Darwin's Perception of Nature and the Question of Disenchantment: a Semantic Analysis Across the Six Editions of On the Origin of Species

Vol.:(0123456789)
HPLS (2021) 43:57
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s40656-021-00373-y
1 3
ORIGINAL PAPER
Da win’s pe cep ion o na u e and heques ion
o disenchan men : aseman ic analysis ac oss hesix
edi ions o On heO igin o Species
Bá ba aJiménez‑Pazos1,2
Recei ed: 5 Ma ch 2020 / Accep ed: 20 Janua y 2021
© The Au ho (s) 2021
Abs ac This body o wo k is mo i a ed by an appa en con adic ion be ween,
on he one hand, Da win’s es imony in his au obiog aphical ex abou a supposed
pe cep ual colou blindness be o e he aes he ic magni icence o na u al landscapes,
and, on he o he hand, he las pa ag aph o On he O igin o Species, whe e he
claims o pe cei e he o ms o na u e as beau i ul and wonde ul. My aim is o
del e in o he essence o he Da winian pe cep ion o beau y in he con ex o he
Webe ian concep o “disenchan men o he wo ld”, assumed as a possible con-
cep ual axis ha enables he un a elling o he co e o his con as o pe cep ions.
In acknowledging he heo y o e olu ion as one o he mos p ominen scien i ic
heo ies likely o ha e con ibu ed o disenchan men , a numbe o ques ions a ise:
Is disenchan men compa ible wi h aes he ic expe ience and sensibili y be o e na u-
al beau y? Was i Da win’s disenchan ed concep ion o he wo ld ha led him o
belie e he was colou blind? To answe hese ques ions, a compu e -assis ed seman-
ic analysis o lexical equency and a iabili y, mos especially ocused on aes-
he ic-emo ional and eligious o spi i ual ad e bs and adjec i es, has been unde -
aken ac oss he six edi ions o The O igin. The seman ic analysis demons a es
ha , al hough disenchan ed, Da win’s desc ip ions o , mainly, he adap a ional
excellence o li ing beings, e lec an aes he ically en iched pe cep ion o na u e. I
is concluded ha Da win’s pe cep ual colou blindness, hen, migh be based on a
Supplemen a y In o ma ion The online e sion o his a icle (h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s40656-
021- 00373-y) con ains supplemen a y ma e ial, which is a ailable o au ho ized use s.
* Bá ba a Jiménez-Pazos
[email p o ec ed]
1 IAS-Resea ch - Cen e o Li e, Mind andSocie y. Philosophy Depa men , Uni e si y
o  heBasque Coun y, SanSebas ián, Spain
2 Facul ad de Educación, Filoso ía y An opología, Uni e sidad del País Vasco, A enida de
Tolosa 70, 20018SanSebas ián,Guipúzcoa, Spain
B.Jiménez-Pazos
1 3
57 Page 2 o 28
con usion oo ed in he equa ion o equali y be ween aes he ic sensibili y in na u e
and he pe cep ion o i s beau y as pa o he es igia Dei.
Keywo ds Da win· The O igin o Species· Disenchan men o he wo ld·
Pe cep ion and desc ip ion o na u al beau y· Compu e -assis ed lexical analysis·
Seman ic analysis
1 In oduc ion
The las pa ag aph o Cha les Da win’s On he O igin o Species (1859) (he eina e
OS) is memo able o i mas e ully syn hesises he wo k’s con en h ough an aes-
he ically and on ologically op imis ic language o Humbold ian demeanou :1
I is in e es ing o con empla e an en angled bank, clo hed wi h many plan s
o many kinds, wi h bi ds singing on he bushes, wi h a ious insec s li ing
abou , and wi h wo ms c awling h ough he damp ea h, and o e lec ha
hese elabo a ely cons uc ed o ms, so di e en om each o he , and depend-
en on each o he in so complex a manne , ha e all been p oduced by laws ac -
ing a ound us. […] The e is g andeu in his iew o li e, wi h i s se e al pow-
e s, ha ing been o iginally b ea hed2 in o a ew o ms o in o one; and ha ,
whils his plane has gone cycling on acco ding o he ixed law o g a i y,
om so simple a beginning endless o ms mos beau i ul and mos wonde ul
ha e been, and a e being, e ol ed (Da win 1859, pp. 489–490).
Da win sha es his iew o li e, desc ibed as g andiose (“The e is g andeu in his
iew o li e”), made up o an admi able in e connec ion be ween laws and beau i ul
and wonde ul o ganic beings (“endless o ms mos beau i ul and mos wonde ul”);
his pa ag aph ansmi s, wi hou a doub , a message abou he in ellec ual, sen i-
men al and aes he ic appeal ha Da win akes on om he s udy o na u e. Su p is-
ingly, hese emo ionally inspi ing wo ds ha e emained almos unchanged om he
i s d a s o OS,3 which con ain he ances o e sions o Da win’s concluding lines
(Da win (ed.) 1909a, 1909b).
The aes he ic and on ological op imism ha is in e ed om hese inal lines
lies in Da win’s abili y o obse e na u e h ough he op ics o his heo y o e olu-
ion and, consequen ly, pe cei e i s beau i ul and wonde ul o ms in slow bu con-
s an de elopmen . Da win’s aes he ic-on ological op imism is also, he e o e, dis-
enchan ed, in he s ic sense o he e m, ha is, desac alized, o o an e iden ly
1 In ac , Da win may ha e been inspi ed by a simila pa ag aph in A. on Humbold ’s Pe sonal Na a‑
i e (Wul 2015, p. 234).
Among he expe in e p e a ions o he las lines o OS, I highligh : Cannon 1968; Kohn 1997; Le ine
2008.
2 Da win added he speci ying exp ession “by he C ea o ” a e “b ea hed” in he second edi ion o OS
(1860b,p. 484), an addi ion “ ha he la e eg e ed” (B owne 2002, p. 96).
3 He e is a selec ion o excellen esea ch pieces on he o igin o OS: Vo zimme 1975; Schwebe 1977;
Kohn e al. 1982.
1 3
Da win’s pe cep ion o na u e and heques ion o … Page 3 o 28 57
na u alis ic inclina ion, since he e a e no indica ions o unde s and Da win’s expla-
na ion o he exis ence and e olu ion o species as cases o es igia Dei.
Wha e e his iew o disenchan ed and op imis ic li e, i is con as ed wi h
he eg e ul con ession Da win makes in his au obiog aphical ex 4 (he eina -
e AB)abou a supposed loss o he abili y o pe cei e in ense aes he ic- eligious
eelings in na u e, which had emained ac i e in his you h. In his ega d, Da win
says he eels colou blind in he ace o g ea scenes o na u e:
I well emembe my con ic ion ha he e is mo e in man han he me e b ea h
o his body. Bu now he g andes scenes would no cause any such con ic ions
and eelings o ise in my mind. I may be uly said ha I am like a man who
has become colou -blind, and he uni e sal belie by men o he exis ence o
edness makes my p esen loss o pe cep ion o no he leas alue as e idence
(Ba low 2005, p. 76).
This con ession, belonging o a sec ion on Da win’s “Religious Belie ” (Ba low
2005, pp. 71–80), e eals he in e up ion o he in e ela ion be ween he expe i-
ence o eligious eelings, in he ace o he magni icence o na u e, and Da win’s
capaci y o aes he ic pe cep ion in such a way ha he o me canno occu wi hou
he la e . I could be said ha , in con as wi h wha can be in e ed om he las
lines o OS, Da win’s con ession e eals he pessimis ic consequences o assuming
a disenchan ed iew o li e.
Could wha Da win diagnoses as “loss o pe cep ion” be ela ed wi h, as he
adds la e in he ex , a loss o his capaci y o a is ic enjoymen ? While Da win’s
ascina ion o scien i ic con en in any ex had emained ali e, in e es in music,
poe y and landscape obse a ion had disappea ed (Ba low 2005, pp. 112–113). The
uncon i med diagnosis Da win himsel makes abou his a is ic discom o is ce -
ainly sugges i e; he con empla es he possibili y ha , o e ime, an o e -dedica ion
o he scien i ic s udy o na u e may ha e a ophied, due o disuse, he pa o his
b ain dedica ed o he app ecia ion o he ines a s (Ba low 2005, p. 113).
Could bo h losses, — he aes he ic and eligious pe cep ual inabili y o na u-
al magni icence and he disappea ance o a is ic enjoymen —, be a ibu ed o
he same cause? Bo h he symp oms and he diagnosis could poin o a possible
Webe ian disenchan men —explained in mo e de ail below in Chap e  2—likely
caused, o some ex en , by Da win’s assimila ion o his own scien i ic ideas and a
consequen loss o he meaning o li e. The side e ec o scien i ic p og ess and
he wo ld’s demys i ica ion, o Webe , is ha he wo ld becomes in ellec ualized,
a ionalized,p edic ableand hus, disenchan ed, bu also disenchan ing, as a conse-
quence o he scien i ic incapaci y o ill he acuum le by he decline o eligion.
