# Charles Darwin > **Machine-Evolution Nexus:** [[articles/Digital Darwinism and the Invisible World of Machine Evolution|Digital Darwinism and the Invisible World of Machine Evolution]] connects this node to the substrate-independent history of heredity, selection and computational populations. **Domain:** Evolutionary Biology / History of Science **Doc Type:** Thinker Node **Maturity:** Foundational ## Definition **Charles Darwin** was the naturalist who, alongside Alfred Russel Wallace's independent work, established natural selection as a mechanism capable of explaining adaptation and diversification without foresight. ## Nexus Context Darwin's importance to [[articles/The Evolutionary Roots of Silicon Valley|The Evolutionary Roots of Silicon Valley]] is structural. Variation, heritability, differential reproductive success and deep time provide a general account of adaptive complexity without central design. Machine learning inherits part of this architecture when candidate structures or behaviors are differentially retained under an objective. The analogy is direct for evolutionary computation and partial for gradient-based optimization. Darwin did not invent an engineering optimization theory, and not every learning rule is biological evolution. ## Continuity Context Evolution replaces type thinking with population and lineage thinking. This helps continuity theory distinguish an unchanging essence from historically maintained organization, while leaving numerical personal identity as a separate philosophical problem. ## Westminster Lineage Darwin was buried in Westminster Abbey in 1882, a few feet from [[wiki/Isaac Newton|Isaac Newton]]. On June 15, 2018, [[wiki/Stephen Hawking|Stephen Hawking]]'s ashes were interred in [[wiki/Westminster Abbey Scientists' Corner|Scientists' Corner]] between their graves. [[thoughts/Where Hawking Is Buried Is Louder Than What Critics Say|Where Hawking Is Buried Is Louder Than What Critics Say]] interprets this physical arrangement as [[wiki/Civilizational Metadata|Civilizational Metadata]]. Within that reading, Darwin marks the transition from a law-governed physical universe to the evolutionary continuity of life, while Hawking's position opens toward gravity, thermodynamics, information, intelligence, and possible post-biological continuity. The burial and its placement are documented institutional acts; the full sequence is Bryant's structural interpretation rather than the Abbey's stated doctrine. ## Sources / Provenance - Darwin, Charles. _On the Origin of Species_, 1859: https://darwin-online.org.uk/ - Natural History Museum Darwin collections: https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/charles-darwin-most-famous-biologist.html - Westminster Abbey, “The Nation's Memory”: https://www.westminster-abbey.org/history/explore-our-history/the-nations-memory ## See Also [[wiki/Natural Selection|Natural Selection]], [[wiki/Evolutionary Biology|Evolutionary Biology]], [[wiki/Adaptive Structure|Adaptive Structure]], [[wiki/Alfred Russel Wallace|Alfred Russel Wallace]], [[wiki/Isaac Newton|Isaac Newton]], [[wiki/Stephen Hawking|Stephen Hawking]], [[wiki/Westminster Abbey Scientists' Corner|Westminster Abbey Scientists' Corner]] ## Relationships - **Edge source route:** [[collections/Edge|Edge]] connects this topic to exact Annual Question passages promoted into the Simple Reminders archive. ## Simple Reminders, Quotations, and Thoughts > “We humans have had a tough time coping with our unremarkable place in the grand scheme of things. First Copernicus trashed our belief that we live at the centre of the universe, followed shortly thereafter by Herschel and co. who suggested that our sun was not at the centre of it either; then Darwin came along and showed that according to our biological heritage, we are just another animal. But we have clung on for dear life to one remaining belief about our specialness; that we, and we alone, have conscious minds. It is time to retire, or indeed euthanize and cremate, this anthropocentric pomposity.” > **— Kate Jeffery**, *2014, Edge Annual Question, “What Scientific Idea Is Ready For Retirement?”* [[reminders/Consciousness/Animal Consciousness Ends the Last Claim of Human Specialness by Kate Jeffery|Animal Consciousness Ends the Last Claim of Human Specialness by Kate Jeffery]] > “I don't know which model of quantum gravity is right, but all the leading candidates, string theory, loop quantum gravity and others, teach us that it is possible that all properties of elementary particles are relational and environmental. In different possible universes there may be different combinations of elementary particles and forces. Indeed, all that used to be thought of as fundamental, space and the elementary particles themselves are increasingly seen, in models of quantum gravity, as themselves emergent from a more elementary network of relations.” > **— Lee Smolin**, *2006, Edge Annual Question, “What Is Your Dangerous Idea?