Wallace’s Controversy with Darwin on Man’s Mental Evolution, on the Position of the Natives in Human Evolution, and His Anticipation of Cultural Evolution, as Distinct from Biological Evolution

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology book series (VERT)

Abstract

Darwin argued that man, including his mental faculties, developed from his sub-human ancestors by natural selection, sexual selection, and the use and disuse of organs (in the Lamarckian mode). He rejected any non-natural involvement in this process, and described a large number of behavioral and mental properties, including language, which can be found in rudimentary form in some animals. However, he assumed this, prior of the discovery of the crucial differences between the instinctive and specific calls of animals, and the symbolic language of humans. His major conclusion was that although the gap in the mental properties between humans and their closest relatives is enormous, it is quantitative rather than qualitative. With regard to the different human races, Darwin suggested that they differ in their inherited mental properties, but belong to a single species. In contrast to Darwin, Wallace did not regard modern human “primitives” as candidates that could fill the gap between humans and apes. He envisioned two steps in human evolution: first, the development of upright posture and freeing of the hands, brought about by natural selection, and then a second step that involved mainly the evolution of the brain and the mind. Wallace subsequently argued that some of the higher human mental abilities (mathematics, art, or the use of abstract concepts) were not the result of natural selection, since they are beyond utility. He claimed that these properties developed as a result of the action of a “higher intelligence”, which guides human intelligence and morality, and the whole evolutionary process, purposefully. There is some disagreement as to whether Wallace’s belief in the action of a “higher intelligence”, and his descent from Darwin on this issue, were the result of his support of spiritualism or was based on purely scientific arguments. Darwin, on his part, forcefully rejected Wallace’s support of the involvement of non-natural causes in evolution of human mental faculties and provided arguments that they were the result of the same mechanisms that acted in the formation of the body, and generally in species evolution. Later, S.J. Gould pointed out that the rapid rate of the development of several mental functions, which Wallace had regarded as an indication of a lack of role in the struggle of life are actually the result of cultural evolution. Both Darwin and Wallace did not pay sufficient attention to the large diversity in human mentality, and the rare and unique existence of individuals with outstanding achievements (“geniuses”). The latter’s unusual and unique creativity in various artistic, philosophical and related activities apparently developed intrinsically, from some “inner resources”, unrelated to the Darwinian “struggle for life”.

Keywords

Darwin Guiding intelligence History of science “Struggle for life” Wallace 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Alland, A. Jr. (1973). Human diversity. Garden City, New York: Anchor BooksGoogle Scholar
  2. Cartwright, J. (2001). Evolution and human behavior. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  3. Cassirer, E. (1944). An essay on man. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Darwin, C. (2009). The descent of man and selection in relation to sex (2nd ed. First Published in 1874). A Digireads.com Book.Google Scholar
  5. Darwin, C. (2010). The descent of man. Abridged with an Introduction by Ghiselin M. Minnesota. New York: Dover PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  6. Eiseley, L. (1961). Darwin’s century. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  7. Foley, R. (1995). Humans before humanity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. Gould, S. J. (1977). Ever since Darwin: Reflections on natural history. London: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  9. Gould, S. J. (1980). The panda’s thumb. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  10. Gould, S. J. (1988). An urchin in the storm. London: Collins Harvill.Google Scholar
  11. Harman, O. S. (2004). The evolution of a naturalist. American Scientist, 92, 470–473.Google Scholar
  12. Hofstadter, R. (1944). Social Darwinism in American thought. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  13. Howard, J. (1982). Darwin. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
  14. Huxley, J. (1955). Evolution in action. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  15. Kottler, M. J. (1974). Alfred Russell Wallace, the origin of man and spiritualism. Isis, 65, 145–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. McGinn, C. (1989). Can we solve the mind-body problem? Mind, 98, 349–356.Google Scholar
  17. Medawar, P. B. (1981). Stretch genes. Genes, mind and culture: The co evolutionary process, by C.L. Lumsden and E.O. Wilson. NYB, 28, 45–48.Google Scholar
  18. Nagel, T. (2012). Mind and cosmos: Why the materialist neo-Darwinian conception of nature is almost certainly false. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Neumann, J. (2013). Biology and culture. Journal of Life Sciences, 7, 322–333.Google Scholar
  20. Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct. New York: Allen Lane The Penguin Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Popper, K. R. (1972). Objective knowledge—an evolutionary approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Richards, R. J. (2005). Darwin’s metaphysics of mind. In V. Hosle & C. Illies (Eds.), Darwinism and philosophy (pp. 166–180). Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  23. Rubens, T. (2012). Genius and changes in social context in politics and neo-Darwinism and other essays. Exeter UK: Societas, Imprint Academic.Google Scholar
  24. Searle, J. R. (1997). The mystery of consciousness. The New York Review of Books.Google Scholar
  25. Searle, J. R. (2002). Consciousness and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  26. Searle, J. R. (2004). Mind – a brief introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Slotten, R. A. (2004). The heretic in Darwin’s court. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Shanahan, T. (2004). The evolution of Darwinism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shermer, M. (2002). In Darwin’s shadow. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Sterelny, K. (2007). Dawkins vs. Gould. Cambridge: Icon Books Ltd.Google Scholar
  31. Tylor, E. B. (1924). Primitive culture. Researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, art and custom (7th ed.). New York: Brentano’sGoogle Scholar
  32. Rycroft, C. (1985). Psychoanalysis and beyond. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  33. Wallace, A. R. (1892, 1980). ‘Spiritualism’. Excerpt from ‘spiritualism’ chambers encyclopedia. In N. G. Coley & M. D. Hall (Eds.), Darwin to Einstein. Primary sources on science and belief (pp. 645–648). London: Longman in Association with The Open University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Wallace, A. R. (1889, 1980). ‘Darwinism applied to Man’. Excerpt from ‘Darwinism Applied to Man’ In N. G. Coley & M. D. Hall (Eds.), Darwin to Einstein. Primary sources on science and belief (pp. 274–299). London: Longman in Association with The Open University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of PlantsTel-Aviv UniversityTel-AvivIsrael
  2. 2.Department of PhilosophyTel-Aviv UniversityTel-AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations