# Charles Darwin English naturalist whose *On the Origin of Species* (1859) set out the theory of evolution by natural selection, and whose *The Descent of Man* (1871) applied it to human beings. Darwin is the founding figure of modern evolutionary biology and the name most attached, fairly or not, to the modern conflict between science and Christian faith. He is cited across the codex in the origins debate ([Evolution](/codex/evolution/), [Common Descent vs Common Design](/codex/common-descent-vs-common-design/), [Cambrian Explosion Argument](/codex/cambrian-explosion-argument/)), and he is also the subject of a recurring question that has little to do with biology: was Darwin a racist, and does it matter? ## Life in brief - Born 1809 in Shrewsbury into two prominent families, the Darwins and the Wedgwoods; the Wedgwood side was active in the British campaign against the slave trade. - Studied medicine at Edinburgh, then at Cambridge with the Anglican ministry in view. - Sailed as naturalist on HMS *Beagle* (1831-1836), a voyage that took him to South America, the Galapagos and around the world, and that shaped both his science and his hatred of slavery, which he saw at first hand in Brazil. - Published *On the Origin of Species* in 1859 and *The Descent of Man* in 1871. - Died in 1882 and was buried in Westminster Abbey. ## What he held - **Common descent by natural selection.** All living things descend from common ancestors, and natural selection acting on variation is the main mechanism of change. - **One human species.** Against writers of his day who argued that human races were separately created species, Darwin held that all living humans share a common ancestry and form one species. - **Opposition to slavery.** Darwin condemned slavery in strong terms in his writings on the *Beagle* voyage and in his letters. On this point he stood with the abolitionists. - **Racial hierarchy.** At the same time, *The Descent of Man* ranks human populations using the "civilised" and "savage" categories of nineteenth-century European anthropology, and speculates that "civilised" races would displace others. Those passages express views that are rightly called racist by later standards. - **Faith.** Darwin moved from conventional belief to doubt and finally to agnosticism, a word he used of himself late in life. The death of his daughter Annie in 1851 is commonly cited as a turning point. ## The racism question, answered carefully Three propositions have to be held apart. 1. **Darwin held and published hierarchical racial views.** Yes. Selective quotation in either direction (only the anti-slavery lines, or only the "savages" lines) misrepresents him. 2. **Darwin defended slavery.** No. He opposed it, and he rejected the separate-creation theories that proslavery writers used. 3. **Darwin's racism refutes evolution.** No. Rejecting a theory because of the character or opinions of its author is the [Genetic Fallacy](/codex/genetic-fallacy/). Common descent stands or falls on the evidence, and the codex argues that case on the evidence ([Common Descent vs Common Design](/codex/common-descent-vs-common-design/), [Intelligent Design](/codex/intelligent-design/)). The fallacy also runs the other way. If common descent is true, that would not make Darwin's racial rankings true, and it would not tell anyone that racism is wrong. A biological history cannot by itself supply an obligation. That opens the better question: **on what ground is racism objectively wrong?** The Christian answer does not depend on how well Christians have behaved; it rests on the text. Every human being bears God's image ([Genesis 1:27](/codex/genesis-1-27/)); God "hath made of one blood all nations of men" ([Acts 17:26](/codex/acts-17-26/)); and in Christ "there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free" ([Galatians 3:28](/codex/galatians-3-28/)). Those premises make human worth independent of intelligence, civilization or ancestry, which is precisely what Darwin's ranking lacked. See [Atheist Moral Realism Defeater](/codex/atheist-moral-realism-defeater/). ## Reception and misuse - **Social Darwinism and eugenics** are later movements that applied a "survival of the fittest" picture to societies and to human breeding. They drew on Darwin's name, and his cousin Francis Galton coined the word "eugenics", but they should be argued on their own terms rather than laid wholesale on Darwin. See [Margaret Sanger](/codex/margaret-sanger/) for the codex's cautious treatment of a eugenics-era figure. - **The deathbed-conversion story.** A story published decades after Darwin's death claimed he renounced evolution and embraced Christ on his deathbed. His family denied it, and Christians should not repeat it. The Christian case needs no invented conversion. ## Position in the codex's framework Darwin is the reference point for the origins cluster rather than an opponent to be discredited. The codex's apologetic engages evolutionary theory on the evidence (see [Evolution](/codex/evolution/), [100 Questions for Evolutionists](/codex/100-questions-for-evolutionists/), [Cambrian Explosion Argument](/codex/cambrian-explosion-argument/)), and treats Darwin's personal views as a separate historical question, answered with the genetic-fallacy guard in both directions. ## See also - [Evolution](/codex/evolution/), the theory he founded and its current forms - [Common Descent vs Common Design](/codex/common-descent-vs-common-design/), the central evidential dispute - [Cambrian Explosion Argument](/codex/cambrian-explosion-argument/), the problem Darwin himself acknowledged in the fossil record - [Genetic Fallacy](/codex/genetic-fallacy/), why his character does not settle his science - [Death Before the Fall](/codex/death-before-the-fall/), the theological question deep-time biology raises - [Christian Abolitionist Movement](/codex/christian-abolitionist-movement/), the anti-slavery cause his mother's family supported
## Common questions this page answers **Q: Was Charles Darwin racist?** By modern standards, yes in part. *The Descent of Man* ranks human groups as "civilised" and "savage" and speculates about some displacing others. At the same time Darwin strongly opposed slavery and held that all humans share one ancestry and form one species. Both facts have to be held together. **Q: Does Darwin's racism prove evolution is false?** No. Judging a theory by the character of the person who proposed it is the genetic fallacy. Evolution has to be assessed on the evidence, which the codex does on its origins pages. Equally, if evolution were true, that would not make Darwin's racial views right. **Q: Did Darwin believe in God?** He trained for the Anglican ministry, drifted into doubt, and late in life described himself as an agnostic. The story that he returned to faith and rejected evolution on his deathbed was denied by his family and should not be used. **Q: Did Darwin support slavery?** No. He saw slavery in Brazil during the *Beagle* voyage and condemned it in strong terms, and his mother's family, the Wedgwoods, were prominent in the British campaign against the slave trade.