December 26, 2022 | David F. Coppedge

Darwin’s Bulldog Raised Mentally-Ill Perverts

Another review of a book about the Huxley family
unloads the dirty laundry

 

On 7 November 2022, we reported on Nature‘s review of The Huxleys, a historical biography by Alison Bashford of Thomas Henry Huxley and his offspring. In that report, we focused on the conspiratorial efforts of “Darwin’s Bulldog” to sell Darwinism. Now we take a look at what Science Magazine said about the book on 1 December 2022. It isn’t pretty.

First, the opening remark by reviewer Piers J. Hale:

What is our evolutionary inheritance? What has our natural history made us, and how does this affect how we might live? Further, given our understanding of the mechanisms of inheritance, can we and should we direct our own evolution to ensure the betterment of humankind, both in body and in mind? Questions such as these are the intellectual offspring of the evolutionary view of life that Charles Darwin described in 1859. They also motivated the Huxleys, one of science’s most famed families and the subject of Alison Bashford’s new book, The Huxleys.

Jesus taught his disciples that the fruit reveals the philosophy.

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.” (Matthew 7:15-19)

Out Comes the Bitter Fruit

Apparently Thomas tried to hold back his animal urges during the end of the Victorian era to not besmirch the reputation of Darwin. It was important that the materialist philosophy appear pleasingly proper to the intelligentsia of British society.

For the Huxleys, biology was always political, but it was also full of contradictions. Thomas Henry’s hierarchical conceptions of race and sex were still liberal enough and typical enough of his time that he could oppose the more extreme racism of many of his contemporaries in British anthropology and advance sex-segregated science education for women seemingly without internal conflict….

Despite how Thomas Henry embraced and advanced Darwin’s views on morality—which shocked critics by discarding the notion of divinely ordained principles of right and wrong—he strove to place himself and his family beyond reproach, adhering to the most conventional moral standards of his day. His son Leonard’s children, however, broke rather than pushed societal boundaries.

Julian Huxley, Darwin’s grandson, let loose with his animal instincts, repudiating his grandfather’s outdated prurience. And Aldous Huxley, known for his dystopian novel Brave New World depicting a drug-ridden, morality-free tyranny, did his part to tear down “divinely ordained principles of right and wrong.”

Julian and his wife experimented with an open relationship; he had a stream of lovers, at least one of whom she shared, and wrote popular articles on birth control, sex, and the future of humanity for Playboy. Aldous, for his part, married “a Belgian bisexual beauty,” experimented with LSD, and sought to test the nature and limits of the mind. He wrote Brave New World in 1932 as Europe tumbled toward authoritarianism, an inclination he recognized in the enthusiasm his brother Julian shared with H. G. Wells for technocratic state solutions to society’s problems.

Bad Fruit Causes Sickness

So did these lifestyles based on Darwinian principles help the Huxleys experience “the betterment of humankind, both in body and in mind?”

Along with his surname, many of the Huxleys inherited the family patriarch’s tendency toward deep depression. Thomas Henry wrestled with this darkness for years, and it almost overthrew him on more than one occasion: once at the loss of his firstborn, Noel, who succumbed to scarlet fever at 4 years old, and again at the death of his daughter Mady, who, struggling with her own mental demons, died suddenly of pneumonia at the age of 27.

Julian, we learn, was in and out of institutions just as his career was taking off. Unable to function, he was forbidden by his doctors even to write, just as he was supposed to be taking up a professorship at Rice University. Noel Trevenen, Julian’s younger brother, was similarly troubled. Missing for days on the eve of the Great War, he was later found hanging from a tree in a secluded forest.

It’s noteworthy that reviewer Piers J. Hale says almost nothing positive about any of the Huxleys in his recounting of Bashford’s descriptions of shocking ill effects of Darwinian philosophy. One might think he would be alarmed enough to flee to Christianity to find healthy fruit and avoid a similar fate. But no; the universal acid in Darwin/Huxley fruit eats through all traditional beliefs, as apostate Christian-turned-Darwinist Daniel Dennett has said. Hale ends,

Readers follow the Huxleys as they contemplate nonhuman animals, primates, man, and mind in their intergenerational quest to understand the implications of evolution on what it means, or might mean, to be human.

That leaves a little room for readers of this review to ponder the implications of tasting of the forbidden fruit that tempts, “Ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:5).

Is it any wonder why as evolutionary indoctrination rises in schools and culture, so does sexual perversion?

(Visited 542 times, 1 visits today)

Leave a Reply