A Public Debate: Creationism and Evolution
Charles Darwin, by Julia Margaret Cameron.
After the publication of Charles Darwin’s landmark work, On the Origin of Species, in 1859, scientists, theologians, and many others debated the theory of evolution. Prominent in the discussions were the roles of natural selection and biological egoism, the existence of the soul, and human knowledge of God and original creation. In the 1920s, fundamentalist preachers and religious organizations that upheld the Bible’s literal accuracy grew in prominence, providing a new challenge to evolution. Regionally popular ministers such as Frank Norris (1877-1952), William Bell Riley (1861-1947), and Billy Sunday (1862-1935) found a champion for their rejection of evolution in William Jennings Bryan (1860-1925), whose fame as a politician and orator galvanized national support for the issue. Opposing the denial of Darwinian theories, in particular, were scientists, progressives and freethinkers, including the famed criminal defense attorney, Clarence Darrow (1857-1938). Darrow aligned with Darwinism, strongly supported free speech, and was deeply critical of conventional religion.
Herbert Spencer. A System of Synthetic Philosophy. Vol. II, The Principles of Biology, I and II. New York: Appleton and Co., 1891.
Spencer (1820-1903), an influential and eclectic British philosopher, greatly helped to popularize Darwin’s theories and is credited with the phrase “survival of the fittest” often attributed to Darwin. Darrow drew on Spencer and others to support his own agnosticism, later writing, “I feel, with Herbert Spencer, that whether the universe had an origin–and if it had–what the origin is will never be known by man.” In various writings and speeches, Darrow questioned free will and espoused a belief that impersonal economic and social forces ultimately controlled human behavior. The views were often invoked in defense of his clients.
The title page shown here is from Darrow’s copy of Synthetic Philosophy, containing his signature and bookplate, drawn from the Riesenfeld Center’s collection of books from Darrow’s library.
Clarence Darrow, and Shirley Jackson Case. Darrow-Case Debate: “Has Religion Ceased to Function?” Chicago, 1921.
As a leading American public intellectual in the first part of the 20th century, Clarence Darrow lectured and debated on religion, free will, Prohibition, crime, and other topics. Strongly progressive as a younger man, Darrow first gained national prominence by championing the cause of organized labor. His abiding sympathy for the working poor continued throughout his life. In this Chicago debate, sponsored by the Workers University Society, Darrow rejected what he called the superstitious beliefs of religion and its place in American society. He took aim at preachers and the wealthy, who he argued profited from religion at the expense of the poor. He was countered in this debate by arguments on the popularity of religion, which met the needs of many believers.
From Clarence Darrow, “Absurdities of the Bible,” in The Debunker and the American Parade, 14 no. 4 (March 1931).
“Why am I an agnostic? Because I don't believe some of the things that other people say they believe. Where do you get your religion, anyway? I won't bother to discuss just what religion is, but I think a fair definition of religion could take account of two things, at least, immortality and God, and that both of them are based on some book, so practically all of it is a book.
As I have neither the time nor the learning to discuss every religious book on earth, and as I live in Chicago, I am interested in the Christian religion. So I will discuss the book that deals with the Christian religion. Is the Bible the work of anything but man? Of course, there is no such book as the Bible. The Bible is made up of 66 books, some of them written by various authors at various times, covering a period of about 1,000 years.”
From William Jennings Bryan, In His Image. New York, 1922.
“That necessary thing is a belief in God. Religion is defined as the relation between God and man, and Tolstoy has described morality as the outward expression of this inward relationship.
If it be true, as I believe it is, that morality is dependent upon religion, then religion is not only the most practical thing in the world, but the first essential. Without religion, viz., a sense of dependence on God and reverence for Him, one can play a part in both the physical and the intellectual world, but he cannot live up to the possibilities which God has placed within the reach of each human being.
A belief in God is fundamental; upon it rest the influences that control life.”
William Bell Riley and Charles Smith. Should Evolution Be Taught in Tax Supported Schools? Riley-Smith Debate. Minneapolis, 1920.
William Bell Riley (1861-1947), a noted Minneapolis preacher at the First Baptist Church, led his congregation for more than forty years. He was a leader, with Bryan and others, in a national crusade against evolution in the 1920s. Evolution was in his view a strictly materialistic account of life that posed an existential threat to Christianity. Like some others who rejected evolution, Riley took up scientific theories, arguing here that the dating of rocks and fossils was flawed and that evolution’s claim to account for all biological development should be met with skepticism. His main arguments against teaching evolution in schools were that it encouraged atheism and was thus immoral, and that it lacked sufficient proof as a scientific theory.