“Evolution: A Controversial Co
What is the true definition of the word “evolution”? I have always considered the definition of “evolution” to be the modern, everyday definition that everyone goes by, which is “the process of unpredictable, random variation through time” of a species. I never had any other perspective on the word until I read Stephen Jay Gould’s essay entitled “What Does the Dreaded “E” Word Mean, Anyway? A Reverie for the Opening of the New Hayden Planetarium.” The essay brought to my attention the fact that “evolution” had a different definition before Darwin’s theory became mainstream. The Oxford English Dictionary defines “evolution” as “the sequential exposure of the prepackaged potential” (Gould 324). My high school textbooks always taught the common definition of “evolution” as the name of Darwin’s theory. There were never any ifs, ands, or buts about the definition. It was always the same dry, singular definition that I’m sure is in all high school biology textbooks. After coming across this bit of information, I was presented with this paradox: What is the true definition of the word “evolution”? Before one can understand the true meaning of “evolution”, one must understand
I think that reasoning behind his contemporaries not wanting to accept his ideas also lies in their own jealousy. Darwin introduced one of the most important concepts ever. They probably wished they had come up with it first. Instead of accepting his ideals and revolutionary concepts, they rejected them and mislabeled his process deliberately. It was the egocentric views of such contemporaries as Herbert Spencer that led to the establishing of “evolution” as the general name for Darwin’s process. “Spencer held a dominating status as Victorian pundit and grand panjandrum of nearly everything conceptual (326)” and instead of realizing the magnitude of Darwin’s process he decided to chastise it by purposely misrepresenting it. I don’t think that Darwin would be surprised as to the fact that the name of his process has a double-meaning, due to the fact that there was and still is a big controversy over his process as whole. I think both Darwin and Gould would agree with me on this: there will always be an argument of creation vs. “evolution”, but why must there continue to be an argument over what is the true definition of the word “evolution”? The fourth principal included the word “random.” Dictionary.com defines the word “random” as “having no specific pattern, purpose, or objective.” That is the complete opposite of what Gould presents the original definition of “evolution” to be. We would not face this additional problem today if “evolution” had undergone a complete transformation to become a strict and exclusive definition of biological change… (329)
Some topics in this essay:
English Dictionary,
Apes Humans,
Herbert Spencer,
,
Darwin Gould,
Hayden Planetarium”,
Jay Gould’s,
word “evolution”,
definition “evolution”,
Man's Nature,
darwin’s theory,
darwin’s process,
darwin’s contemporaries,
true definition,
definition word,
Henry Huxley,
true definition word,
definition word “evolution”,
Oxford English,
oxford english dictionary,
traditional view,
name darwin’s,
definition biological,
“evolution” name darwin’s,
sequential exposure prepackaged,
Join now to see the rest of the essay!
Approximate Word count = 1312
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
Example Essays Home