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Darwin and Einstein May Illuminate Each Other by Lee Smolin|Darwin and Einstein May Illuminate Each Other by Lee Smolin]] > “Elegance is more than an aesthetic quality, or some ephemeral sort of uplifting feeling we experience in deeper forms of intuitive understanding. Elegance is formal beauty. And formal beauty as a philosophical principle is one of the most dangerous, subversive ideas humanity has discovered: it is the virtue of theoretical simplicity. Its destructive force is greater than Darwin's algorithm or that of any other single scientific explanation, because it shows us what the depth of an explanation is.” > **— Thomas Metzinger**, *2012, Edge Annual Question, “What Is Your Favorite Deep, Elegant, Or Beautiful Explanation?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Darwin's Algorithm Has Extraordinary Destructive Force by Thomas Metzinger|Darwin's Algorithm Has Extraordinary Destructive Force by Thomas Metzinger]] > “By the 1830's, the geologist Charles Lyell had decided that atolls must be coral reefs growing on the crater rims of sunken extinct volcanoes. Darwin didn't agree, and it's wonderful to know that Lyell was thrilled when Darwin came back from the Beagle voyage and told him the real answer: the coral organisms thrive in shallow water but the ocean floor is slowly sinking; the polyps die but new ones are growing on top of them, and over an immense amount of time countless billions of tiny calcareous skeletons accumulate to make up a vast structure reaching from the darkness of the ocean bed to the sunlit surface so far above.” > **— Christopher Sykes**, *2012, Edge Annual Question, “What Is Your Favorite Deep, Elegant, Or Beautiful Explanation?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Darwin's Explanation of the Origin of Coral Reefs by Christopher Sykes|Darwin's Explanation of the Origin of Coral Reefs by Christopher Sykes]] > “I think that Darwin's invention of the theory of evolution by natural selection outshines them all. It is perhaps the only truly general theory in Biology, a field much more complex than physics. If we discover life elsewhere in the universe it is likely to be the only biological theory that will carry over from our terrestrial biology. Darwin's theory reduced tremendously the complication of zoological data. Critically, as with the telescope, it has put tremendous pressure on the previous world-view to accommodate man as "merely" a part of a much larger nature. This pressure is still largely being resisted, but the outcome is clear.” > **— Christopher G. Langton**, *1999, Edge Annual Question, “What Is The Most Important Invention In The Past Two Thousand Years?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Darwin's Theory Outshines Every Other Biological Invention by Christopher G. Langton|Darwin's Theory Outshines Every Other Biological Invention by Christopher G. Langton]] > “As a student, I was influenced by Claude Lévi-Strauss and even more by Noam Chomsky. Both of them dared talk about "human nature" when the received view was that there was no such thing. In my own work, I argued for a naturalistic approach in the social sciences. I took for granted that human cognitive dispositions were shaped by biological evolution and more specifically by Darwinian selection. While I did occasionally toy with evolutionary speculations, I failed to see at the time how they could play more than a quite marginal role in the study of human psychology and culture.” > **— Dan Sperber**, *2008, Edge Annual Question, “What Have You Changed Your Mind About? Why?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Darwinian Selection Shaped Human Cognitive Dispositions by Dan Sperber|Darwinian Selection Shaped Human Cognitive Dispositions by Dan Sperber]] > “I navigate through this storm of information using my favorite conceptual compass: Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection. Application of evolutionary principles often draws attention to paradoxes and flaws in arguments. These problems, if recognized, are often swept under the rug, but they become unavoidably conspicuous when the correct alternative argument is formulated. One of my research strategies is to identify medical conventional wisdom that is inconsistent with evolutionary principles. I then formulate alternative explanations that are consistent and then evaluate all of them with evidence.” > **— Paul W. Ewald**, *2010, Edge Annual Question, “How Is The Internet Changing The Way You Think?