The wo ld, in sum, becomes undesi ably unable o ul il emo ional needs.
4 Al hough Da win’s au obiog aphy was published, along wi h pa o his co espondence, in h ee ol-
umes in 1887 unde he edi ion by his son F ancis Da win wi h he i le The Li e and Le e s o Cha les
Da win, Including an Au obiog aphical Chap e , I will quo e he edi ion by N. Ba low: The Au obiog a‑
phy o Cha les Da win, 1809–1882 (2005).
B.Jiménez-Pazos
1 3
57 Page 4 o 28
Webe ’s diagnosis o he disenchan men o he wo ld could be a use ul way o
eph ase wha Da win expe ienced, since i could explain he a is ic and aes he ic-pe -
cep ual blindness he desc ibed in AB. Bu i is pa adoxical ha Da win ends OS, a dis-
enchan ing miles one in he his o y o science, wi h wo ds ha appeal o he g andeu
o na u e and con ey posi i i y and in ellec ual, aes he ic and sen imen al sa is ac ion,
while i is no un il la e publica ion o AB ha he e eals he nega i e e ec s o an
alleged disenchan men , in he Webe ian sense o he e m.
In sho , on he one hand, he las lines in OS show a clea op imis ically disen-
chan ed aes he ic sensibili y a ising om a ious sou ces o inspi a ion such as he
awa eness o a i al ac i i y ha is in ini e in appea ance and pe ec in essence. On
he o he hand, he es imony in ABabou Da win’s “a ophy” in one pa o he b ain
and an alleged “colou blindness” would indica e, consequen ly, a eeling ha does no
seem o co espond o wha was exp essed in he las pa ag aph o OS.
The ideas jus desc ibed hen poin o a con adic ion ha allows he o mula ion
o ques ions ha will ma k he a gumen a i e de elopmen o his a icle. I Da win-
ian science,—whe he i is an o e -dedica ion o scien i ic s udy, o pe haps he in e -
naliza ion o a supposedly pessimis ically disenchan ing message ound in OS—, is he
cause, acco ding o Da win, o he a ophy o he pa o his b ain dedica ed o a is ic
app ecia ion, and also o he inabili y o expe ience eelings o aes he ic exal a ion in
na u e, why does Da win end OS, one o he mos ou s anding wo ks in he his o y o
science ha would ha e con ibu ed o disenchan men , wi h a message ha indica es
in ellec ual and aes he ic ascina ion? Is disenchan men compa ible wi h aes he ic
expe ience and sensibili y o na u al beau y? Conside ing ha he OS ex a ied con-
side ably o e he yea s, leading o di e en edi ions wi h mul iple addi ions and dele-
ions, would i be possible o de ec in he lexical-a gumen a i e e olu ion o he di -
e en edi ions o OS signals ha an icipa e a la e disenchan men in Da win? Is i his
disenchan ed concep ion o he wo ld ha led Da win o belie e himsel colou blind in
he ace o he beau y o na u e? Was Da win disenchan ed a he end o his li e, o jus
con used by his inexplicable lack o aes he ic and a is ic in e es ? I will answe hese
ques ions in ou chap e s dedica ed o un a elling he cha ac e is ics o Da win’s pe -
cep ion o na u al beau y.
To s a wi h, he ollowing chap e will de ine he concep ual pilla s o his a i-
cle a ound he no ion o Webe ian disenchan men , and i s ela ionship wi h Da win’s
wo k, h ough a c i ical e iew o he s a e o he a . The e iew o he li e a u e will,
consequen ly, allow us o p opose he wo king hypo hesis and jus i y he me hodology
ha I ha e used o sol e he dilemma abou Da winian disenchan men .
1 3
Da win’s pe cep ion o na u e and heques ion o … Page 5 o 28 57
2 Disenchan men : hypo he ical andme hodological ema ks
One o he cul u al mani es a ions ha came ou o he his o ical p ocess o he
“desac aliza ion” o he “secula iza ion”5 o he wo ld, is he “disenchan men o
he wo ld” (En zaube ung de Wel ),6 p oposed by Max Webe in his 1917 lec u e
“Science as a Voca ion” (Wissenscha als Be u ), a phenomenon o mode n soci-
e y ha a ises om cul u al in ellec ualiza ion and a ionaliza ion. Webe a ibu es
he eme gence o he disenchan men o he wo ld o he possibili y o access o a
a ionalized knowledge o ou li ing condi ions:
The g owing p ocess o in ellec ualiza ion and a ionaliza ion does no imply
a g owing unde s anding o he condi ions unde which we li e. I means
some hing qui e di e en . I is he knowledge o he con ic ion ha i only we
wished o unde s and hem we could do so a any ime. I means ha in p inci-
ple, hen, we a e no uled by mys e ious, unp edic able o ces, bu ha , on he
con a y, we can, in p inciple, con ol e e y hing by means o calcula ion. This
in u n means he disenchan men o he wo ld. Unlike he sa age o whom
such o ces exis ed, we need no longe ha e ecou se o magic in o de o con-
ol he spi i s o p ay o hem. Ins ead, echnology and calcula ion achie e ou
ends. This is he p ima y meaning o he p ocess o in ellec ualiza ion (Webe
2004, pp. 12–13).
F om Webe ’s wo ds i can be in e ed ha he concep o he “disenchan men o
he wo ld” is a clea exp ession o how he cha ac e is ic ype o knowledge o mod-
e n sciencea ec s he iew and emo ional pe cep iono he wo ld inspeci ic cul-
u al con ex s. In he case o he mode n cul u al con ex o which Webe e e s o,
he de achmen o assump ions abou he unc ioning o he wo ld based on mys-
e ious o ces caused by us in echnology and calcula ion would ha e been he
essence o disenchan men .
In his ega d, i should be bo ne in mind ha he Webe ian diagnosis o he dis-
enchan men o he wo ld caused by mode n science is only a gene ic desc ip ion o
a ype o modi ica ions ha he his o y o science has in oduced in he wo ld iew
and in cul u al consciousness; hese modi ica ions ha e c ys allized in p ocesses ca -
ego ised as “secula iza ion” o “desac aliza ion” o he wo ld and cul u e. La ely,
hese p ocesses a e being aken up in con empo a y philosophical his o iog aphy
5 Among he ex ensi e bibliog aphy on he concep o “secula iza ion”, I highligh A Secula Age (2007)
by C. Taylo , whe e he p esen s he e olu ion o he p ocess o he secula iza ion o he wo ld h oughou
his o y.
6 Al hough he concep “disenchan men o he wo ld” is gene ally a ibu ed o Max Webe , he poe
F ied ich on Schille (1962)had p e iously alluded o he “dis-godding o na u e” (die En gö e ung
de Na u ) in his 1788 25-s anza-poem “The Gods o G eece” (Die Gö e G iechenlandes), whe e he
e e s o he passing o an age in which di ini y inhabi s he wo ld o a godless wo ld, and hus, a godless
na u e.
Bu e en be o e Schille , he philosophe René Desca es, in he se en h chap e o his 1664wo k Le
Monde de R. Desca es ou le T ai é de la Lumié e, desc ibes na u e no as a Goddess bu as ma e i sel
wi h i s quali ies: “Sachez donc, que pa la Na u e je n’en ends poin ici quelque Dèesse, ou quelque
au e so e de puissance imaginai e, mais que je me se s de ce mo pou signi ie la Ma iè e même en an
que je la considè e a ec ou es les quali és que je lui ai a ibuées” (Adam and Tanne y 1974, p. 37).

B.Jiménez-Pazos
1 3
57 Page 6 o 28
unde pa ially equi alen desc ip o s such as “me aphysical na u alism” and “scien-
i ic na u alism”.
A speci ic case o he ela ionship be ween scien i ic knowledge and cul u e ha
would con i m he Webe ian hesis on he disenchan men o he wo ld is, p ecisely,
he publica ion o Da win’s OS. As we will discuss in mo e de ail in Sub-chap-
e 2.1., he bi e cul u al ecep ion o he secula izing implica ions o he analysis
o na u e ha Da win p oposed in OS has been, in addi ion, one o he p eambles o
a wa e o social analysis abou why science would no be o ien ed o, no would i
be able o, make sense o he wo ld. As an example o his, a numbe o s udies ha e,
in ac , managed o pe pe ua e he idea ha mode n science would consequen ly
esul in he i e e sible dehumaniza ion o cul u e (see, o ins ance,Ado no and
Ho kheime 2016).7
2.1 Disenchan men andDa winian disenchan men
Da win’s OS is ce ainly conside ed a pa adigma ic wo k in he his o y o science
because o he disenchan ing e ec caused by he cul u al ecep ion o i s ideas, bo h
in he s ic lexical sense o he e m “disenchan men ”, and in he pessimis ic sense
mos aligned wi h he emo ional s a e o all hose who in e nalize he ideas de el-
oped in he wo k.
