Civic Biology

Last updated
A Civic Biology: Presented in Problems
Author George William Hunter
Country United States
SubjectBiology
GenreAcademic textbook
Publication date
1914

A Civic Biology: Presented in Problems (usually referred to as just Civic Biology) was a biology textbook written by George William Hunter, published in 1914. It is the book which the state of Tennessee required high school teachers to use in 1925 and is best known for its section about evolution that was ruled by a local court to be in violation of the state Butler Act. It was for teaching from this textbook that John T. Scopes was brought to trial in Dayton, Tennessee in the Scopes "Monkey" Trial. The views espoused in the book about evolution, race, and eugenics were common to American Progressives (especially in the work of Charles Benedict Davenport, one of the most prominent American biologists of the early 20th century, whom Hunter cites in the book).

Contents

Excerpts

Excerpts from the book give its general tone and approach to controversial topics regarding mankind:

Evolution of Man. – Undoubtedly there once lived upon the earth races of men who were much lower in their mental organization than the present inhabitants. If we follow the early history of man upon the earth, we find that at first he must have been little better than one of the lower animals. He was a nomad, wandering from place to place, feeding upon whatever living things he could kill with his hands. Gradually he must have learned to use weapons, and thus kill his prey, first using rough stone implements for this purpose. As man became more civilized, implements of bronze and of iron were used. About this time the subjugation and domestication of animals began to take place. Man then began to cultivate the fields, and to have a fixed place of abode other than a cave. The beginnings of civilization were long ago, but even to-day the earth is not entirely civilized.

The Races of Man. – At the present time there exist upon the earth five races or varieties of man, each very different from the other in instincts, social customs, and, to an extent, in structure. These are the Ethiopian or negro type, originating in Africa; the Malay or brown race, from the islands of the Pacific; the American Indian; the Mongolian or yellow race, including the natives of China, Japan, and the Eskimos; and finally, the highest type of all, the Caucasians, represented by the civilized white inhabitants of Europe and America. ...

Improvement of Man. – If the stock of domesticated animals can be improved, it is not unfair to ask if the health and vigor of the future generations of men and women on the earth might not be improved by applying to them the laws of selection. This improvement of the future race has a number of factors in which we as individuals may play a part. These are personal hygiene, selection of healthy mates, and the betterment of the environment.

Eugenics. – When people marry there are certain things that the individual as well as the race should demand. The most important of these is freedom from germ diseases which might be handed down to the offspring. Tuberculosis, syphilis, that dread disease which cripples and kills hundreds of thousands of innocent children, epilepsy, and feeble-mindedness are handicaps which it is not only unfair but criminal to hand down to posterity. The science of being well born is called eugenics. ...

Parasitism and its Cost to Society. – Hundreds of families such as those described above exist today, spreading disease, immorality, and crime to all parts of this country. The cost to society of such families is very severe. Just as certain animals or plants become parasitic on other plants or animals, these families have become parasitic on society. They not only do harm to others by corrupting, stealing, or spreading disease, but they are actually protected and cared for by the state out of public money. Largely for them the poorhouse and the asylum exist. They take from society, but they give nothing in return. They are true parasites.

The Remedy. – If such people were lower animals, we would probably kill them off to prevent them from spreading. Humanity will not allow this, but we do have the remedy of separating the sexes in asylums or other places and in various ways preventing intermarriage and the possibilities of perpetuating such a low and degenerate race. Remedies of this sort have been tried successfully in Europe and are now meeting with some success in this country.

