Image from: Dutch National Archives, The Hague, Fotocollectie Algemeen Nederlands Persbureau (ANEFO), 1945-1989
The paper entitled:
Julian Huxley and the Continuity of Eugenics in Twentieth-century Britain was written by Professor Paul Weindling
The life and ideas of Julian Sorrell Huxley (1887-1975) represent not only considerable contributions to evolutionary theory but also to eugenic thought and social planning. Huxley’s career history was complex and disjointed making him an international and very much a public figure. This paper sees Huxley’s peripatetic career as linked to ideological agendas, not least of “a new world order”.1The problems addressed here are, first, the extent of continuities in eugenic commitments from his interwar views and, second, to determine the contours of Huxley’s post-Second World War eugenic thinking. Huxley emerges as a crucial bridging figure from what has been referred to as “old eugenics” to a new eugenics based on molecular biology, providing an influential analysis of human evolution and a set of persuasively appealing concepts for both the wider public and scientific elite.
Julian Huxley has contributed to climate change can we separate eugenics from climate change easily?
UNESCO ITS PURPOSE AND ITS PHILOSOPHY
bY JULIAN HUXLEY
“The analysis of evolutionary progress gives us certain criteria for judging the rightness or wrongness of our aims and activities, and the desirability or otherwise of the tendencies to be noted in contemporary history-tendencies of which Unesco must take account. Thus mere increase of our control over nature is not to be valued for itself, yet appears to be a necessary foundation for future progress. Put in a way more closely affecting Unesco’s programme, research may be perverted, and its material applications may be over-valued ; yet without them we shall not advance. This conclusion applies afortiori to mere complexity of social organisation. Again, even knowledge that appears to be wholly beneficent can be applied in such a way that it does not promote progress. Thus, the application of medical science may increase the number of human beings in a given area but lower their quality or their opportunities for enjoyment of life : and if so, in the light of our basic criterion of evolutionary direction, it is wrong. We are brought by a new route to realise once more the need for a Unesco policy balanced between many fields-in this instance, Unesco policy would have to include, besides the application of medical science, studies on agricultural productivity (soil erosion, mechanisation, etc.) and on social welfare, and also the provision of birth-control facilities.”
Eugenics, Mental Deficiency and Fabian Socialism between the Wars
L. J. Ray
Oxford Review of Education
Vol. 9, No. 3, Mental Handicap and Education (1983), pp. 213-222