Rega ding he s ic sense o he e m “disenchan men ”, i should be no ed ha
he a gumen a i e axis o OS, he heo y o e olu ion, explains he unc ioning o
he mechanism ha leads o he e olu ion o species, na u al selec ion, cas ing aside
he need o appeal o sup a-na u al—enchan ed—en i ies. Tha is, Da win undid
he need o belie e in a C ea o o —independen ly c ea ed ad hoc—animal species
and laid he g oundwo k o he belie in a p og essi e e olu ion o species, which
included human beings, om a common ances o .
As o he emo ionally pessimis ic, o pejo a i e, sense o he e m “disenchan -
men ”, i is he pe spec i e ha assumes ha he enchan men o na u e, ha is, i s
aes he ic and emo ional appeal, de e io a es as science explains i s sec e s. To his
espec , he biological— he disco e y o an ances o o human beings, which we e
o be inse ed as ano he link in he e olu iona y chain—and, abo e all, he cul u al
implica ions esul ing om he assimila ion o he disenchan ing conclusions ha
Da win aised in OS should be emembe ed. These ideas ac ed as he disconnec o s
o enchan men , gene a ing a eeling o social un es mo ed by he loss o he mean-
ing o li e, in he cul u al con ex o ha ime. Accep ing Da winian science equi ed
elimina ing undamen al cul u al p esupposi ions ela ed o eligious mo als.
7 Ado no and Ho kheime (2016) de ec ed he weigh o he disenchan ing p og am in he Renaissance,
ocused on “ he dissolu ion o my hs and he subs i u ion o knowledge o ancy” (p. 3). The disen-
chan ed Renaissance na u e go id o animism, gods, my h and supe s i ion; e e y hing ha was no
subjec o nume ical, compu a ional ules, become illuso y and suspicious. The Renaissance human
used and domina ed disenchan ed na u e —a demys i ied na u e, subjec o he ules o calculabili y and
educed o me e objec i i y— o his own in e es s. Ado no and Ho kheime ’s c i icism was he e o e
di ec ed a he p og essi ely dehumanizing Renaissance eali y ha os e ed eason and p og ess.
1 3
Da win’s pe cep ion o na u e and heques ion o … Page 7 o 28 57
One o he mos mani es analyses o bo h he s ic and pessimis ic senses o
Da winian disenchan men is ha o D. C. Denne (1995). This au ho p esen s
“Da win’s dange ous idea” as a “uni e sal acid” ha co odes he ne wo k o a-
di ional ideas and o e s a new e olu iona y iew o he wo ld based on na u al
selec ion being conside ed o be a mechanical “algo i hm” ha dispenses wi h an
in insic and con olling a ionali y o i s own mechanism.
The ecen his o iog aphical s udies, a majo i y o which a e eac ions o sci-
en i ic disenchan men in gene al, and a mino i y oDa winian disenchan men in
pa icula , s ill con i m he eeling o social discom o .These s udies, some mo e
p o usely han o he s, analyse—and many o hem also boos — he concep s o
“enchan men ” and, abo e all, “ e-enchan men ” and i s mul iple mani es a ions,
namely, a is ic and li e a y, ecological, mys icalo spi i ual, eligious and secula
o scien i icas s a egies o e-enchan ing he wo ld(Swa os 1983; Be man 1981;
Lassman and Velody 1989; Sc ibne 1993; Kon os 1994; Sch oede 1995; McDow-
ell 1996; Cu y 1999; Be ge 1999; Ruickbie 1999; Jenkins 2000; G i in 2001;
Gane 2002; McG a h 2002; Owen 2004; Pa idge 2004; Koshul 2005; G aham
2007; Le ine 2008, 2011; Walsham 2008; Gibson 2009; Landy 2009; Landy and
Sale 2009; Paige 2009; Tanaka 2009; Richa ds 2011; Taylo 2011; Asp em 2014;
Josephson-S o m 2017).
As a as Da winian disenchan men is conce ned, R. J. Richa ds (2011), a
de ende o Da winian enchan men whose endency has been o conside Da win
as an au ho decisi ely in luenced by oman ic na u alism,8 and especially G. Le -
ine (2008; 2011), a de ende o a Da winian e-enchan men , a e he au ho s who
mos p o usely ha e s udied he ela ionship be ween he concep o disenchan men
and Da win’s wo k. Le ine (2008) sugges s ha one should no assume he iew o
na u e ha Da win p oposes in OS as disenchan ing, bu as secula ly e-enchan ing.
In his ega d, Le ine a gues ha Da win’s abili y o be amazed by he wonde s o
na u e, which is isible, o example, in he las lines o OS, is an ob ious sign ha
he e is no eason why he assimila ion o he ideas se o h in his wo k has o
p oduce disenchan men , in he pessimis ic sense o he e m, and ha i could, on
he con a y, encou age a secula ly e-enchan ing iew o na u e. To p o e his, he
highligh s he supposedly equen use o he wo d wonde , and i s de i a i e e ms,
in OS.
Al hough I do no sha e Le ine’s p oposal o conside ing Da winian science as
e-enchan ing, I will adop his ejec ion o he posi ion ha assumes i as disen-
chan ing, in an emo ionally pessimis ic sense. I will also adop he me hodology o
analysis o lexical equencies. Ne e heless, unlike Le ine’s, my analysis will be
compu e -assis ed and, he e o e, quan i a i ely mo eexhaus i e.
The bes and clea es de ence o he ac i e knowledge o na u e9 is he mani-
es opposi ion o Alexande on Humbold in his wo k Kosmos, published in i e
8 On he oman ic ounda ions o Da win’s heo y p oposed by Richa ds see: Richa ds 2002; Richa ds
and Ruse 2016.
9 Among he li e a u e ha mani es ly de ends ha scien i ic knowledge o na u e allows us o obse e
i om an aes he ically ein o ced pe spec i e, and no ice e sa, I highligh Pea son 1892; Bee 1983;
Dawkins 1998; Fishe 1998; Ca lson 2000; Pa sons 2008; Campion 2011.
B.Jiménez-Pazos
1 3
57 Page 8 o 28
olumes om 1845 o 1862, o he ela ionship be ween he s udy o na u e and he
loss o i s enchan men . Only by s udying he exac sciences, says Humbold , can he
pleasu e p oduced by he con empla ion o na u e be ound (Humbold 1993, p. 28).
This is p ecisely he poin o iew on which I ha e cons uc ed my hypo hesis abou
Da winian disenchan men in he ollowing sub-chap e .
2.2 Hypo hesis
The hypo hesis I in end o explo e—I will o mula e a complemen a y hypo hesis in
Chap e 4—is ha , con a y o wha can be in e ed om Da win’s diagnosis abou
a pe cep ual colou blindness, he p og essi e acquisi ion o explana o y knowledge
abou na u e should no ha e weakened Da win’s aes he ic sensibili y, bu , on he
con a y, i should ha e e ined and ma u ed i , as can be seen om he disenchan ed,
al hough aes he ically and emo ionally sa is ied iew o li e ha Da win desc ibes a
he end o OS. Whe eas he heo y o e olu ion ce ainly di es s na u e o i s magi-
cal cha ac e in explaining he mechanics o na u al selec ion, i also should ha e
acco ded a mo e p o ound and comple ely new unde s anding o i o Da win.
A speci ically human way, al hough no he only one, o ela e o na u e, is in i s
pe cep ion and desc ip ion, as bo h a e insepa able om he idea o na u e in o ce
in each cul u al en i onmen . So, ega dless o Da win’s assessmen o his own aes-
he ic sensibili y agains na u al beau y in AB, whe he o no he con eys a non-
pejo a i e disenchan ed concep ion o na u e should be made isible by examining
ele an lexical equencies and a ia ions in he ocabula y used o desc ibe na u e
ac oss he six edi ions o OS (1859,1860b, 1861, 1866, 1869, 1872). The seman ic
es imony o he lexicon in he six edi ions o OS should ha e mo e au ho i y han
he opinion ha Da win himsel could hold a any gi en ime abou his own aes-
he ic sensibili y. And, o cou se, he ex s should ha e mo e au ho i y han Da win’s
will o he meaning o his own ex s, o hese e eal, in he end, wha hei seman ic
mass con ains, including i s logical implica ions, and his need no necessa ily coin-
cide wi h he will o i s au ho .