Development and publication

Hunter was born in Mamaroneck, New York, and was educated at Williams College, the University of Chicago, and New York University, where he obtained his doctorate. [1] He later became chairman of the biology department at his alma mater, De Witt Clinton High School, a public secondary school for boys in Manhattan. During his time at Clinton, he wrote or co-authored 30 textbooks for college and high school biology courses, including Civic Biology in 1905. By working with educators at Columbia University's Teachers College and the geneticist Thomas Hunt Morgan, Hunter developed Civic Biology, a textbook that shaped the modern secondary-school biology curriculum. [2]

Eugenics

In the first edition of Civic Biology, Hunter briefly discusses eugenics on one page of the 432 page textbook. Along with many other evolutionary biologists, Hunter embraced the idea of eugenics as a social doctrine. It was a popular idea in the early 20th century, and several states had enacted laws to compel the sexual segregation and sterilization of people deemed eugenically unfit. [3] Hunter believed that society could perfect the human race by preventing intermarriage between people such as the mentally ill, criminals, and epileptics. He also believed that the Caucasian race was the highest type of all the races. [4]

Shifts in science education

Charles Darwin had published his evolutionary theories 60 years before the public controversy over Civic Biology with the Scopes Trial. Prior to the Scopes Trial and controversy over Civic Biology, most science textbooks included Darwinian concepts in order to keep abreast with prevalent scientific ideas. In the early 20th century, there was a movement in the education sector to bring evolution into high school classrooms, in order to update and reshape how biology was taught. Once evolution began being taught in high schools, controversy over Darwin's theories developed. [5] These efforts tried to incorporate progressive educational ideologies and apply the biological sciences to human society. [6]

Civic Biology was an example of the new approaches to scientific instruction emerging in the education sector. [7] This modern education focused on applying scientific principles to human society by developing applicable and relevant content for students. [8] This movement towards socially applicable biology was coupled with national efforts towards mandatory public education. Anti-evolution efforts and legislation were responding to the redesigned ideologies in the new biology curricula, and also to the centralized control and regulation of education. Concerns about public and standardized education were part of the public debate over Civic Biology. [9]

Cultural context

Several socio-cultural events shaped the publication and reaction to Civic Biology. Following World War I, a cultural movement emerged that poised two ideological groups against each other: the traditionalists and the modernists. [10] The modernists embraced intellectual experimentation by exploring new philosophies such as Freudian theories and advocated against alcohol prohibition in political spheres. In response to this modernist cultural movement, there was a religious revivalist movement to protest the emergence of these progressive ideologies. [11] The traditionalists were distinguished by their religious zeal. This group favored alcohol prohibition laws and a literal interpretation of the Bible. [12]

Scopes Trial

The content of Civic Biology was not specifically discussed in the trial; rather the trial focused on the merits and problems with Darwin's theory of evolution. [13] The Scopes Trial used Civic Biology as a tool to have a publicized and public debate on whether evolution should continue to be taught. The prosecution argued that teaching evolution undermined traditional religious values by disrupting the Biblical concept of a six-day creation, and claimed that Darwinian concepts could subvert the political sphere of the United States, saying that "survival of the fittest" could be used to justify a laissez-faire capitalist system, imperialism, and militarism in United States politics [ citation needed ].They warned that Darwin's theories could be used to justify mass sterilization of livestock in order to selectively breed the best organisms. Prosecutors created arguments to demonstrate the dangers that teaching evolutionary theory could pose to society.

The defense crafted arguments that largely fit within a modernist ideology. [14] They argued that evolution should be taught to high school students under the protection of freedom of speech. [15] The defendants proposed a more liberal and innovative science curriculum be provided to students, one that keeps up with popular scientific ideas of the time. [16] They believed that it was within the rights of teachers and students to decide whether to use Civic Biology, [17] and advocated for a public education system that was independent of specific political, economic, and religious viewpoints. [18]

Legacy

The Scopes Trial, with its controversy over Civic Biology, was a major setback for anti-evolution groups because of the 15 states with anti-evolution legislation pending in 1925, only 2 enacted laws restricting the teaching of Darwin's evolutionary theories. [19] While this public controversy had some political implications, it was not extensively influential in the education sector and the instruction of the biological sciences. During the 1970s, it was believed that pressure from Christian fundamentalists after the Scopes Trial forced textbook authors to limit the discussion of evolution. [20] However, upon later examination of biology textbooks, scholars determined that textbook authors worked to develop biological curricula that differentiated and defended its content, in an attempt to reduce the influence of religious fundamentalism on the biological sciences. As a result, modern scholars now believe that overall, biology textbooks were not heavily influenced by anti-evolution rhetoric after the Scopes Trial. [21]

While biology textbooks did not yield heavy influence from the Scopes Trial, some laws emerged that affected high school teachers. After the Scopes Trial, many teachers, particularly in the South, were then required to take oaths of loyalty. These oaths centered upon restricting instructors to teaching content that did not contradict traditionalist ideologies. [22]

New Civic Biology

A revised edition [23] of Hunter's book appeared the year after the Scopes Trial. This edition no longer used the word "evolution", and removed most references to recognizably evolutionary concepts. A figure illustrating fossils of the precursors of horses in geological context and much of the associated text was eliminated. The section quoted above, "Evolution of Man", was renamed "Development of Man", and, rather than saying "lower in mental organization" said "lower in civilization" (page 250). The book did mention natural selection (page 383), homology (page 237), classification of plants and animals (Chapter XXI, pages 234–252) (including mention of "man" as a vertebrate, a mammal, and a primate, page 250), and had a short biography of Charles Darwin among the "Great Names in Biology" (pages 411–412). [24]

This new edition contained an extended discussion of eugenics (Chapter XXXII "The Improvement of the Human Race", pp. 394–404), but the section quoted above on "The Remedy" removed the words "If such people were lower animals, we would probably kill them off to prevent them from spreading. Humanity will not allow this ...". (page 400). The supposed history of the Jukes family and the Kallikak family was advanced (pages 398–399). The section "Parasitism and its Cost to Society" was unchanged but for the insertion of the sentence "It is estimated that between 25% and 50% of all prisoners in penal institutions are feeble-minded." The new edition retained the section "The Races of Man" as written, with two changes about "caucasians": They were no longer described as "the highest type of all", and "the Hindus and Arabs of Asia" were included among the enumerated caucasians (page 251). [25]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Scopes trial</span> 1925 legal case in Tennessee, US

The Scopes trial, formally The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes, and commonly referred to as the Scopes Monkey Trial, was an American legal case from July 10 to July 21, 1925, in which a high school teacher, John T. Scopes, was accused of violating Tennessee's Butler Act, which had made it illegal for teachers to teach human evolution in any state-funded school. The trial was deliberately staged in order to attract publicity to the small town of Dayton, Tennessee, where it was held. Scopes was unsure whether he had ever actually taught evolution, but he incriminated himself deliberately so the case could have a defendant.

The Butler Act was a 1925 Tennessee law prohibiting public school teachers from denying the book of Genesis account of mankind's origin. The law also prevented the teaching of the evolution of man from what it referred to as lower orders of animals in place of the Biblical account. The law was introduced by Tennessee House of Representatives member John Washington Butler, from whom the law got its name. It was enacted as Tennessee Code Annotated Title 49 (Education) Section 1922, having been signed into law by Tennessee governor Austin Peay.

Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning the constitutionality of teaching creationism. The Court considered a Louisiana law requiring that where evolutionary science was taught in public schools, creation science must also be taught. The constitutionality of the law was successfully challenged in District Court, Aguillard v. Treen, 634 F. Supp. 426, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed, Aguillard v. Edwards, 765 F.2d 1251. The United States Supreme Court ruled that this law violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because the law was specifically intended to advance a particular religion. In its decision, the court opined that "teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to school children might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social Darwinism</span> Group of theories and societal practices

Social Darwinism is the study and implementation of various theories and societal practices that purport to apply biological concepts of natural selection and survival of the fittest to sociology, economics and politics, and which were largely defined by scholars in Western Europe and North America in the 1870s. Social Darwinists believe that the strong should see their wealth and power increase while the weak should see their wealth and power decrease. Social Darwinist definitions of the strong and the weak vary, and also differ on the precise mechanisms that reward strength and punish weakness. Many such views stress competition between individuals in laissez-faire capitalism, while others, emphasizing struggle between national or racial groups, support eugenics, racism, imperialism and/or fascism.

Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that invalidated an Arkansas statute prohibiting the teaching of human evolution in the public schools. The Court held that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits a state from requiring, in the words of the majority opinion, "that teaching and learning must be tailored to the principles or prohibitions of any religious sect or dogma." The Supreme Court declared the Arkansas statute unconstitutional because it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. After this decision, some jurisdictions passed laws that required the teaching of creation science alongside evolution when evolution was taught. These were also ruled unconstitutional by the Court in the 1987 case Edwards v. Aguillard.

<i>Icons of Evolution</i> Book by Jonathan Wells

Icons of Evolution is a book by Jonathan Wells, an advocate of the scientific intelligent design argument for the existence of God and fellow of the Discovery Institute, in which Wells criticizes the paradigm of evolution by attacking how it is taught. The book includes a 2002 video companion. In 2000, Wells summarized the book's contents in an article in the American Spectator. Several of the scientists whose work is sourced in the book have written rebuttals to Wells, stating that they were quoted out of context, that their work has been misrepresented, or that it does not imply Wells's conclusions.

The social effects of evolutionary thought have been considerable. As the scientific explanation of life's diversity has developed, it has often displaced alternative, sometimes very widely held, explanations. Because the theory of evolution includes an explanation of humanity's origins, it has had a profound impact on human societies. Some have vigorously denied acceptance of the scientific explanation due to its perceived religious implications. This has led to a vigorous conflict between creation and evolution in public education, primarily in the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rejection of evolution by religious groups</span> Religious rejection of evolution

Recurring cultural, political, and theological rejection of evolution by religious groups exists regarding the origins of the Earth, of humanity, and of other life. In accordance with creationism, species were once widely believed to be fixed products of divine creation, but since the mid-19th century, evolution by natural selection has been established by the scientific community as an empirical scientific fact.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of creationism</span>

The history of creationism relates to the history of thought based on the premise that the natural universe had a beginning, and came into being supernaturally. The term creationism in its broad sense covers a wide range of views and interpretations, and was not in common use before the late 19th century. Throughout recorded history, many people have viewed the universe as a created entity. Many ancient historical accounts from around the world refer to or imply a creation of the earth and universe. Although specific historical understandings of creationism have used varying degrees of empirical, spiritual and/or philosophical investigations, they are all based on the view that the universe was created. The Genesis creation narrative has provided a basic framework for Jewish and Christian epistemological understandings of how the universe came into being – through the divine intervention of the god, Yahweh. Historically, literal interpretations of this narrative were more dominant than allegorical ones.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Creation and evolution in public education</span> Status of creation and evolution in public education

The status of creation and evolution in public education has been the subject of substantial debate and conflict in legal, political, and religious circles. Globally, there are a wide variety of views on the topic. Most western countries have legislation that mandates only evolutionary biology is to be taught in the appropriate scientific syllabuses.

The "teach the controversy" campaign of the Discovery Institute seeks to promote the pseudoscientific principle of intelligent design as part of its attempts to discredit the teaching of evolution in United States public high school science courses. Scientific organizations point out that the institute claims that there is a scientific controversy where in fact none exists.

Devolution, de-evolution, or backward evolution is the notion that species can revert to supposedly more primitive forms over time. The concept relates to the idea that evolution has a purpose (teleology) and is progressive (orthogenesis), for example that feet might be better than hooves or lungs than gills. However, evolutionary biology makes no such assumptions, and natural selection shapes adaptations with no foreknowledge of any kind. It is possible for small changes to be reversed by chance or selection, but this is no different from the normal course of evolution and as such de-evolution is not compatible with a proper understanding of evolution due to natural selection.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Edward J. Larson</span> American lawyer, historian

Edward John Larson is an American historian and legal scholar. He is university professor of history and holds the Hugh & Hazel Darling Chair in Law at Pepperdine University. He was formerly Herman E. Talmadge Chair of Law and Richard B. Russell Professor of American History at the University of Georgia. He continues to serve as a senior fellow of the University of Georgia's Institute of Higher Education, and is currently a professor at Pepperdine School of Law, where he teaches several classes including Property for the 1Ls.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Yuri Filipchenko</span>

Yuri Aleksandrovich Filipchenko was a Russian entomologist who coined the terms microevolution and macroevolution, as well as the mentor of geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky. Though he himself was an orthogeneticist, he was one of the first scientists to incorporate the laws of Mendel into evolutionary theory and thus had a great influence on The Modern Synthesis. He established a genetics laboratory in Leningrad undertaking experimental work with Drosophila melanogaster. Theodosius Dobzhansky worked with him from 1924. Filipchenko is also known for his work in Soviet eugenics, though his work in the subject would later result in his public denunciation due to the rise of Stalinism and increased criticisms that eugenics represented bourgeois science.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of the creation–evolution controversy</span> Aspect of history

Rejection of evolution by religious groups, sometimes called creation–evolution controversy, has a long history. In response to theories developed by scientists, some religious individuals and organizations question the legitimacy of scientific ideas that contradicted the young earth pseudoscientific interpretation of the creation account in Genesis.

The Discovery Institute has conducted a series of related public relations campaigns which seek to promote intelligent design while attempting to discredit evolutionary biology, which the Institute terms "Darwinism". The Discovery Institute promotes the pseudoscientific intelligent design movement and is represented by Creative Response Concepts, a public relations firm.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Timeline of intelligent design</span> Outline of the topic

This timeline of intelligent design outlines the major events in the development of intelligent design as presented and promoted by the intelligent design movement.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">George William Hunter</span> American writer

George William Hunter was an American writer. He wrote Civic Biology, the text at the center of the Scopes "monkey" trial in 1925.

In American schools, the Genesis creation narrative was generally taught as the origin of the universe and of life until Darwin's scientific theories became widely accepted. While there was some immediate backlash, organized opposition did not get underway until the Fundamentalist–Modernist controversy broke out following World War I; several states passed laws banning the teaching of evolution while others debated them but did not pass them. The Scopes Trial was the result of a challenge to the law in Tennessee. Scopes lost his case, and further U.S. states passed laws banning the teaching of evolution.

This article presents an overview of creationism by country.

References

  1. ↑ Magat, Richard. "The Forgotten Roles of Two New York City Teachers in the Epic Scopes Trial." Science & Society 70, No. 4 (2006): 542."
  2. ↑ Pauly, Philip J. "The Development of High School Biology: New York City, 1900–1925." Isis 82, No. 4 (1991): 662.
  3. ↑ Magat: 541.
  4. ↑ Magat: 539.
  5. ↑ Shapiro, Adam R. "Civic Biology and the Origin of the School Antievolution Movement." Journal of the History of Biology 41, No. 3 (2008): 430.
  6. ↑ Shapiro (2008): 433.
  7. ↑ Ladouceur: 435.
  8. ↑ Moore: 542.
  9. ↑ Shapiro (2008): 428.
  10. ↑ Hellmann, Robert A. "Evolution in American School Biology Books from the Late Nineteenth Century until the 1930s." The American Biology Teacher 27, no. 10 (1965): 778–80. doi : 10.2307/4441184.
  11. ↑ Hellman: 779.
  12. ↑ Hellman: 780.
  13. ↑ Richards, Oscar W. "The Present Status of Biology in the Secondary Schools." The School Review 31, no. 2 (1923): 143–46.
  14. ↑ Moore, John W. "Teaching Evolution." Journal of College Science Teaching 4, no. 4 (1975): 277.
  15. ↑ Magat: 541.
  16. ↑ Magat: 541.
  17. ↑ Moore: 277.
  18. ↑ Moore: 542.
  19. ↑ Magat: 549.
  20. ↑ Ladouceur, Ronald P. "Ella Thea Smith and the Lost History of American High School Biology Textbooks." Journal of the History of Biology 41, No. 3 (2008): 435–71.
  21. ↑ Ladouceur: 435.
  22. ↑ Ladoucer: 435.
  23. ↑ George William Hunter, New Civic Biology: Presented in Problems, New York: American Book Co. (1926)
  24. ↑ The Journal of Education 105, no. 2 (1927): 51.
  25. ↑ The Journal of Education 105, no. 2 (1927): 51.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.