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Darwinian Thinking Is a Compass Through Complexity by Paul W. Ewald|Darwinian Thinking Is a Compass Through Complexity by Paul W. Ewald]] > “Another question that has fallen into the dustbin of history is this: Is human nature innately good or evil? This became a gripping topic in the late 17th century, as Enlightment thinkers began to challenge the Christian assumption that man was born a fallen creature. It was a great debate while it lasted: original sin vs. tabla rasa and the perfectability of man; Edmund Burke vs. Tom Paine; Dostoyevsky vs. the Russian reformers. But Darwin and Freud undermined the foundations of both sides, by discrediting the very possibility of discussing human nature in moral or teleological terms. Now the debate has been recast as "nature vs. nurture" and in secular scientific circles at least, man is the higher primate -- a beast with distinctly mixed potential.” > **— Ann Crittenden**, *2001, Edge Annual Question, “What Questions Have Disappeared?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Is Human Nature Innately Good or Evil by Ann Crittenden|Is Human Nature Innately Good or Evil by Ann Crittenden]] > “One is the world of the objective content of ideas, in particular of science as a body of knowledge, of actual and possible scientific theories, their truth or falsity, their refutability, tests passed or failed, valid and invalid arguments, objections met or unanswered, crucial evidence deployed, progress achieved. Darwinian science has high status in this world of objective knowledge as perhaps "the single best idea anyone has ever had". And, probably uniquely in the history of science, it is unlikely to be superseded; biology will be forever Darwinian—for natural selection, it seems, is the only mechanism that can achieve design without a designer. And the Darwinian understanding of human nature is a straightforward implication of that core insight. The first serious attempt at a science of ourselves … and, what's more, it's most likely right.” > **— Helena Cronin**, *2013, Edge Annual Question, “What *should* We Be Worried About?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Natural Selection May Be the Only Mechanism That Designs Without a Designer by Helena Cronin|Natural Selection May Be the Only Mechanism That Designs Without a Designer by Helena Cronin]] > “The woman's sense of being understood is based on the ability of computational objects like Paro to convince their users that they are in a relationship. I call these creatures (some virtual, some physical robots) "relational artifacts." Their ability to inspire relationship is not based on their intelligence or consciousness, but on their ability to push certain "Darwinian" buttons in people (making eye contact, for example) that make people respond as though they were in relationship. For me, relational artifacts are the new uncanny in our computer culture — as Freud once put it, the long familiar taking a form that is strangely unfamiliar. As such, they confront us with new questions.” > **— Sherry Turkle**, *2006, Edge Annual Question, “What Is Your Dangerous Idea?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Relational Robots Can Make Simulation Feel Natural by Sherry Turkle|Relational Robots Can Make Simulation Feel Natural by Sherry Turkle]] > “Cancer is often described as a sped-up version of Darwinian evolution. Through a series of advantageous mutations, the tumor—this hopeful monster—becomes fitter and fitter within the ecosystem of your body. Some of the mutations are inherited while others are environmental—the result of a confusion of outside influences. Much less talked about is a third category: the mutations that arise spontaneously from the random copying errors occurring every time a cell divides.” > **— George Johnson**, *2016, Edge Annual Question, “What Do You Consider The Most Interesting Recent [Scientific] News? What Makes It Important?”* [[reminders/Evolution/The Most Powerful Carcinogen May Be Entropy by George Johnson|The Most Powerful Carcinogen May Be Entropy by George Johnson]] > “The truly dangerous ideas in science tend to be those that threaten the collective ego of humanity and knock us further off our pedestal of centrality. The Copernican Revolution abruptly dislodged humans from the center of the universe. The Darwinian Revolution yanked Homo sapiens from the pinnacle of life. Today another menacing revolution sits at the horizon of knowledge, patiently awaiting broad realization by the same egotistical species.” > **— Scott Sampson**, *2006, Edge Annual Question, “What Is Your Dangerous Idea?”* [[reminders/Evolution/The Purpose of Life Is to Disperse Energy by Scott Sampson|The Purpose of Life Is to Disperse Energy by Scott Sampson]] > “For many years what had been good enough for Darwin was good enough for me. I too described myself as an agnostic. I had been brought up in a Christian culture and some of the most rational humanists I knew were believers. I loved the music and art that had been inspired by a belief in God and saw no hypocrisy in participating in the great carol services held in the Chapel of King's College Cambridge. I did not accept the views of some of my scientific colleagues that the march of science has disposed of religion. The wish that I and many biologists had to understand biological evolution was not the same as the wish had by those with deep religious conviction to understand the meaning of life.” > **— Patrick Bateson**, *2008, Edge Annual Question, “What Have You Changed Your Mind About? Why?