As he publica ion o new edi ions o OS p og essed, Da win elimina ed and
added a mul iplici y o pa ag aphs, upda ed hypo heses, e ined ideas, co ec ed
explana ions and imp o ed desc ip ions. The e o e, he lexical a iabili y, om he
i s edi ion o he six h, should be one o he mos no able indica o s o he unde -
lying concep ual s uc u e o OS, which e lec s, in u n, he on ologicalandepis-
emological p esupposi ions on which Da win’s concep ion o na u e is buil . The
equency, he modi ica ions and he na u e o he e minology, should be illus a-
i e indica ions o he consequences ha he de elopmen o he e olu iona y heo y
has had on Da win’s pe cep ion and desc ip ion o na u e and, consequen ly, on he
issue o disenchan men .
Un o una ely, he c i ical li e a u e a ound he Da winian lexicon is no abun-
dan . The e a e conco dances o OS (Ba e e al. 1981) and o he wo ks by Da win
1 3
Da win’s pe cep ion o na u e and heques ion o … Page 9 o 28 57
(Ba e e  al. 1986, 1987; Weinshank e  al. 1990), as well as he digi al10 and
p in ed(Peckham 1959) e sions o he a io um o he six edi ions o OS. O he
s udies, minimal in some cases, ha e ocused on speci ic aspec s o Da winian lex-
icology and he e olu ion o Da win’s hough ac oss edi ions (Vo zimme 1972;
Liepman 1981; Sulloway 1985; Loye 2000; Richa ds 2002, 2011; Sloan 2005; Shil-
lingsbu g 2006; Le ine 2011; Sain e-Ma ie e  al. 2011; Hidalgo-Downing 2014;
Menninghaus 2016; Hoque 2013, 2018). Howe e , he e has been no seman ic
s udy o he lexicon ha con i ms o e u es he hesis o disenchan men in Da -
win’s wo k.
In sho , i Da win’s wo k had con ibu ed o he disenchan men p ocess, hen i
should be possible o de ec i s seman ic aces in Da win’s desc ip ion and pe cep-
ion o na u e. A seman ic analysis on lexical equency and a iabili y should, in
u n, cla i y, wi h a g ea e p ecision han is a ailable in his o iog aphy, he issue
o whe he he assimila ion o Da win’s own heo y weakened o , on he con a y,
s eng hened his aes he ic sensibili y.
2.3 Me hodology
To es he jus -desc ibed hypo hesis, I ha e de eloped a compu e -assis ed11 s udy
on he Da winian lexicon, especially ocused on he lexical equency and a iabili y
ac oss he six edi ions o OS. This lexical da a analysis should help ace he on o-
epis emological p esupposi ions unde lying Da win’s desc ip ions o na u e.
To answe he ques ion o whe he he disenchan ed concep ion o he wo ld
weakened Da win’s aes he ic sensibili y, he key e minology ha o his espec I
ha e chosen o analyse is mainly he ypes o adjec i es and ad e bs ela ed o: 1)
desc ip ions o na u e which ha e an aes he ic bias, as well as; 2) Da win’s moods
wi h espec o na u e, and; 3) gene al imp essions ha deno e empha ic in e es
in he knowledge o he na u al landscape. The esul s ob ained om he analysis
ocused on he numbe o occu ences, as well as on he ype and a iabili y o
he exp essions a ec ed by his ca ego y o adjec i es and ad e bs, should be eli-
able indica o s o he Da winian capaci y o he aes he ic-emo ional pe cep ion o
na u e.
I seems easonable o assume ha he use o a lexicon o sup a-na u al seman-
ics, ha is, wi h an implici on ology p one o ega d na u e as a numinous eal-
i y no explainable by i sel and popula ed by en i ies, i uali ies o ai s o ans-
na u al descen , is a good indica o o a non-disenchan ed wo ld iew in he sense
desc ibed abo e.12 The e o e, I ha e s udied he equency and a iabili y in OS
11 Al hough ecen s udies (Mahmoudi and Abbasalizadeh 2019) ha e a gued in a ou o he en iching
app oach ha s a is ics and ex mining s a egies can o e o li e a y s udies, o he pieces o esea ch
(Da 2019) wa n us abou he p oblems, logical allacies and concep ual laws ha could a ise in compu-
a ional li e a y s udies.
12 An example o ans-na u al seman ics would be o make use o he no ion o beau y e e ed o na u e
assuming ha i s meaning necessa ily e e s o he eligious on ological domain. Bu he ac ha his use
has been his o iog aphically e y equen does no demons a e ha i is logically necessa y.
10 The Online Va io um o Da win’s O igin o Species, c ea ed by Ba ba a Bo dalejo (2012), is a ailable
a h p:// da win- online. o g. uk.
B.Jiménez-Pazos
1 3
57 Page 16 o 28
scien i ic, ma hema ical and echnical aspec s o na u e, a e p ecisely a ibu es o
disenchan men ha acqui e special isibili y i he beha iou o he Da winian lexi-
con is analysed ac oss he six edi ions o OS.
As an example, he possible emo ional use ha could be applied o an adjec i e
such as delica e, is uled ou i he nouns a ec ed by his adjec i e a e analysed.
Da win has igo ously limi ed i s use o he desc ip ion o o ms, beings and p op-
e ies o na u e ha ha e he quali y o being delica e, such as shells, hexagonal
walls, na u e (quali y), cell‑cons uc ing wo k (3 d ed.–5 h ed.), b anching co al‑
line, inhabi an s o he cells, ilamen s, memb ane, ex u e, inne coa o he eye and
leshy o gans. Many o he exp essions jus lis ed a e in oduced in he six h edi-
iono OS, wi h a s iking di e ence o eigh occu ences be ween he i s and six h
edi ion. This, again, demons a es Da win’s p og essi e acquisi ion o scien i ic
knowledge abou na u eand a consequen e inemen o his desc ip ions.
Howe e , unlike delica e, he adjec i e exquisi e and he ad e b exquisi ely ha e
been conscien iously applied in OS o aes he ic-emo ionally deno a e s uc u aland
adap a ional ea u eso na u e, such as exquisi e adap a ions,exquisi e s uc u e o
a comb, exquisi ely cons uc ed hooks, exquisi ely adap ed pa s and o gans and
exquisi ely ea he ed gills. These esul s indica e ha he emo ional in ensi y o he
e ms exquisi e and exquisi ely es s on he adap i e and s uc u al excellence o na -
u al objec s, no admi able wi hou he pe spec i e o scien i ic op ics. Da win him-
sel ea i ms his admi a ion o one o he examples jus men ioned, he s uc u e o
a comb, indica ing ha he pe cei es i wi h en husias ic admi a ion.20
As a as admi a ion is conce ned, i should be no ed ha Da win uses admi ably
ou imes also o e e o he excellence o he adap a ion o he en i onmen o
some li ing beings: admi ably adap ed woodpecke , admi ably adap ed pleu onec i‑
dae, admi ably adap ed pollinium and admi ably adap ed species. In o he wo ds,
Da win’s lexicon shows, once mo e, ha his admi a ion lies wi h he complexi y and
unc ional and adap i e excellence o biological objec s and beings.
The lis o lexical examples ha mani es a union be ween aes he ic-emo ional
adjec i es and ad e bs, and na u al objec s, s a es, a ibu es and p ocesses, some
o ma ked scien i ic- echnical cha ac e is ics, expands, in his espec , conside ably.
The su p ising emphasis ansmi ed by he ad e b as onishingly a ec s only echni-
cal aspec s o na u e such as a i icially imp o ed a ie ies (as onishingly imp o ed
b eeds by c ossing hem) and he apid inc ease o some animal species (as onish‑
ingly apid inc ease o a ious animals); in a simila ly empha ic, al hough alsosci-
en i ic- echnical, way, Da win adjec i izes he sea asa o midable ba ie  ha migh
in e e e wi h he geog aphical dis ibu ion o animal species; he adjec i e mag‑
ni icen , o equi alen exp essi e in ensi y, applies exclusi ely o he compound eyes
o bu e lies in a s a e o ch ysalis; he ad e b ma ellously is used o indica e he
pe ec ion o he a ibu es o he eye (ma ellously pe ec a ibu es/cha ac e s);
he ad e b nicely accen ua es he pe ec ela ionship o balance be ween, on he one
hand, a iabili y o he o ces o compe ingo ganic beings(nicely balanced o ces)
and, on he o he hand, he consequen  luc ua ings abili y o he scale o  ic o y
20 See he adjec i e en husias ic in Table2 (Online Resou ce, pp. 4–11).

1 3
Da win’s pe cep ion o na u e and heques ion o … Page 17 o 28 57
and de ea in he s uggle o li e (nicely balanced scale in he s uggle o li e); he
adjec i e s upendous a ec s only he noun deg ada ion, e e ing o he de e io a-
ion o some olcanic islands; and inally, he adjec i e wond ous e e s o he elec-
ical o gans o some ish (wond ous o gans) and o he beau i ul physical o ganisa-
ion o some li ing beings classi ied as low on he scale o na u e ( eally wond ous
and beau i ul o ganisa ion).
