Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Dangerous Darwinism.

Chris Flemming1, Jane Goodall

  • 1College of Arts, Education, and Social Sciences, University of Western Sydney, Australia. j.goodall@uws.edu.au

Public Understanding of Science (Bristol, England)
|November 15, 2002
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Elucidating acquired PARP inhibitor resistance in advanced prostate cancer.

Cancer cell·2024
Same author

Stop elephant hunting in Tanzania borderlands.

Science (New York, N.Y.)·2024
Same author

Targeting myeloid chemotaxis to reverse prostate cancer therapy resistance.

Nature·2023
Same author

[The Planet as a Patient].

ZFA. Zeitschrift fur Allgemeinmedizin·2023
Same author

The Gombe Ecosystem Health Project: 16 years of program evolution and lessons learned.

American journal of primatology·2021
Same author

Elucidating Prostate Cancer Behaviour During Treatment via Low-pass Whole-genome Sequencing of Circulating Tumour DNA.

European urology·2021
Same journal

Willingness to participate in medical research: Unraveling the roles of scientific literacy and beliefs about medical researchers.

Public understanding of science (Bristol, England)·2026
Same journal

Does medium matter? Political orientation and variability in scientific self-perceptions.

Public understanding of science (Bristol, England)·2026
Same journal

Public backlash against science communicators: Conceptualization and qualitative analysis of perceptions, effects, responses, and contextual factors.

Public understanding of science (Bristol, England)·2026
Same journal

Experts' boundary work on social media: Doctors on Instagram.

Public understanding of science (Bristol, England)·2026
Same journal

Too sure or not sure enough? Trust may hinge on scientists' uncertainty matching knowledgeable audiences' tolerance for it.

Public understanding of science (Bristol, England)·2026
Same journal

Threatened by science: Can affirmations alleviate motivated science rejection?

Public understanding of science (Bristol, England)·2026
See all related articles

The "culture-shock myth" surrounding Darwin's theory is a persistent narrative. This paper critiques this myth by examining Victorian reactions and its modern rhetorical function.

Area of Science:

  • Evolutionary Biology
  • History of Science
  • Rhetorical Studies

Background:

  • Charles Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection faced significant debate.
  • Sigmund Freud identified Darwin's work as a major blow to human vanity.
  • A recurring narrative posits Darwin's ideas as a profound psychological threat, causing widespread resistance.

Discussion:

  • This paper scrutinizes the 'culture-shock myth' concerning Darwin's theory.
  • It examines the historical basis of Victorian reactions to Darwin's work.
  • The analysis investigates the myth's function as a rhetorical strategy in contemporary public discourse.

Key Insights:

  • Victorian reactions to Darwin were more complex than the 'culture-shock myth' suggests.
  • The myth serves as a rhetorical device to frame public understanding of evolutionary science.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Challenging this myth is crucial for a more accurate public reception of Darwinian concepts.

    • Outlook:

    • Re-evaluating historical responses to Darwin can inform current science communication.
    • Understanding the rhetorical strategies behind the 'culture-shock myth' is vital for public debate.
    • Further research into the reception of scientific ideas and their cultural impact is warranted.