In 2018, the then Union Minister for Human Resource Development, Satyapal Singh calls Darwin’s theory of evolution “scientifically incorrect” And asked that it be removed from the Indian school and college curriculum. The next year, the Vice-Chancellor of Andhra University, Nageswara Rao Gollapally, claimed at the 106th Indian Science Congress that the “theory of Dasavatara” explained evolution better than Darwin’s theory.
Both instances sparked substantial controversy. However, little did we know that Mr. Singh’s statement also demonstrated foresight.
The National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) removed Darwin’s theory from the examination syllabus for class 9 and 10 students in the academic year 2021-22. In a development this year, the NCERT has now removed the entire section on development from its Class 10 textbooks.
Darwin’s theory of need, teaching change
Scientists and teachers across the country are naturally disappointed. As one of the most firmly established theories in science, Darwin’s theory not only explains the origin of humans (and all other forms of life in the world), but also rescues this explanation from the belief that a ‘ The intelligent designer’ (read: God) made them the way they are and put them in their place. Depriving students of this information, especially those who do not take up biology after Class 10, is “dangerous”, as dissident scientists and teachers have pointed out.
Our approach to teaching Darwin’s theory has, by and large, been to tell students the story of a lone Englishman (sometimes two Englishmen, if one were to throw Alfred Russel Wallace into the mix) who led the way in his time. Was swimming against the tide. And while Darwin should remain in our textbooks, this is where our teaching of his theory should change.
Darwin’s theory is based on the fossils he collected and the wildlife he observed during his five-year voyage (1831–36) on the HMS Beagle – a fact regularly taught. What is not taught, however, is that just before Darwin set out on his voyage, the ship’s captain handed him a copy of geologist Charles Lyell’s Principles of Geology.
Lyell, who studied glaciers, volcanoes and fossils, proposed the concept of “gradual geological change”: that geological events and objects today result from subtle changes that accumulate over a period of time, just as random mutations can cause some provide benefits to living beings. time, giving rise to their present species. Darwin himself acknowledged that Lyell’s theories had a strong influence on his work.
Biologist Ruth Hubbard, the first woman to hold a permanent professorship in Harvard University’s Department of Biology, wrote in 1979: “By the time Darwin came along, it was clear to many people that the Earth and its organisms It was history.” As an example, Hubbard speaks of the French naturalist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, who proposed his theory of evolution before Darwin. Flawed as it was, it also portrayed evolution as a process involving the accumulation of changes over time and did not involve an ‘intelligent designer’.
other effects
Another important aspect that biology classes tend to overlook is the influence of social beliefs of his time on the way Darwin viewed the natural world. Philosopher Bertrand Russell wrote how Darwin’s theory was “essentially an extension of laissez-faire economics to the animal and plant world”. The term, coined by economist Adam Smith and developed by Thomas Malthus, refers to self-interest and free competition in the marketplace. Malthus also propounded a theory of population in 1798, where he claimed that humans compete for limited resources until a catastrophic event leads to a decline in their population.
Darwin was greatly influenced – as he acknowledged in his autobiography – by Malthus’ ideas of competition in environments with limited resources. Thus, only those species survive that have variations that give them an edge over others – a phenomenon that Darwin called “natural selection”.
Finally, another serious lapse in the teaching of the theory of evolution is the consequential use of his theory – by others and by Darwin himself.
For example, Herbert Spencer’s idea of ”survival of the fittest”, proposed in 1864, was eventually absorbed into a philosophy called “social Darwinism”, best known for promoting eugenics in the late 19th century. In his later book, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex, Darwin claimed that men evolved to be naturally more intelligent because they were constantly forced to hunt for food and defend “themselves”. Had to use his “mental faculties”. Female ”and offspring.
Specifically, here Darwin appears to be invoking the same Lamarckian principle of use and disuse, which his theory of natural selection rejected in Genesis.
A reminder about the world of science
But, why should students and teachers in school be concerned with these aspects of Darwin’s theory? The reason is that these examples hold important insights about science in both the historical and contemporary world; It is rarely the story of a single man, and it is shaped by the social and cultural beliefs of its time (think how World War II was key to many scientific inventions and discoveries, including the atomic bomb), which It also actively contributes to
Most importantly, though, these examples remind us that science is a messy affair (like all human endeavors) that requires curiosity, creativity, and imagination as well as caution. If the strength of science lies in its ability to stand the test of critical inquiry, then science classrooms must develop an ability to embrace criticism, sometimes at the risk of confronting their own troubled history.
Editorial | Lessons learned: On the lack of professionalism in the deletion of NCERT in textbooks
The teaching of Darwin’s theory offers possibilities for this collision without diminishing the force of this collision. Thus, while Darwin should remain in our textbooks, how we teach him should change.
Sayantan Dutta is a science journalist