These examples p o e ha al hough Da win does no cease o expe ience in ense
emo ions o aes he ic magni icence, admi a ion and su p ise be o e he excellence
o na u e, he use o hese aes he ic-emo ional adjec i es and ad e bs is mos ly
es ic ed o scien i ic- echnical aspec s o na u e. Howe e , his es ic ion is no
absolu e. Wi hou di e ing a en ion om his p ima y pu pose in OS, ha is, o
explain he na u al mechanisms necessa y o a co ec dissemina ion o e olu ion-
a y ideas, Da win occasionally desc ibes na u e wi h a cha ac e is ically aes he ic-
poe ic lexicon, e e ing bo h o me ely aes he ic aspec s o he landscape and na u-
al objec s, as well as o his mood. Thus, o example, he way Da win emphasizes
he delicacy by which bees sp ead he e milion colou o he wax h ough he axes
o he hi e cells is especially s iking: as delica ely as a pain e could ha e done
wi h his b ush. Simila ly, Da win also desc ibes some bi ds and he plumage o
bi ds o pa adise as go geous, ce ain ui a ie ies as splendid, he beau y in scen‑
e y as pic u esque, he di e si y o na u e as ha monious and bu e liesas magni i‑
cen ly colou ed.
In sum, al hough hese exp essions, when analysed indi idually, a e hose wi h
he highes aes he ic-poe ic in ensi y compa ed o he mos equen adjec i es and
ad e bs analysed in sub-chap e  3.1.1., i should be no ed ha , i analysed in he
ex ual con ex o OS, hey all a e inse ed in pa ag aphs igo ously dedica ed o he
scien i ic explana ion o na u al ac s and mechanisms. In addi ion, he p esence o
hese adjec i es and ad e bs in he ex is minimal, as hey appea , excep o he
adjec i e delica e, once o wice in each edi ion o he wo k, and in he case o he
adjec i e pic u esque, only once in he i h edi ion.
3.2 Seman ic analysis o  eligious o spi i ual lexicon inOS
The i egula lexical beha iou o eligious o spi i ual adjec i es, in e ms o e -
minological addi ions and sub ac ions is e e ed o, is isually s iking when com-
pa ed wi h he gene alized semi-s able o g owing lexical endency o aes he ic-
emo ional adjec i es. Ne e heless, his i egula i y depends, o a la ge ex en , on
he addi ions o dele ions ha Da win applies o he OS bibliog aphic ma e ial,
whe e he majo i y o hese adjec i es a e included. Religious o spi i ual adjec-
i es, he e o e, ha e no heo e ical weigh in any o he six edi ions o OS.21 OS is,
consequen ly, a disenchan ed ex , in he s ic es sense o he e m, ha is, lacking
21 Ne e heless, his idea is no in con lic wi h iews claiming ha he use o heology played an epis-
emic ole in he OS’s case o e olu ion, and agains special c ea ion (Dilley 2012). Excellen analyses
on Da win’s use o heology can also be ound in Gillespie 1979; Ospo a 1980; B ooke 1985, 2008;
Kohn 1989; Depew 2008, o men ion a ew.
B.Jiménez-Pazos
1 3
57 Page 18 o 28
e e ences o sup a-na u al en i ies ha a e heo e ically ele an o he scien i ic
a gumen a ion o OS.
The adjec i e di ine shows, p ecisely, a ma kedly i egula lexical beha iou . I
a ec s he nouns powe and lo e in he i s edi ion and au ho in he second edi-
ion; in he hi d edi ion Da win elimina es he noun lo e on he wo occasions in
which i appea s; in he ou h edi ion headds he noun elemen s; inally, he i h
and six h edi ions main ain he numbe o occu ences o he hi d edi ion. These
lexical esul s, howe e , lack heo e ical alue o he OS ex . The exp ession di ine
powe belongs o Whewell, which Da win quo es;22 he exp essions di ine lo e and
di ine elemen s a e ound in he bibliog aphic con en o OS; inally, he exp ession
di ine au ho ob iously e e s o an au ho men ioned by Da win.
The adjec i e holy beha es simila ly in OS. I a ec s he nouns land, al a and
places, which a e included in he i s and second edi ions, elimina ed in he hi d,
e aken up in he ou h edi ion, wi h he addi ion o he noun sc ip u e, and inally
elimina ed in he i h and six h edi ions. Now, all hese exp essions belong o he
bibliog aphic lis o OS, ha is, o he wo ks o o he au ho s. The seman ic alue o
he adjec i e holy, as well as o all he nouns a ec ed, is, he e o e, a gumen a i ely
null o he con en o OS. Likewise, he only occu ence o he adjec i e mys ical,
om he hi d o he six h edi ion o OS, a ec s he noun na u ‑philosophie, bu i
is a e e ence by Da win o Oken’s wo k. A case analogous o hose o he adjec-
i es holy andmys ical is ha o he adjec i e sac ed, whose only wo occu ences
a e bee le o he Egyp ians, a ype o bee le also called A euchus, and places, which
belongs o he bibliog aphy. We ind he same lexical si ua ion in he case o he
adjec i e supe na u al, which is used o quo e Bu le 23 om he second edi ionon
(wha is supe na u al o mi aculous…), and o e e o pa o he con en o Gui-
zo ’s wo k (The Supe na u al) in he ou h edi ion.
Imma e ial and mys e ious a e no e en used in OS as adjec i es o a eligious o
spi i ual ype, bu , in he case o imma e ial, as a synonym o “i ele an ”; in he
case o mys e ious, as a synonym o “unknown”, as i e e s o aspec s o Da win’s
in es iga ions ha a e unknown, o ha ha e ceased o be unknown o him, like laws
o he co ela ion o g ow h, causes, he succession o he same ypes o s uc u e, a
manne and cases o co ela ion.
Las ly, mi aculous is he only adjec i e which has minimal, and indi ec , heo e i-
cal alue in OS, as i a ec s he exp ession ac /s o c ea ion and he nouns in e posi‑
ion and p ocess, included in he ex as examples o mi aculous cases o c ea ion,
in e posi ion and p ocess incompa ible wi h Da win’s heo y o e olu ion based
on na u al selec ion. The only u ili y Da win ob ains om he use o he adjec i e
22 Howe e , as Topham (2010, p. 111) ad oca es, his quo a ion, belonging o W.Whewell’s B idgewa‑
e T ea ise, and loca ed “in a p ominen posi ion opposi e he i le page o he O igin o Species”, was
in suppo o he heology o na u al laws, despi e Da win’s “subsequen e osion o his belie in God in o
a somewha acilla ing o m o agnos icism”. I goes wi hou saying, Topham no es, ha he “na u e o
Da win’s quo a ion” is “s a egic”.
23 This quo a ion was added as a nod o he heological conce ns o some o Da win’s acquain ances
(B owne 2002, p. 96).
1 3
Da win’s pe cep ion o na u e and heques ion o … Page 19 o 28 57
mi aculous is, he e o e, o comple e he scien i ic con en o OS wi h examples o
heo e ical incompa ibili y.
In b ie , as ad anced abo e, since Da win does no use any o he eligious o
spi i ual adjec i es as a gumen a i e ounda ion o his explana ions in OS, i is
he e o e possible o conclude ha disenchan men also mani es s i sel in he ex s
in he o m o he absence o eligious o spi i ual adjec i es wi h ele an heo e i-
cal alue.
4 Wha abou Da win’s “colou ‑blindness”? Anexplana o y hypo hesis
oni s sou ce24
The lexically s ic , al hough emo i ely op imis ic, mani es a ion o disenchan men
in Da win’s six edi ions o OS ha has been depic ed so a , howe e , seems o be
in con lic wi h some s a emen s ha Da win includes in his Au obiog aphy (AB)
abou a supposed, and unwan ed, loss o he capabili ies o aes he ic and a is ic
pe cep ion, as an icipa ed in he in oduc ion o his pape . The AB ex ac whe e
Da win con esses o expe ience colou blindness (Ba low 2005, p. 76) is especially
signi ican in ha i con as s he posi i ely disenchan ed iew o na u e ha Da -
win p ojec s no only in he las OS pa ag aph, bu h oughou he six edi ions o
he wo k, as demons a ed in he seman ic analysis o he Da winian lexicon. To
Da win’s as onishmen , he magni icen scenes o na u e ha led him o belie e
ha he e is mo e in man han he b ea h o his body25 ha e ceased o p o oke he
same eelings in him wi h he passage o ime. Could hese symp oms o sen imen al
blindness ha Da win sel -diagnoses be ela ed o a pa allel loss o a is ic as es?26
This chap e will del e in o he con idences ha Da win exposes in AB and will
p opose, as a complemen a y hypo hesis ha e ines he conclusions eached so a ,
a solu ion o he alleged p oblem o Da winian disenchan men .
Da win no ices a change in his hough s (“my mind has changed o e he las
wen y o hi y yea s” (Ba low 2005, p. 76)) ha mani es s i sel , on he one hand,
in an unwan ed pe cep ion o poe y as bo ing and nausea ing, in he case o Shake-
spea e (“I ha e ied la ely o ead Shakespea e, and ound i so in ole ably dull
ha i nausea ed me” (Ba low 2005, p. 113)), and, on he o he hand, in he loss o
as e o pic u es o music (“I ha e also los my as e o pic u es o music” (Ba low
2005, p. 113)). Da win claims o main ain a ce ain as e o e ined na u al se ings,
al hough he admi s o ha e los he eeling o absolu e enjoymen ha such scenes
used o cause him yea s ea lie (“I e ain some as e o ine scene y, bu i does no
24 A mo e ex ensi e e sion o his chap e is included in my doc o al hesis (Jiménez Pazos 2016).
25 Da win’s memo ies o you h ha ing esul ed in a supposed pe cep ual colou blindness in his old age
a e included in Jou nal o Resea ches: “Among he scenes which a e deeply imp essed on my mind, none
exceed in sublimi y he p ime al o es s unde aced by he hand o man; […] —no one can s and in hese
soli udes unmo ed, and no eel ha he e is mo e in man han he me e b ea h o his body” (Da win
1860a, p. 503).
26 The e a e se e al au ho s who ha e con ibu ed o he explana ion o Da win’s loss o aes he ic as e.
See, o example: Campbell 1974; Fleming 1961; on Sydow 2005.
B.Jiménez-Pazos
1 3
57 Page 20 o 28
cause me he exquisi e deligh which o me ly did” (Ba low 2005, p. 113)). These
symp oms a e syn hesized in wha Da win, eg e ully, diagnoses as a s ange loss
o he mos e ined aes he ic as es. Howe e , Da win con i ms o main ain in e es
in eadings ocused on his o y, biog aphical accoun s, a el li e a u e and essays o
all kinds (“This cu ious and lamen able loss o he highe aes he ic as es is all he
odde , as books on his o y, biog aphies, and a els (independen ly o any scien i ic
ac s which hey may con ain), and essays on all so s o subjec s in e es me as
much as hey did” (Ba low 2005, p. 113)). An in ense eeling o con usion and a
need o ind answe s eme ge om his e ospec i e analysis in sea ch o he men al
changes ha Da win has expe ienced o e he yea s.
The allusion, in b acke s, o he possibili y o inding a scien i ic backg ound in
he eadings on which he s ill can s and o ocus (“independen ly o any scien i ic
ac s which hey may con ain”), mus no go unno iced. The scien i ic con en o
which Da win has no expe ienced disin e es becomes he main cause on which
Da win p ojec s his suspicions abou a possible pa ial ce eb al a ophy (“why his
should ha e caused he a ophy o ha pa o he b ain alone, on which he highe
as es depend, I canno concei e” (Ba low 2005, p. 113)). Da win’s men al ans-
o ma ion would consis o a hypo he ical mechaniza ion o he mind, which has
become, acco ding o his own ha sh wo ds, “a kind o machine o g inding gen-
e al laws ou o la ge collec ions o ac s” (Ba low 2005, p. 113). Ce eb al palsy
linked o he highes as es, appa en ly p oduced by an o e -dedica ion o scien i ic
s udy, emains an incomp ehensible key, induce o such a p onounced con usion
ha leads Da win o elucida e o e possible me hods ha would ha e p e en ed he
s a e o pe cep ual and emo ional decline desc ibed, such as a mo e egula app oach
o music o poe y (“i I had o li e my li e again, I would ha e made a ule o ead
some poe y and lis en o some music a leas once e e y week; o pe haps he pa s
o my b ain now a ophied would hus ha e been kep ac i e h ough use” (Ba low
2005, p. 113)).
Le us accep o a momen he hypo hesis ha con empla es an o e -concen a-
ion in scien i ic s udy as he main cause o Da win’s supposed ce eb al a ophy.
Wha he accep ance o his speci ic in e p e a ion does no con empla e is he
au ho ’s logical bewilde men in ega d o he explana o y implica ions ha such
an admission would en ail. I scien i ic o e -dedica ion is assumed as he cause o
Da win’s a ophy, hen he eason why such scien i ic p ac ice is exclusi ely ha m-
ul o highe aes he ic as es and no o app ecia ion o and deligh wi h his o ical,
biog aphical o li e a y subjec s should be a gued acco dingly. This pa icula ead-
ing is esolu ely as ine icien as Da win’s ague a emp s o conside he egula ed
ollow-up o musical habi s and poe ic eading as a p ecau iona y me hod o a oid-
ing all kinds o men al a ophy due o disuse.
The hypo hesis ha pe haps bes accoun s o he o igin o he newly no ed weak-
ening o Da win’s emo ional side, is ha which ocuses on he modi ica ion o his
eligious belie s. In AB, Da win ecalls his absolu e con ic ion o he exis ence o
1 3
Da win’s pe cep ion o na u e and heques ion o … Page 21 o 28 57
God and he immo ali y o he soul ci ing a passage om he Jou nal o Resea ches
(1860a)whe e he highligh s he eme gence o eelings o as onishmen , admi a ion
and de o ion in he B azilian jungle o such a p onounced ehemence, ha would
e ade any igh desc ip ion: “In my Jou nal I w o e ha whils s anding in he mids
o he g andeu o a B azilian o es , ‘i is no possible o gi e an adequa e idea o
he highe eelings o wonde , admi a ion, and de o ion, which ill and ele a e he
mind’” (Ba low 2005, p. 76). The exp essi e inabili y in he ace o he sublime
g andeu 27 o na u e, would be in ima ely linked o he eeling ha “ he e is mo e in
man han he me e b ea h o his body” (Da win 1860a, p. 503). Howe e , he colou
blindness ha Da win claims o su e , would ha e blocked he p ocess o aes he ic
pe cep ion o na u e and he subsequen eme gence o eligious eelings.
The expe iences epo ed in he Jou nal o Resea ches would be suppo ed by he
classic link be ween he eeling o he sublime and he eligious eeling, suppo ha
would c umble o e he yea s wi h he p og essi e e olu ion o Da win’s hinking.
Da win himsel con i ms his clea ly: “The s a e o mind which g and scenes o -
me ly exci ed in me, and which was in ima ely connec ed wi h a belie in God, did
no essen ially di e om ha which is o en called he sense o sublimi y” (Ba low
2005, p. 76). ¿Could Da win ha e been nos algic o Paleyan na u al heology, ha
is, he pe cep ion o na u e as es igia Dei?
In Na u al Theology (1802), William Paley a ibu es, by induc i e in e ence, he
e idences o design in na u e like he human eye, which Paley compa es wi h a el-
escope, o he exis ence o a di ine designe ; such a complex na u al mechanism
like ha o he human eye mus ha e had a designe , jus as he machine y o a el-
escope had. Paley’s wo k was o conside able impo ance o Da win; he a gumen
om design in na u e esul ed, ini ially, in being absolu ely con incing un il na u al
selec ion was disco e ed.28 Da win himsel s a es his in AB: “The old a gumen
o design in na u e, as gi en by Paley, which o me ly seemed o me conclusi e,
ails, now ha he law o na u al selec ion has been disco e ed. We can no longe
a gue ha , o ins ance, he beau i ul hinge o a bi al e shell mus ha e been made
by an in elligen being, like he hinge o a doo by man” (Ba low 2005, p. 73). Da -
win belongs o he gene a ion ha pa icipa es in he old “on o- heological”—in he
Heidegge ian sense—pa adigm. In his pa adigm eigned a non-disenchan ed wo ld-
iew ha conside ed beau y in na u e, like he hinge o a bi al e shell, especially
when i is unde s ood as a mani es a ion o he sublime, as a es ige o di ini y.
Howe e , he hypo hesis o na u al selec ion b ough wi h i he es ablishmen o a
new pa adigm, na u alized, na u alis ic and disenchan ed.
27 On he concep o he sublime in Da win’s wo ks, I ecommend he ollowing esea ch wo ks: B adley
2011; Le ine 2011; La son 2013.
28 The Paley-Da win con on a ion is a oo simplis ic one. In he middle o bo h a e he B idgewa e
T ea ises, a se ies o eigh wo ks, w i en by Paley’s successo s, ha p oposed al e na i e app oaches
o na u e in he ame o na u al heology. Da win owes, acco ding o Topham (2010), “a deb o he
B idgewa e T ea ises” (p. 112) o hey od “ he pa h be ween Paley’s wa chmake and Da win’s na u al
selec ion” (p. 89) […] [b]y adap ing na u al heology o a p og essi e and law-like iew o he his o y o
c ea ion” (p. 112). Fo a comple e unde s anding o he dimension ha he deba es a ound he ques ion o
pu pose in na u e acqui ed om he XVII h Cen u y on, as well as Da win’s in ellec ual in ol emen in
hese deba es, I highligh Ospo a ’s The De elopmen o Da win’s Theo y (1980).

B.Jiménez-Pazos
1 3
57 Page 22 o 28
So, i he supe na u al u ns ou o be he only esou ce ha can accoun o wha
has been expe ienced in he ace o majes ic scenes o na u e capable o gene a ing
a eeling o sublimi y, and Da win alludes o an i emediable supposed loss o ai h
o e ime, i is unde s andable ha he claimes o su e a ype o colou blindness, a
de ec i e pe cep ion be o e he sublime scena ios o na u e. I is, howe e , s iking
ha Da win did no la e cla i y ha wha is uly de ec i e, ha is, he cause o he
sensa ion o colou blindness, is he missing eligious link o he iad 1. Pe cep ion
o he beau y o na u e; 2. Religious eeling; 3. Expe imen a ion o he sublime, and
no he abili y o pe cei e beau y.
I he e o e deduce he exis ence o wo ypes o pe cep ual losses— ha a e no
opposed, bu o e lapping— ha will allow us o de ise a solu ion o Da win’s p ob-
lem. Fi s , he loss e e ing o ce eb al a ophy, e oneously, in my iew, a ibu ed
o an o e -dedica ion o scien i ic ac i i y. Second, he loss p oduced by disenchan -
men , in an emo ionally nega i e sense, wi h espec o he landscape aes he ic
pe cep ion, ha is, a supposed colou blindness de i ed om he loss o eligious
belie s; his loss o aes he ic pe cep ion caused by disenchan men , should, ne e -
heless, ha e been speci ied as a modi ica ion o pe cep ion, and no as a loss.
The e o o Da win’s in e p e a ion could be o a syllogis ic na u e. His mind
seems o ope a e as ollows: (a) The e is aes he ic expe ience i —in na u e o a —
he con en s XYZ a e pe cei ed; (b) I do no pe cei e hem anymo e; (c) Then, I no
longe ha e aes he ic sensibili y. Howe e , p emise (a) is a bi a y, some hing ha
Da win, due o cul u al o pe sonal easons, pe haps, could no no ice.
This syllogis ic deduc ion could ha e led Da win o belie e ha , simila ly, he has
los he as e o he highe aes he ic as es. I Da win iden i ies he sublime wi h
anscendence, wi h he imp in o di ini y in na u e, and heceases o es ablish such
a ela ionship, gi en he ideological demands consequence o he assimila ion o his
heo y o e olu ion, i is he e o e plausible o accep ha he belie ed o ha e los , a
he same ime, he eeling o he highe aes he ic as es—linked oa s which could
equally ha e led Da win o expe ience eelings o eligious exal a ion—and o ce -
ain aspec s o he na u al beau y ha he could ini ially pe cei e. I is hen possible
o belie e ha bo h eelings o loss ha e a common oo : he p o ound change ha
his scien i ic heo y causes o his wo ld iew, namely, he al e a ion and des uc ion
o many o he basic assump ions o he p e-Da winian wo ld iew.
In sum, no only he colou blindness passage, bu also ha o ce eb al a ophy
could be ela ed o he loss o pe cep ion o he supe na u al in na u e. This could
ha e caused Da win he eeling o ha ing los aes he ic sensibili y.
5 Conclusions
Fi s ly, he ques ion o whe he disenchan men can be compa ible wi h aes he ic
expe ience and sensibili y o beau y mus be aken up again. The esul s ob ained
om he seman ic analysis o he lexical a ia ions and equencies ac oss he six
edi ions o OS ha e shown ha he disenchan men o he wo ld —in he way in
which i has been pe cei ed cul u ally and his o iog aphically as a desac alized con-
cep ion o he wo ld—, on he one hand, clea ly mani es s i sel in he ex s wi h
1 3
Da win’s pe cep ion o na u e and heques ion o … Page 23 o 28 57
lexical ac s suchas a seman ically i ele an p esence o eligious o spi i ual lexi-
con and, on he o he hand, is compa ible, ega dless o wha Da win occasionally
a i med in AB, wi h aes he ic sensibili y o na u al beau y; he esul s o he seman-
ic analysis, such as he use o aes he ic-emo ional adjec i es and ad e bs applied
o na u e’s s uc u ally cons i u i e cha ac e is ics, indeed show ha i is no only
compa ible, bu can u he e ine ha sensibili y.
These na u al cha ac e is ics would no be no iceable, and he e o e, no aes he i-
cally quali iable, wi hou he in luence o a scien i ic- echnical knowledge base on
na u e. Unlike wha could be assumed by adop ing a pessimis ic pe spec i e on he
concep o disenchan men , he lexical con en o OS demons a es ha Da winian
science, despi e b inging o ligh he biological s uc u e o he mul iplici y o na -
u al ac s, ins inc s, mechanisms, e c., p o okes in Da win in ense aes he ic-emo-
ional eelings p ecisely ocused on he elegance and unc ional beau y o na u e ha
he himsel has explained.
In sum, as can be in e ed om he seman ic analysis o he lexical esul s,
despi e Da win’s concep ion o he wo ld is suppo ed by disenchan ed on ological
pilla s, his iew o na u e has no been aes he ically weakened.
Secondly, in ega d o he ques ion abou whe he i was he disenchan ed concep-
ion o he wo ld ha led Da win o belie e himsel colou blind in he ace o na u-
al beau y, i is possible o con i m ha he ype o disenchan men Da win desc ibes
in AB, ha is, he cessa ion o eligious belie , appa en ly b ings him close o he
concep o  disenchan men ,sugges ed by Webe , ha has a nega i e conno a ion:
“a ophy” and “colou -blindness” a e no e ms compa iblewi h a comple e, in ense
and posi i ely disenchan ed aes he ic pe cep ion o he landscape, o mo e speci i-
cally, wi h he aes he ically and scien i icallyinspi ing iew o he wo ld p oposed
by Da win, as e oked in he concluding lines o OS.
Howe e , i is no possible o in e his nega i ely disenchan ed iew om he
s udy o he lexical e olu ion o he di e en edi ions o OS, because, as has been
demons a ed, he a ia ions o he Da winian lexicon show a g owing ascina ion,
abo e all, o cons i u i e, essen ial aspec s o na u e. So, we could s a e, a leas
en a i ely, ha Da win could pe haps ha e con used his eelings o an inexplicable
lack o in e es in landscape aes he ics and he a s. Gi en he co ela ion be ween
pe cep ion, in na u e, o beau y, o he sublime in i , and o he eeling o he supe -
na u al, in e ed h ough he commemo a ion o he passage om he Jou nal o
Resea ches which e eals he con ic ion ha he e is some hing mo e in man han
he me e b ea h o his body, he loss o eligious eeling, in conjunc ion wi h he
de ec ion o an a ophy wi h espec o he ines a s, could ha e d i en Da win
o deduce, pe haps w ongly, a loss o he abili y in aes he ic pe cep ion in gene al,
ins ead o conside ing i o be a modi ica ion o pe cep ion.
In sho , he cause o Da win’s e o o in e p e a ion o his aes he ic sensibili y
would hen ha e been o assume he equa ion o equali y be ween aes he ic sensibil-
i y in he ace o na u e and he pe cep ion o i s beau y as pa o he es igia Dei.
Acknowledgemen s Depa amen o de Educación del Gobie no Vasco. P og ama Pos doc o al de Pe ‑
eccionamien o de Pe sonal In es igado Doc o . G an code: POS_2019_2_0012.
B.Jiménez-Pazos
1 3
57 Page 24 o 28
Funding Depa amen o de Educación del Gobie no Vasco. Ayudas pa a Apoya lasAc i idades de
G upos de In es igacióndel Sis ema Uni e si a io Vasco. P ojec code: IT1228-19.
Compliance wi h e hical s anda ds
Con lic s o in e es No applicable.
