Tuesday, March 16, 2010

darwin and nietzsche

Some thoughts on what has been surprising to me about reading Nietzsche and Darwin over the last 5 months.

1. Darwin isn't an environmentalist. In his travel writings, Darwin shoots and kills any strange animals that he finds, and cuts them open. In Origin of Species he talks about performing all sorts of experiments on animals, etc. He also isnt too worried about the extinction of specific species, or about the invasion of foreign plants onto domestic territories. No save the whales here. But he does set things up quite nicely for environmentalism, especially when he talks about the relationships between different life forms, or when he describes how the breakdown of coral could lead to the death of an island of people.

2. It's very difficult to disentangle both Darwin and Nietzsche from everything that has been said about them, or from how they have been used as weapons for different causes (or as targets for different attacks). Nietzsche isn't as much of an atheist as people want him to be, and he's not much of a nihilist (many of his arguments are critique's of nihilism). Darwin doesn't really talk about the origins of life in the origin of species. It's difficult to disentangle Darwin from contemporary biology and genetics.

3. I appreciate how easy both are to dip into when I'm not a specialist in science or philosophy. Darwin's arguments are complex (more complex than they are represented), but not in the way that a contemporary science journal is complex. As a casual observer, I can pick up Origin of Species and have some understanding of the arguments and details of what Darwin is writing. Likewise Nietzsche is more complicated than he is represented (either by enemies or fans), but reading bits and pieces of him gives me a lot to digest. In a more general sense, Darwin wrote in a variety of different genres (travel/memoir/autobiography/science), or somewhere between the genres.

Whatevz.

No comments: