From the reading, it is clear that the author talks about two personalities, Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin, who have contributed immensely in shaping the modern world. Both men were born on February 12 1809, one to a rich British family and the other to a poor American family (Gopnik 2), but they went ahead to develop great ideas that continue to shape the modern world especially in the sciences and political domains. The present paper is a reaction to the reading.
There are several important themes that can be found in this particular reading. From the onset, it is evident that author is interested in showing how the two men – Lincoln and Darwin – contributed in shaping the modern thought and processes using the evolutionary lens. To demonstrate the evolutionary perspective, the author first introduces the concept of vertical organization of life to show how life was prior to the contributions of these men. In this structure, there is “a hierarchy of species on earth, descending from man on down toward animals, and a judge appraising us up in heaven” (Gopnik 2).This form of hierarchical structure, in my view, was central in reinforcing the social ills affecting mankind during this era, including slavery, as some individuals viewed themselves superior to others. While Lincoln fought hard to change the status quo and introduce democratic institutions in the United States, it remains unclear how the vertical organizational structure is any different from Darwin’s theory of evolution particularly in reference to humans and primates as the theory seems to acknowledge that modern-day people evolved vertically from the primates.
Exemplifying further on the vertical organizational structure which was predominant prior to the major contributions of Lincoln and Darwin, this author argues that people had a perception that the types “of organisms they saw on earth had always been here and always would be, that life had been fixed in place since the beginning of a terrestrial time that was thought to go back a few thousand years at most” (Gopnik 2). Although this statement is intended to demonstrate how life has generally evolved owing to the immense contributions of Darwin in the sciences and Lincoln in politics and democracy, it lacks merit as there were other sources of knowledge, including the Bible, that could be used to effectively demonstrate that life was not “fixed in place” as argued by the author. It is undeniable that Darwin and Lincoln contributed significantly to the establishment of modern thought, but other rulers and philosophers before them had also contributed immensely to this debate, hence it is incorrect for the author of this reading to use shallow perspectives to superimpose his own concept of how modern thought has been affected by the two men.
The next point of interest is that it is unconvincing, in my view, to use the evolutionary perspective as deployed by the author of this reading to show how governments across the world have evolved over the years, from autocracies to democracies. The author suggests that prior to the immense contributions made by Lincoln and Darwin to modernize the world, “societies without inherited order were intrinsically weak, unstable and inclined to dissolve into anarchy or tyranny” (Gopnik 2). While this statement may be valid based on evidence and experience, we still have perceived democratic governments that engage in tyrannical rule, and modern-day slavery is rife in some countries especially in the Middle East. Just as was the case in the early days when some people thought that it was acceptable or tolerable to take blacks toward Christianity (Gopnik 3), Western-based Christian organizations today continue to spread the doctrine to people of other faiths in spite of the fact that such a practice is not only wrong but also undemocratic. Consequently, the modern changes this particular author attributes to the contributions of Lincoln, in my view, are not evolutionary in scope and practice.
As suggested by the author, it is correct to hold the view that both Darwin and Lincoln were instrumental in facilitating people’s understanding that “the world was very, very old, and that the animals and plants in it had changed dramatically over the eons – and though just how they had changed was still debated, the best guesses, then as now, involved slow alteration through a competition for resources over a very long time” (Gopnik 3). Darwin’s theory of evolution has a concept of ‘survival for the fittest’, whereby species which are well endowed to compete for the scarce resources from the environment will survive at the expense of those with less capacity to compete. It is also true there is competition of resources between and among democratic countries for survival and stability as envisaged by Lincoln. However, as opposed to the evolution concept envisaged by Darwin, the rise and competition of democratic countries and institutions as envisaged by Lincoln is largely associated with the concept of emancipation.
The author is partially correct to argue that though Lincoln and Darwin did not constitute the modern world, they nevertheless assisted greatly in establishing our moral authority “by becoming icons of free human government and slow natural change” (Gopnik 3). It is also correct for the author to suggest that while Lincoln represents liberal democracy and a faith in armed republicanism and a government of the people as envisaged in modern societies, Darwin is instrumental in demonstrating how humans have evolved over time and how they continue to compete over scarce resources, hence developing various adaptation methods to remain competitive (Gopnik 4). However, in my view, other pressures and factors have been involved in shaping the modern world; hence it would be imprudent to argue that all of our moral authority is wholly predicated upon the contributions of these men.
Overall, therefore, it can be argued that the reading has effectively illuminated the immense contributions of Charles Darwin and Abraham Lincoln, but it is weak in associating their contributions to the evolutionary changes that the world continues to experience in the sciences as well as in the political and/or democratic front. The author does well to underline the fact that these men were mere mortals (Gopnik 5); however, he attempts to establish a linkage between their contributions and the direction that the modern world has taken without providing valid evidence to show that the world would have been different if Darwin and Lincoln never came to the scene. In my view, such a linkage should be established using evidentiary data and information rather than mere prose, and should also involve other important personalities that have contributed immensely in shaping the modern world.
Of course it is clear in our minds that Darwin helped to change how individuals perceived the natural history of the earth and that the end of slavery, initialization of free human-oriented democratic government, and the internalization of democratic institutions was occasioned by Lincoln. Indeed, their major breakthroughs can be termed as evolutionary in nature and scope. However, people need to debunk the idea that the two were singularly involved in the development of the moral authority that governs the modern world as espoused by the author of this reading.
Works Cited
Gopnik, Adam. “Twin Peaks.” Smithsonian. 39.11 (2009): 1-5. Academic Search Premier. Web.