempts of writing on historical Jesus, people are still writing these books today, just that this is earlier in 1846. ● This again resulted in a huge debate, especially in the church of England, and the more liberal ones were quite eager to accept these findings, as they want their religion to be also scientific. What will freak you out is that they were equally sciency and religiousy at the same time, it is hard to imagine that today, but this is the way many of the Victorians were. These liberal ones want their faiths to be well substantiated by evidence, not a contradiction for them, it is just how they saw their religion. But there were also the conservative critics who do not think this way, they think it’s dangerous and shouldn’t be doing it. Can blame this on William Paley. Although he was considered so safe, he said: you can study nature to find evidence of designer, and this backs up his Christian religion. He’s teaching people to study the nature and find evidence to show that God is behind it. But with all these radical ideas coming in arguing that nature is just working by natural laws (although the people arguing for this are not atheist), that is what they found when they are studying it. This did undermine the faith of some people, Darwin may be one of them since he also followed Paley’s talk in Cambridge and was taught to follow the evidence of how nature works. This led to a crisis of faith for many people. Darwin’s Origin of Species (1859) ● Another of these big events, like vestiges. ● Controversial book. Huge range of reaction and opinions. ● Some people love it and some hate it and everything in between. ● All the events before this sets the background for Darwin book The Victorian crisis of faith ● A lot of people began to doubt their religion or faith, lost their faith ● It is now so famous and so common that in every Victorian novel and movie in Victorian time is that somebody has a crisis of faith. It is something that happens a lot in the stories. Means that after reading vestiges, constitution of man, or even origin of species, people are starting to feel that the pillars holding up their religious views may not be real or may be toppling, and they feel that their faiths are starting to crumble, start to have terrible psychological uncertainties and stress. Not that these people wanted to lose their faith, but they were troubled by the things they were reading – hence called a crisis. ● However, this did not happen to everybody, just some people, but something that was very characteristic of the Victorian period, that for the first time, apart from the radical French revolutionary, many people are changing their views quite substantially, giving up their religion, more certain than it had happened before. ● Not totally because of these sciency books, but also the type of Christianity that they were taught in the first place, if they were taught the version of Christianity to have evidence to back up their belief, then there would be no problem, there would not be a crisis, so if this type of Christianity were set up before those books appeared, there wouldn’t be any crisis of faith. Science Professionalisation ● Huxley the ‘Agnostic’ (1869) o Agnos is the dirtiest word in English back then (inmoral etc) o He is not a believer of god & uses the word agnostic (refuse to answer the question whether god exists or not) 🡪 allowed to make him look respectable in the scientific community but continue to push forward science ● Huxley is not trying to reform science for the good of humanity although he probably said so. He is a man who needs a job and to help the scientific community become one of which serious, talented, and quailed young men (no women) should be able to find professional jobs in science, and these jobs should be well paid (hopefully by the government or maybe by universities), respectable etc. it is not a very unselfish motive that he is putting forward, but a very selfish one. He wants science to become more professionalised. ● Image showing the later or end part of the 19th century when moved from science being on display to entertain gentlemen and their wives (amateur) to professionalisation (consisting of professors), which means not amateur. Darwin and his generation of men are mostly considered amateur (simply wealthy men devoted to science), probably only a few professors such as Henslow (in Cambridge) and Nichol (Professor of Astronomy), but it is not like there was a professional scientific community that Huxley and other reformists wanted to push for. Coined the term ‘scientist’. o Science became a more professional job o Huxley is one of the leaders who made science a professional job ● They did usher in a new world of more modernised and more secular science, but in a way they regulated the generation that they have been following like Lyell and Darwin to be old fashioned. John Tyndall’s Belfast Address (1874) ● One of the most famous punctuating events in the story is the physicist John Tyndall giving his Belfast Address, which just mean that the British Association for the advancement of science was meeting that year in Belfast, Ireland. ● Tyndall got the slot to give the introduction lecture, which turned out to be unbelievably provocative and controversial, reprinted and sent all over by electric telegraph. He made these points of all the authors in front that have talked about very overt, and he was speaking to a very conservative religious audience in Belfast, he was attacking them with these remarks and the audience did not like it. o Speech was controversial and radical (next day, he was published in news to be criticised) o “The sufficiency of natural laws – the properties of Nature itself do that we observe – leaving no room for gods – which is what some radical French revolutionary philosophers had sad ● He promotes the sufficiency of natural laws, natural laws work by themselves to make nature work, no room for gods – what the radical French revolutionary philosophers said. ● He added that religion must keep out of the boundaries of science. This was being declared in this official lecture of a national scientific meeting, where a large proportion of the people present are not only religious but are even clergymen. It is a very radical thing to say – that religion has no authority here. This is the type of things nobody had said openly and publicly except all the way back to the French revolution. People tried to represent Tyndall as the bad people during the French revolution who were chopping people’s heads off. People think that he is dangerous and not okay for putting forward these radical ideas. o Religious sentiment should not be permitted to “intrude on the region of knowledge, over which it holds no command” 🡪 religion has no authority to intrude science ● He has been called a pantheist. Pantheism. One meaning – believing in all gods. Pantheon in Rome. Ancient roman temples dedicated to all the gods. ● Pantheism – equate god with nature. God is simply nature. In all that I see, I see god. Does not believe in any personal deity. o Radical 🡪 saying theres no god, theres just nature ● Deist - asserts that reason and observation of the natural world are sufficient to establish the existence of a Supreme Being or creator of the universe Victorian evangelicalism, etc. ● Do not want to give the impression that the 19th century is simply a story of ever-growing secularism. Or religion in decline. ● Church attendance are going down in 19th century, but they are still building more churches in some places. ● Emphasise that there are some Christianity movements in Britain that are becoming more popular and influential at the same time of this story. Different from the story so far. o Centred on bible ● Evangelical movement was huge. o Might even think it’s a reaction towards these secular doctrines (but it is not) The big question ● How could Darwin’s theory be so successful, in such a short time, in such a religiously conservative world? o Because 19th century, everyone so religious but how did people accept his scientific theories 🡪 so why people could appropriate his views into their own views and not contradict religion. ● Despite the secular and radical people that talked about in this lecture, the Victorian society at that period is still much more religious and more conservative than the people today by comparing the proportion or percentage of people attending services. Being religious etc. ● The debate on Darwin’s theory was over in 15 to 20 years. In 1870s, the entire international scientific community accepted his theory. Despite having constitution of man being burnt, vestiges being kicked down the stairs, Darwin won the debate after 20 years. How did this happen? ● In contrast, although the society now is more secular and there are many more evidence for this theory now, it seems like there are more controversies now as compared to the end of the Victorian time – something that does not really make sense. ● Possible reason: it is not a question in the Victorian times to accept Darwin’s theory of evolution or your religion. Maybe the Victorians who first read Darwin’s book were more accustomed to accommodating new books or new books with their religious views than the people today as they have seen so many radical books coming in and out. They were able to blend views that are apparently contradictory more skilfully, more readily, more naturally and more easily than people nowadays – this may be the reason why Darwin’s evolution theory are so successful with the Victorian people but so controversial today.