Darwin’s work is most important and suits my purpose in that it provides a basis in natural science for the historical class struggle. One does, of course, have to put up with the clumsy English style of argument. Despite all shortcomings, it is here that, for the first time, ‘teleology’ in natural science is not only dealt a mortal blow but its rational meaning is empirically explained.
Karl Marx, letter to Ferdinand Lassalle, January 16, 1861
I have long had my doubts about Darwinian evolution, none of my doubts being religion based. Consider the domestic dog for example. Breeding by humans over the past few thousand years has produced infinite variety, but all still the same members of a species. Radiation experiments on fruit flies, carried out over the past century, have produced quite a few variant fruit flies, many of them lethal, but all still members of the same species. Darwinian evolution strikes me as a 19th century Just so story, a story that sought to explain things by invoking a grand encompassing theory. Marx did this in economics, Freud did this in the human subconscious and Darwin did this in explaining the infinite variety of life. Each of these three gentlemen wrote with a literary flair, and all three were master story tellers. What they were not, were scientists. Each had a pre-determined theory, and each used the evidence they collected to support the theory, rather than to produce a theory based on the evidence they found. That is not how science works.
In regard to Darwinian evolution, the last century was largely an attempt by evolutionists to shore up the theory of natural selection with various ramshackle expedients. Once again we have theories that seek out evidence to support them, rather than developing the theories from the evidence. Darwinian evolution is a pseudoscience with all the problems of other pseudosciences like phrenology: a theory that cannot survive an honest look at the evidence.