|
Main
- books.jibble.org
My Books
- IRC Hacks
Misc. Articles
- Meaning of Jibble
- M4 Su Doku
- Computer Scrapbooking
- Setting up Java
- Bootable Java
- Cookies in Java
- Dynamic Graphs
- Social Shakespeare
External Links
- Paul Mutton
- Jibble Photo Gallery
- Jibble Forums
- Google Landmarks
- Jibble Shop
- Free Books
- Intershot Ltd
|
books.jibble.org
Previous Page
| Next Page
Page 15
The other was his controversy in 1885-6 with Mr. Gladstone, over the
account of the creation in Genesis. But, at least, this was a reply
to Mr. Gladstone's attack upon M. R�ville and his applications of
scientific methods to the problem.
Nevertheless, in this and the similar controversies on Biblical
subjects, his chief aim was not simply to confute his adversary. To
demolish once more the legend of the Flood, or the literal truth of
the Creation myth, in which a multitude of scholars and critics and
educated people generally had ceased to believe, was not an otiose
slaying of the slain. It made people think of the wider questions
involved. To riddle the story of the Gadarene swine was to make a
breach in the whole demonology of the New Testament and its claims to
superior knowledge of the spiritual world.
It may be noted in passing that, however hard he hit in these
controversies, he never descended to anything which would merely wound
and offend cherished convictions. His own feelings forbade ribaldry,
and abuse disgusted him, on whichever side employed. He declined to
admit that rightful freedom of discussion is attacked when a man is
prevented from coarsely and brutally insulting his neighbours' honest
beliefs. And this apart from the question of bad policy, inasmuch
as abuse stultifies argument. But if prosecutions for blasphemy
are permitted, it would be but just to penalize some of the
anti-scientific blasphemers for their coarse and unmannerly attacks on
opinions worthy of all respect.
For the rest, as he humorously remarks, when he began in early days to
push his researches into the history and origin of the world and its
life, he invariably ran up against a sign-board with the notice, "No
Thoroughfare--By Order--Moses." Geology and Biology were shut in by a
ring-fence; the universe beyond was a Forbidden Land, guarded by the
Lamas of ecclesiastical authority.
The first great clash with this authority, which focussed attention
upon the scientific struggle for freedom of thought, was that which
followed the publication of the _Origin of Species_ at the end of
1859, and culminated in the debate with the Bishop of Oxford at the
Oxford meeting of the British Association in 1860. A fierce but more
limited struggle for freedom of criticism within the pale of the
Church was to follow the publication of _Essays and Reviews_ (1860)
and Bishop Colenso's examination of the Pentateuch in 1862 and
onwards.
The first of these episodes was to have the widest consequences on
thought at large. Huxley early had an opportunity of commending the
book to the public. The reviewer of the _Times_, knowing nothing about
the subject, was advised to entrust the work to him, adding only the
opening paragraphs himself. But it was his retort to the Bishop of
Oxford six months later which publicly proclaimed how boldly the
challenge of authority was to be taken up. The story is well known;
how the Bishop came down on the last day of the Association meeting to
"smash Darwin." Crowds gathered to hear the great orator, who was also
reputed to carry scientific weight as having taken a high mathematical
degree. He knew nothing directly of the subject, but apparently
had been coached up, somewhat inadequately, by Owen, his guest at
Cuddesdon, who did not put in an appearance at the meeting that day,
but whose hand was also apparent in the Bishop's _Quarterly_ article
that was published a few days later.
After several merely rhetorical speakers had been cut short by the
chairman, Henslow, who ruled that scientific discussion alone was in
order, the Bishop rose in response to calls from the audience, and
"spoke for full half-an-hour with inimitable spirit, emptiness, and
unfairness," wrote Hooker.
He ridiculed Darwin badly and Huxley savagely; but all in such
dulcet tones, so persuasive a manner, and in such well-turned
periods, that I, who had been inclined to blame the President
for allowing a discussion that could serve no scientific
purpose, now forgave him from the bottom of my heart.... In a
light, scoffing tone, florid and fluent, he assured us there
was nothing in the idea of evolution; rock-pigeons were what
rock-pigeons had always been. Then, turning to his antagonist
with a smiling insolence, he begged to know was it through
his grandfather or his grandmother that he claimed his descent
from a monkey.
Here the Bishop left the vantage ground of any pretence to scientific
discussion, and descended to tasteless personalities. Here was the
opportunity for an equally personal retort, which would show an
audience, for the most part neither of a mind nor of a mood to follow
closely argued reasonings, that personalities were not argument, and
that ridicule is a two-edged weapon. As he spoke these words
Huxley turned to Sir Benjamin Brodie, who was sitting next him, and
whispered: "The Lord hath delivered him into mine hands."
Previous Page
| Next Page
|
|