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Understanding Evolution Is Not the Same as Understanding Life's Meaning by Patrick Bateson|Understanding Evolution Is Not the Same as Understanding Life's Meaning by Patrick Bateson]] > “Alongside the biological changes runs a history, or prehistory, of technology. It has usually been supposed that this technology, surviving mainly as modified stone artifacts, was a product of the higher brain power that our human ancestors displayed. According to Darwin’s sexual selection hypothesis, female hominins favored innovative male hunters, and the incremental growth in intelligence led, ultimately, to material innovation (hence the evocative but not taxonomic term, Homo faber—Man the Maker).” > **— Timothy Taylor**, *2016, Edge Annual Question, “What Do You Consider The Most Interesting Recent [Scientific] News? What Makes It Important?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Weapons Technology Powered Human Evolution by Timothy Taylor|Weapons Technology Powered Human Evolution by Timothy Taylor]] > “The idea that most impressed me — and did the most to shake me of the belief that language was separate from the rest of the mind — goes back to Darwin. Not "survival of the fittest" (a phrase actually coined by Herbert Spencer) but his notion, now amply confirmed at the molecular level, that all biology is the product of what he called "descent with modification". Every species, and every biological system evolves through a combination of inheritance (descent) and change (modification). Nothing, no matter how original it may appear, emerges from scratch.” > **— Gary Marcus**, *2008, Edge Annual Question, “What Have You Changed Your Mind About? Why?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Whats Special About Human Language by Gary Marcus|Whats Special About Human Language by Gary Marcus]] > “Unification of opposites is an underlying theme in the development of humanity. Newton showed us that the same laws govern the motion of heavenly bodies and apples falling on Earth. Darwin unified the concept of being a human with that of being another living organism. There have been numerous other unifications in the history of mankind. So, how will it go on? Which notions appearing to us as very distinct today will turn out to be the same for future generations? Will there ever be a limit to unification? Will we in the end be able to show that everything just stems from one single fundamental idea? Or two? Or many? Or infinitely many?” > **— Anton Zeilinger**, *2002, Edge Annual Question, “What Is Your Question? ... Why?”* [[reminders/Evolution/Will Unification Ever Come to a Stop by Anton Zeilinger|Will Unification Ever Come to a Stop by Anton Zeilinger]] > "A man who dares to waste one hour of time has not discovered the value of life." > **— Charles Darwin**, *1836, Letter to Susan Darwin* [[reminders/Scientific Literacy/A Man Who Dares to Waste One Hour of Time Has Not Discovered the Value of Life by Charles Darwin|A Man Who Dares to Waste One Hour of Time Has Not Discovered the Value of Life by Charles Darwin]] > "From so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved." > **— Charles Darwin**, *1859, On the Origin of Species, closing sentence* [[reminders/Evolution/From So Simple a Beginning Endless Forms Most Beautiful and Most Wonderful Have Been and Are Being Evolved by Charles Darwin|From So Simple a Beginning Endless Forms Most Beautiful and Most Wonderful Have Been and Are Being Evolved by Charles Darwin]] > "I love fools' experiments. I am always making them." > **— Charles Darwin**, *1860, Letter / recollection preserved by Darwin Correspondence Project* [[reminders/Scientific Literacy/I Love Fools' Experiments I Am Always Making Them by Charles Darwin|I Love Fools' Experiments I Am Always Making Them by Charles Darwin]] > "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." > **— Charles Darwin**, *1871, The Descent of Man* *Verification Status: Unverified — exact wording/source has not yet been independently confirmed against a primary source; source clue: The Descent of Man, 1871.* [[reminders/unverified/Ignorance More Frequently Begets Confidence Than Does Knowledge by Charles Darwin|Ignorance More Frequently Begets Confidence Than Does Knowledge by Charles Darwin]] > "There is grandeur in this view of life." > **— Charles Darwin**, *1859, On the Origin of Species, closing paragraph* [[reminders/Evolution/There Is Grandeur in This View of Life by Charles Darwin|There Is Grandeur in This View of Life by Charles Darwin]]