Open Access This a icle is licensed unde a C ea i e Commons A ibu ion 4.0 In e na ional License,
which pe mi s use, sha ing, adap a ion, dis ibu ion and ep oduc ion in any medium o o ma , as long as
you gi e app op ia e c edi o he o iginal au ho (s) and he sou ce, p o ide a link o he C ea i e Com-
mons licence, and indica e i changes we e made. The images o o he hi d pa y ma e ial in his a icle
a e included in he a icle’s C ea i e Commons licence, unless indica ed o he wise in a c edi line o he
ma e ial. I ma e ial is no included in he a icle’s C ea i e Commons licence and you in ended use is
no pe mi ed by s a u o y egula ion o exceeds he pe mi ed use, you will need o ob ain pe mission
di ec ly om he copy igh holde . To iew a copy o his licence, isi h p:// c ea i eco mmons. o g/ licen
ses/ by/4. 0/.
Re e ences
Adam, C., & Tanne y, P. (Eds.). (1974). Oeu es de Desca es, (Vol. XI). Pa is: CNRS/V in.
Ado no, T., Ho kheime , M. (2016). Dialec ic o enligh enmen , ans. John Cumming. London and New
Yo k: Ve so.
Asp em, E. (2014). The p oblem o disenchan men : Scien i ic na u alism and eso e ic discou se, 1900–
1939. Bos on: B ill.
Ba low, N. (Ed.). (2005). The au obiog aphy o Cha les Da win, 1809–18821882. New Yo k: W.W. No -
on & Company.
Ba e , P. H., Weinshank, D. J., & Go lebe , T. T. (Eds.). (1981). A conco dance o Da win’s “O igin o
Species". I haca and London: Co nell Uni e si y P ess.
Ba e , P. H., Weinshank, D. J., Ruhlen, P., & Ozminski, S. J. (Eds.). (1987). A conco dance o Da win’s
“Descen o man, and selec ion in ela ion o sex". I haca and London: Co nell Uni e si y P ess.
Ba e , P. H., Weinshank, D. J., Ruhlen, P., Ozminski, S. J., & Be hage, B. N. (Eds.). (1986). A conco d‑
ance o Da win’s “The exp ession o he emo ions in man and animals". I haca and London: Co -
nell Uni e si y P ess.
Bee , G. (1983). Da win’s plo s: E olu iona y na a i e in Da win, Geo ge Elio , and nine een h‑cen u y
ic ion. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Bee , G. (1985). Da win’s eading and he ic ions o de elopmen . In D. Kohn (Ed.), The Da winian
he i age (pp. 543–588). P ince on (New Je sey): P ince on Uni e si y P ess.
Be ge , P. L. (Ed.). (1999). The desecula isa ion o he wo ld: The esu gence o eligion in wo ld poli‑
ics. Washing on D.C.: E hics and Public Policy Cen e .
Be man, M. (1981). The eenchan men o he wo ld. London and I haca: Co nell Uni e si y P ess.
Bo dalejo, B. (2012). Online a io um o Da win’s O igin o Species. In an Wyhe (Ed.), The comple e
wo k o Cha les Da win online. Re ie ed 3 Jan 2021 om h p:// da win- online. o g. uk.
B adley, B. S. (2011). Da win’s sublime: The con es be ween eason and imagina ion in On he O igin o
Species. Jou nal o he His o y o Biology, 44, 205–232.
B ooke, J. (1985). The ela ions be ween Da win’s science and his eligion. In J. Du an (Ed.), Da win‑
ism and di ini y (pp. 40–49). New Yo k: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
B ooke, J. (2008). Laws imp essed on ma e by he c ea o ? In M. Ruse & R. J. Richa ds (Eds.), The
Camb idge companion o he “O igin o Species” (pp. 256–274). Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e -
si y P ess.
B owne, J. (2002). Cha les Da win: The powe o place (Vol. 2). P ince on: P ince on Uni e si y P ess.
Campbell, G. (1867). Reign o law. London: Alexande S ahan.
Campbell, J. A. (1974). Na u e, eligion and emo ional esponse: A econside a ion o Da win’s a ec i e
decline. Vic o ian S udies, 18(2), 159–174.
Campion, N. (2011). Disenchan men and he awe o he hea ens. In Co sini, E. M. (Ed.), The inspi a ion
o as onomical phenomena VI, ASP Con e ence Se ies 441. pp. 415–422.
1 3
Da win’s pe cep ion o na u e and heques ion o … Page 25 o 28 57
Cannon, W. F. (1968). Da win’s ision in On he O igin o Species. In G. Le ine & W. Madden (Eds.),
The a o Vic o ian p ose (pp. 154–176). New Yo k: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Ca lson, A. (2000). Aes he ics and he en i onmen : The app ecia ion o na u e, a and a qui ec u e.
London and New Yo k: Rou ledge.
Cu y, P. (1999). Magic s. enchan men . Jou nal o con empo a y eligion, 14(3), 401–412.
Da, N. Z. (2019). The compu a ional casa agains compu a ional li e a y s udies. C i ical Inqui y, 45(3),
601–639.
Da win, C. R. (1859). On he o igin o species by means o na u al selec ion, o he p ese a ion o
a ou ed aces in he s uggle o li e. London: John Mu ay.
Da win, C. R. (1860a). Jou nal o esea ches in o he na u al his o y and geology o he a ious coun‑
ies isi ed by H.M.S. beagle ound he wo ld, unde he command o cap . Fi z Roy, R.N. London:
John Mu ay.
Da win, C. R. (1860b). On he o igin o species by means o na u al selec ion, o he p ese a ion o
a ou ed aces in he s uggle o li e. London: John Mu ay.
Da win, C. R. (1861). On he o igin o species by means o na u al selec ion, o he p ese a ion o
a ou ed aces in he s uggle o li e. London: John Mu ay.
Da win, C. R. (1866). On he o igin o species by means o na u al selec ion, o he p ese a ion o
a ou ed aces in he s uggle o li e. London: John Mu ay.
Da win, C. R. (1869). On he o igin o species by means o na u al selec ion, o he p ese a ion o
a ou ed aces in he s uggle o li e. London: John Mu ay.
Da win, C. R. (1872). The o igin o species by means o na u al selec ion, o he p ese a ion o a ou ed
aces in he s uggle o li e. London: John Mu ay.
Da win, F. (Ed.). (1887). The li e and le e s o Cha les Da win, including an au obiog aphical chap‑
e (Vol. 3). London: John Mu ay.
Da win, F. (Ed.). (1909). The ounda ions o he o igin o species, a ske ch w i en in 1842. Cam-
b idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Da win, F. (Ed.). (1909). The ounda ions o he o igin o species. Two essays w i en in 1842 and
1844. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Dawkins, R. (1998). Unwea ing he ainbow: Science, delusion and he appe i e o wonde . Bos on:
Hough on Mi lin Company.
Denne , D. C. (1995). Da win’s dange ous idea: E olu ion and he meanings o li e. New Yo k:
Simon & Schus e .
Depew, D. J. (2008). The he o ic o he O igin o Species. In M. Ruse & R. J. Richa ds (Eds.), The
Camb idge Companion o he “O igin o species” (pp. 237–255). Camb idge: Camb idge Uni-
e si y P ess.
Dilley, S. (2012). Cha les Da win’s use o heology in he o igin o species. The B i ish Jou nal o
he His o y o Science, 45(1), 29–56.
Fishe , P. (1998). Wonde , he ainbow, and he aes he ics o a e expe iences. Camb idge: Ha a d
Uni e si y P ess.
Fleming, D. (1961). Cha les Da win, he anaes he ic man. Vic o ian S udies, 4, 219–236.
Gane, N. (2002). Max Webe and pos mode n heo y: Ra ionaliza ion e sus e‑enchan men . New
Yo k: Palg a e.
Gibson, J. W. (2009). A eenchan ed wo ld: The ques o a new kinship wi h na u e. New Yo k: Me -
opoli an Books. Hen y Hol and Company.
Gillespie, N. (1979). Cha les Da win and he p oblem o c ea ion. Chicago: Uni e si y o Chicago
P ess.
G aham, G. (2007). The e‑enchan men o he wo ld: A e sus eligion. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y
P ess.
G i in, D. R. (2001). Reenchan men wi hou supe na u alism: A p ocess philosophy o eligion.
I haca and London: Co nell Uni e si y P ess.
Hidalgo-Downing, L. (2014). The ole o nega i e-modal syne gies in Cha les Da win’s The O igin o
Species. In G. Thompson & L. Alba-Juez (Eds.), E alua ion in con ex (pp. 259–280). Ams e -
dam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hoque , T. (2013). The e olu ion o he O igin (1859–1872). In M. Ruse (Ed.), The Camb idge ency‑
clopedia o Da win and e olu iona y hough (pp. 158–164). New Yo k: Camb idge Uni e si y
P ess.
Hoque , T. (2018). Re isi ing he O igin o Species: The o he Da wins. New Yo k: Rou ledge.