Charles Darwin would have never thought that natural selection would come to such a pass that those who get ‘elected’ will doubt the very idea of their own selection naturally by the nature to serve the larger humanity by being member of the legislation. It would have helped their own argument via social Darwinism that they are innately better incarnates to rule over the country or the world. The recent brutalisation of the NCERT textbooks though suggests otherwise yet when a learner will ask how and why we are on earth, the answer will come from creationism rather than Darwinism. Darwin in contest with God was sure to lose owing to his own idea of the survival of the fittest. Probably he never realised that between science and pseudo-science it will be the latter which will be fitter to survive.
The certitude of science to Darwinian theory is very high as it has undergone extensive amount of testing through experimentations and observations. Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace’s theory of evolution through natural selection became recognised in 1859 when Darwin published The Origin of Species. Even then people who had power and more belief in the divine book rather than science feared the social and moral implications of this theory. The problems of teaching natural selection to the newer generation are many for those who have more faith in the status quo than change. Natural selection is a simple theory that asserts how populations change by variation, inheritance, selection, time and adaptation.
Variation and Inheritance
The members of any given species are hardly the same. Those who are oppose this theory somehow believe that yellows, whites, blacks, aryans, dravidans, americans, english, pakistanis, muslims, hindus, christians, brahmins, dalits, gays, straight are very different species and only their own ilk will survive to which the propounder belongs. There is a fierce contest among the people who oppose natural selection to prove that they are the ‘fittest’ to reproduce and survive given any opportunity to compete. Similarly in the matter of inheritance, those who oppose Darwin believe that they inherited the best ancient wisdom from their ancestors and hence are the truest advocates of endogamy and purity of bloodlines. When women are exhorted to produce more children to strengthen the number of their religion or caste, probably it is the Darwinian elaboration which lurks in the backdrop.
Selection: Survival and Reproduction
When Iqbal wrote “kuch dam hai ki hasti mitati nahin hamari, sadiyon raha hai dushman daur-e-jahan hamara” (probably there is something inherently resilient in us that is why we are here, else the world has been against us). The intent of what Iqbal wrote also has Darwinian echoes as it points how the glorious us survived despite several invaders from Northwest fronts and the onslaught of European colonialism. This may also render us incapable to explain why OBC, SC and ST population together is higher than Brahmins and Kshatriyas when they are suggestively fitter to reproduce and survive. This explains the sinister and conspiratorial design behind the population explosion of certain religious and caste communities.
Time and Adaptation
This is one of the most problematic ideas in times when we have restarted celebrating the drive namely ‘Go back to Vedas’ and also in the times of ‘righting’ all historical wrongs. We are humans who should not adapt to the changing times; we should rather make efforts to go back in time to reclaim the power that we once had. The discourse of modernity, modern, and mass education similarly vouched for liberty and equality and also that all of us have common ancestry and hence belong to the same origin, It is probably the belief in a different creator implying my creator is stronger and superior than yours, which impedes believing in Darwin.
Darwin’s theory not only revolutionized the discipline of biology only but almost every other discipline, be it is economics, political science or educational theorization itself per se. The idea of competition, struggle for existence, survival of the fittest though not original to Darwin’s work yet attributed to him, has affected every discipline, curriculum and pedagogy. Removing Darwin and every reference to his theorization may shackle the very foundation of many other disciplines.
Also, the people having scientific temper would think in multi-dimensional ways developing their curiosity to explore more of nature as Darwin did. Such a naturalistic worldview of science can be the biggest threat to the ideologically driven polity, progressive science aka Darwinism and regressive ideology aka majoritarianism won’t go hand in hand. Any state which makes efforts to be hegemonic cannot tolerate people asking questions. Three noted Darwinian followers (or activists) with scientific temper namely Gauri Lankesh, Narendra Dabholkar and Kalburgi were eliminated. The elimination of Darwin from the textbooks will then turn out to be the last straw of this polity.
There is no western science or Indian science or African science or Native American science, science is just science as it endeavours to exceed authority over the presumptions of any one culture and thus remains open to criticism and refutation. Rejecting science in favour of a cultural subversion of science is extremely harmful especially for the ones who take pride in providing covid vaccines to the whole world rather than deifying Corona mata akin to Sitala mata.
Navneet Sharma teaches in the Department of Education, Central University of Himachal Pradesh, Dharamsala.