I have know quite few things about Darwin before reading his autobiography. We all know the man because of his great work "Origin of Species". As we all know he was the founder of the "natural selection" theory and therefore his name is widely spread all around the globe. Although the work itself is unique there are some side stories which questions the man himself. He has been in contact with several fellow scientist while he was on the "Beagle" voyage and some think that the ideas that were on the "origin of species" might be not his own findings but might be stolen from others. There is no way to find out if that is the case or not but the man himself is indeed far from the great scientist we had in mind. He believes man is much more powerful than women and there is no way a female can be a scientist and so on, so on. The autobiography on the other hand is very slim on many ways. I wonder why we know so few about this man while we almost know everything about the other bearded man on the photo Tolstoy. While reading the autobiography I came across with a movie named "The last situation". It takes place in Tolstoy's house in his late 70's. All strong english cast plays, however no one can say either we see them at their best nor the movie is the best on the famous author. Tolstoy the man we adore as writer and question as a man while we take Darwin as a scientist and scientist alone. I wonder why...
and coincidence it is...the last letter of Tolstoy to his daughter and son :
The views you have acquired about Darwinism, evolution, and the struggle for existence won’t explain to you the meaning of your life and won’t give you guidance in your actions, and a life without an explanation of its meaning and importance, and without the unfailing guidance that stems from it is a pitiful existence. Think about it. I say it, probably on the eve of my death, because I love you.
Tolstoy’s complaint has been the most common of all indictments against Darwin, from the publication of the Origin of Species in 1859 to now. Darwinism, the charge contends, undermines morality by claiming that success in nature can only be measured by victory in bloody battle – the “struggle for existence” or “survival of the fittest” to cite Darwin’s own choice of mottoes. If we wish “meekness and love” to triumph over “pride and violence” (as Tolstoy wrote to Gandhi), then we must repudiate Darwin’s vision of nature’s way – as Tolstoy stated in a final plea to his errant children.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder