Social Darwinism

“If Adam and Eve had two sons, how do we have black people, white people and Asians?”

I had an insight after reading Darwin's on the Origin of Species. I had heard of a doctrine called "Social Darwinism." I also heard from many reputable sources that it had no relation to what Darwin actually said. Now I have that from the most reputable source.

Disclaimer: I'm only halfway through it. I am taking a break to explore nature and digest what I have learned so far. I have yet to read what, if anything, he says about our own evolution. I have been able to make my own conclusions based of Darwin's description of genetic variation. This is not my only source. Darwin's work has been very influential in the biological science that has been developed since it was written. I can now see how a television program I watched in my youth was informed by it. It was called Wild Kingdom. It was hosted by a zoologist named Marlin Perkins. You may be able to find it on Youtube. I now recognize Darwin's influence in it. I took general biology as my life science elective toward my degree. The textbook introduction gave explicit acknowledgment to Darwin.

It is generally accepted that humanity originated in Africa. Like all species there is a great deal of variation on our genes. Look at the great diversity of human populations in terms of skin shade. In Africa intense sunlight could damage bare skin. There is evidence that over five million years ago a change in environment caused humans to lose their fur. This can be found in The Descent of Woman by Elaine Morgan.

Those humans whose genes carried a variation to produce cells called melanocytes that produce melanin, a pigment that protects the skin, were given a survival advantage. Other factors in survival included tool making and the development of language. When species spread over a geographic distance, then become isolated from each other they will develop differently over many generations to adapt to different environments. Populations that had spread to northern Europe found themselves in an environment were production of melanin was no longer essential to survival. Over many generations it faded from dominance in the populations genome.

According to Darwin, populations isolated in this way will have the same basic genome. Genes associated with melanin production are still present in northern populations. Those differences in genetic traits between European and African populations that can be seen in skin color and are dependant on latitude and climate. I can think of no example where toolmaking and language would be dependant on latitude. The cognitive ability to plan to hunt a giraffe is not that different than required to hunt caribou. Advanced language developed among different isolated populations. We can still see this in the great variation in human languages now.

Social Darwinism argues that the "white race" dominated the darker "races" because they were evolutionarily superior. Actual Darwinism says no such thing. The history of colonialism can be looked at through a Darwinian perspective applied to culture. While one culture developed advanced mathematics, and a very accurate calendar, another learned to form iron into weapons. Darwin also discusses population pressure. Europe at the start of the colonial age was very populated, and started crossing oceans in numbers Americans and Africans found hard to resist. Parts of Asia were densely populated and European colonists were less successful there.