Reply to comment

I think the biggest question in my mind right now is, just what defines "Darwinism"? Somehow I can't see Darwin, the strict empiricist we've been discussing, being thrilled by the fact that there is an ideology named after him. Ideologists believe that their ideas are fixed, unchanging; immobile. It seems to me that an ideology of evolutionary thought is just as dangerous as an ideology of creationist thought.

I've always heard Origen of Species described as excruciatingly boring and dense piece of work. Boring it may sometimes be, but dense it is not at all. I've had denser introductory science books. I think this is what impresses me most about Darwin so far: he is an excellently clear writer.

As for other observations, I keep returning to Professor Grobstein's depiction of "the earth is flat" as a useful theory that people use every day. Are there ways in which the theory of evolution or its supposed ideological opposite, creationism, are "useful"? Obviously scientists use the theory of evolution and genetics to understand how bacteria change and evolve, for example...but how does the every day layperson conceptualize these theories on a daily basis?