2) Lyell was the geologist that proposed the theory of Uniformitarianism. This theory proposed that the Earth's crust changes occurred with the same speed and intensity as they occur today.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/02/4/l_024_01.html
3) In evolution, it is evident how changes within a species don't just take one generation to occur- they take multiple. Individuals do not change, populations do and so evolution occurs between generations. Additionally, change takes too long to be able to observe in one lifetime, but that doesn't mean it does not occur. Likewise to the earth'[s crust, changes within species may have taken thousands of years to happen, yet we can still observe and point out similar and different characteristics within species. Lyell influenced Darwin through his theory of uniformitarianism; the theory showed a correlation to species in the way that a lot of time passes between evolution, and certain traits that are necessary for survival are passed on through generations.
4) I believe it is possible that without Lyell's contribution to geology, Darwin may have not been able to propose his theory of evolution. Darwin was unable to explain the possibility of evolution until the theory of uniformitarianism was proposed, which influenced his thinking. Just as the earth's crust took millions of years to change and shape to the way it is today, the same principle was applied to species by Darwin.
5) The church did not agree with Darwin's theory of evolution because it contradicted religious beliefs. It was believed that all creatures created by God were fixed, and therefore a possibility of evolution did not exist. As a result, Darwin received a lot of backlash and controversy for his publication on evolution- as expected. Darwin's goal was to offer a plausible explanation for the evolution of species.
You offer a lot of good information on Lyell in the opening paragraph and then very little in the second. I don't mind if you provide a link to your sources in your post, but that shouldn't be used as a substitute for writing out your points yourself in your post. Students shouldn't have to go to your link to understand your point.
ReplyDeleteSome questions left unanswered: How does Lyell's explanation of geological change translate into Darwin's explanation for biological change? Can you explain the concept of Uniformitarianism? And what about Lyell's concept of Deep Time? What role did that play for Darwin?
To clarify: Lyell developed the theory of uniformitarianism, which demonstrated two things: First, that the earth was shaped through slow, gradual forces, a process that remarkably mirrors the process of natural selection, a parallel Darwin may well have noticed. Second, it demonstrated that these process occurred over a very long period of time, which was very significant to Darwin. Before Lyell, it was generally accepted that the earth was only a few thousand years old. Lyell demonstrated that the earth was at least millions of years old (we now know it is billions of years old). So how does that impact Darwin? Well, natural selection is a slow process. It would not have been possible for natural selection to produce not only the extant organisms in a few thousand years but also all of the extinct organisms. With Lyell's concept of "deep time", suddenly Darwin had the geological time he for his theory to work. Lyell, quite literally, gave Darwin the gift of time. Without that, Darwin's theory would not have worked.
I definitely agree with you regarding the issue of time, and how this was important regarding Lyell's influence over Darwin. You are referring to the issue of "Deep Time" which I explain in the last section.
While I understand the point you are trying to make regarding the bullet point "Individuals do not evolve. Populations do.", you must remember that Lyell did NOT support the concept of biological evolution, which is ironic since his theory was so important to Darwin's work. Lyell didn't contribute to this differentiation of the way evolution works.
So is there another point that might apply better? What about the point on the influence of the changing environment? Didn't environmental change play a significant role in Uniformitarianism?
I agree with your conclusion in the next section, along with your reasoning. I usually don't like to grant any one scientist so much credit as to be indispensable to the work of another, but in the case of Lyell, I'm willing to do so, primarily because without Lyell, Darwin literally wouldn't have had enough time for his mechanism to work. Without Lyell, Darwin was stuck.
"The church did not agree with Darwin's theory of evolution because it contradicted religious beliefs."
Actually, the church didn't know Darwin existed until after he published. This is not a question about the reaction he received *after* he published. It is a question about his decision to publish in the first place. Darwin delayed publishing for more than 20 years. The question is, why? And how did the influence of the church play a role in this delay? What were Darwin's concerns? And was he only worried about himself or was he also worried about how his family might be impacted by publishing? Recognize that his wife was very devout. How might she have been impacted if the church responded negatively to Darwin? Remember that scientists don't work in a vacuum. They can be influenced not just by academics but also by social, cultural and personal issues.
Hi Angelo,
ReplyDeleteIn regards to your answer for Question #4, I agree that without Lyell’s contribution Darwin would have never been able to propose his theory of evolution. I chose Thomas Malthus for my assignment. So until reading your blogpost, I had little realization of how truly profound Lyell’s impact was on Charles Darwin. This lead me to wonder what would have happened if Lyell never made this discovery. Darwin most likely would have never figured out natural selection or published his theories. It’s amazing to think where we would be now if these discoveries were never made!
Great post.
Hey Angelo! I liked how you pointed out that the Church had dealt out a great deal of backlash to Darwin about his evolutionary theory. Darwin's studies proved to be in direct contrast to the views of creation from Genesis. This way of thinking was revolutionary at the time and rattled the Church. They went out of their way to attack and discredit Darwin to support their own positions and tried to sway public opinion to detract from his studies.
ReplyDeleteAwesome post!
Hello Angelo, I enjoyed reading your point regarding the influence that Lyell had on Darwin's perspective on evolution. I too thought that Darwin's perspective had a big imprint on Darwin's theory.
ReplyDelete