As a sentient species we are compelled to resolve the mystery of our beginnings. Anthropologists note that every culture has formulated a scheme for explaining its origin. These explanations typically encompass a spiritual dimension and, despite the hegemony in Western culture of Judaeo-Christian meditations on origins, none seem more or less satisfactory to meet our need for understanding from where and how we came to be.

Then comes Darwin. His "theory of ascent by means of natural selection", using an objective and compelling explanation for the origin of the species, utterly roiled formerly calm spiritual waters. His science found answers through an entirely different paradigm than religion, one that pushed aside supernatural causation to a wholly natural one. This profoundly challenged long-held beliefs on origins of all plants and animals, most disturbingly affecting the belief in the special case and status of humans. Darwin's theory did not merely modify the existing and accepted sensibility about the genesis and place of man in the cosmos, it completely eviscerated it. Darwin himself, although he did not expressly claim that a spiritual version of creation was unsustainable in light of his theory, knew that he was entering dangerous waters. He held off publishing his theory for several decades until he became aware that Alfred Russel Wallace was about to reveal very similar findings.

Fuller's book portrays the influence of Darwin's book on arts and sciences in America and on social and political currents in the nation. Two of America's most prominent scientists are featured: the botanist Asa Gray and the natural scientist Louis Agassiz. Gray immediately appreciated the importance of Darwin's concepts. He wrote several articles for academic journals and popular periodicals that explicated the revolutionary theory propounded by Darwin. (He had a close professional relationship with Darwin through correspondence.) Gray understood that evolution through natural selection was incompatible with the biblical account of creation. However, what he was unable to conclude that, since the initiation of biological life could not be explained, there was not divine causation that sparked and directed the course of evolution. In other words, that while the evolution of species could be understood as a process of mechanics, it could not be random, rather must be designed and led by a divine force. This argument, of course, persists to our time. The problem with this reasoning is that it requires a giant intellectual leap from creation and modification governed by natural law to a supernatural explanation of origins. Some still try to do this, but, to me, that's just not epistemologically possible.

Agassiz completely rejected the implications of Darwin's theory. To him all science was a manifestation of the creation and intervention of God. His position, too, redounds today among a significant portion of the general public, if no longer held by scientists, other than a few pseudo-scientists with an agenda.

Darwin's hypotheses on the development of species came at a time in America when there was intense obsession on the nature of the races, sparked by moral and institutional conflict about slavery. Schools of thought on the matter centered on the question of how to explain the differences in racial characteristics in view of the biblical assertion that one man and one woman were created by God. One line of thought held the monogenists was that human traits following the origin diverged over time due to natural causes, that the ancestors were a single pair hence all humans were descendants of a single first pair. This did not support the notion of equality of races; rather that "inferior" non-white races were the result of the degeneration of the ideal. This idea was challenged by the polygenists who posited that the races descended from diverse single pairs separately created by God, thus instead of different races of one species of humans there were altogether different species. This claim was buttressed by pseudo-scientific studies based on purported differences in physical characteristics that distinguished distinct species of humans. Here, too, Darwin's conclusion of what constituted the bounds of species (especially the ability to procreate, an attribute not possible in distinct species) patently contradicted the notion that the races were different species. This led to unsettling moral implications of treating non-white races as unequal and undeserving of the rights and privileges guaranteed to others. If "All Men are Created Equal" was to be upheld as a republican ideal, then some men (and finally all women) could not be logically or ethically excluded. Douglass and other abolitionists would argue that if all are men enslaving some is morally repugnant.

The literary world was equally rocked by Darwin's work. Fuller examines the reactions of the principal intellectual lights of the era including Thoreau, Emerson and Alcott along with some lessor known figures. The author devotes much space to Thoreau who, as did most of the transcendentalists, accepted science and were greatly fascinated by Darwin's work, but struggled with the implications of a world governed by mechanistic processes which would imply that a spiritual sense of being could also be a product of a cold and heartless biology, of randomness over eons versus purposefulness directed by a higher being. (One could even argue that "spirituality" is an evolved trait that has been useful to the perpetuation of the human species. Perhaps God did not create humans, but humans created God.)

It is nearly 160 years since Darwin unveiled what it may be said to be the most revolutionary concept of origins and pathway of life, and thus man's connection with existence, ever to emanate from science. The discomfort this poses reverberates still today. The empirical findings of evolution scientists have bolstered the proof of Darwin's theory to such degree that alternative explanations are simply untenable, even preposterous. Yet, the creationists and promoters of "intelligent design" persist in their advocacy of a spiritual and supernatural rationale for existence with as much fervor as those who first encountered Darwin's theory. ( )

Most would agree that Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species created a stir among the scientific and religious communities when it was first published (some could argue it's still wreaking havoc to this day). However, in America the hubbub was less about where God fit into the picture and more how Darwin's theory solidified the stance against slavery. The Book That Changed America: How Darwin's Theory of Evolution Ignited a Nation by Randall Fuller explores how this one book helped abolitionists build arguments based on scientific fact while at the same time forcing long-held rigid beliefs to be questioned. (I'm looking at you Bronson Alcott.) Until reading this book, I had never thought about its reception in America in terms of its historical context/proximity to the Civil War. These two events seemed to be separate while in reality they were very much interwoven. Leading authors of the day including Henry David Thoreau were well-known and vocal about ending slavery so they not only endorsed Darwin's theories but went on publicity tours to promote it (and give their own opinions). On the Origin of Species showed that all humans had a common ancestor and thus there was no reason why they should not be treated as equals. (The relevance of this book during this time of sociopolitical upheaval in America right now was not lost on me. It just goes to show that we haven't evolved that much since this book hit the shelves.) I was continually surprised by what I learned by reading this book considering that I studied Darwin while I was working on my Bachelor's degree in Anthropology. Instead of solely focusing on the religious impact (which was still significant) it would have been informative to have learned this as well. I suppose that's why Randall Fuller wrote the book! hahaha If you're like me and eager to learn more (especially in light of the insanity that is 2017) then this book is the one for you. 9/10 ( )