Jusqu’à présent, les travaux sur la réception de la théorie darwinienne en France ont surtout porté sur le monde savant. Ils ont conclu à un échec de sa diffusion. En élargissant cette étude à la société dans son ensemble, on découvre qu’il s’agit, en réalité, d’un succès. Le rôle du débat public dans l’introduction du darwinisme en France fait l’objet d’une première partie. Les thèses darwiniennes suscitent d’autant plus la curiosité d’un large public, à Paris et en province, qu’elles paraissent suggérer des réponses à des questions qui sont dans l’air du temps. Une deuxième partie analyse les enjeux soulevés par le darwinisme dans la société, qui expliquent pour une bonne part son audience. Au-delà des réflexions sur l’évolution suscitées par Darwin dans la plupart des pays, le contexte politique et social entraîne des interprétations et des peurs spécifiquement françaises. Une troisième partie étudie les réticences du monde savant. Malgré l’engouement public pour le darwinisme, la science officielle reste à l’écart du débat. Finalement, il a fallu qu’un vaste débat public s’instaure et que le darwinisme devienne l’enjeu d’affrontements politiques pour que Darwin soit reconnu par les institutions académiques parisiennes. / Most works on the reception of Darwin’s theory in France have heretofore chiefly focused on the scientific community. They conclude that the theory failed to spread to the whole country. By widening the scope of this analysis to French society as a whole, we realise that, in fact, Darwin’s theory had successfully circulated in most social circles. In the first part of this study, we will analyse how the public debate contributed to introducing Darwinism in France. Darwinian theories were all the more appealing to the wider public, both in Paris and in the rest of the country, as they seemed to suggest answers to topical concerns. Then, we will study the issues raised by Darwinism in French society, and how these issues can account for Darwinism’s wide audience. In addition to the reflexions on evolution triggered by Darwin’s theory in most countries, the social and political context paved the way for specifically French interpretations and fears. The third part of this work deals with the scientific reluctance to adopt Darwin’s theory. We can therefore conclude that it is precisely the fact that Darwinism triggered a vast public debate, and became a central political issue, that allowed this theory to be acknowledged by Parisian academic institutions.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-28T14:16:40Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Marcelo Akira Hueda.pdf: 931223 bytes, checksum: ed10fcfcb79a8f804f3accfcea991962 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-05-18 / Secretaria da Educação do Estado de São Paulo / Published anonymously in 1844, the book Vestiges of the natural history of creation triggered one of the greatest public debates which took place in the 19th century. Its author Robert Chambers proposed the transformation of living beings and the origin of new species by natural causes. The first aim of this dissertation is to describe some evolutionary concepts presented in the book. The second one is to compare them to the final version of Lamarck s theory on the progression of animals. This dissertation contains an introduction and four chapters. Chapter 1 discusses the evolutionary precedents and the general context in which Chambers presented his views concerning the transmutation of species. It also describes his career and professional interests. Chapter 2 deals with Chambers main evolutionary ideas. Chapter 3 provides a comparison between Chambers' and Lamarck's views, showing their similarities and differences. Chapter 4 offers some final remarks on the subject. This study led to the conclusion that although several similarities between Chambers' and Lamarck's evolutionary ideas may be found in some respects, such as gradualism, progression, uniformitarism, natural laws and no interference of God in natural processes, there were also some relevant differences such as the way in which they attempted to provide a foundation for their theories. Whereas Chambers presented many arguments using the fossil records as well as some other ones related to rudimentary organs and embryology, Lamarck made scarce use of the fossil record for the foundation of his theory. Instead of this, he provided a huge mass of facts showing the existence of a progression of the great taxonomical groups of animals. The arrangement of those groups in a progressive scale, however, did not provide an empirical foundation for what had happened in time. On the other hand, Chambers presented laws different from Lamarck's. However, although he did not propose a law dealing with the increase of the complexity of the great groups or individuals as Lamarck did, this idea permeated all of Chambers' ideas on the transmutation of species / Publicado anonimamente em 1844, o livro Vestiges of the natural history of creation desencadeou uma das maiores discussões públicas que ocorreram durante o século XIX. Seu autor, Robert Chambers, defendeu a transmutação dos seres vivos e a origem de novas espécies através de causas naturais. O primeiro objetivo desta dissertação é descrever algumas concepções evolutivas apresentadas neste livro e o segundo é compará-las à versão final da teoria da progressão dos animais de Lamarck. Esta dissertação contém uma introdução e quatro capítulos. O capítulo 1 discute os precedentes evolutivos e o contexto geral no qual Chambers apresentou suas idéias sobre a transmutação das espécies, tratando também de sua carreira e interesses profissionais. O capítulo 2 lida com alguns aspectos das concepções evolutivas de Chambers. O capítulo 3 oferece uma comparação entre as concepções de Chambers e Lamarck mostrando suas similaridades e diferenças. O capítulo 4 apresenta algumas considerações sobre o que foi discutido nos capítulos anteriores. Este estudo levou à conclusão de que embora possam ser detectadas diversas semelhanças entre alguns aspectos das concepções evolutivas de Chambers e as concepções evolutivas de Lamarck, tais como o gradualismo, a progressão, o uniformitarismo, as leis naturais e a não intervenção divina nos processos naturais, há também diferenças tais como o modo pelo qual eles procuraram fundamentar suas teorias. Enquanto Chambers apresentou exemplos obtidos principalmente a partir do registro fóssil e alguns relacionados à presença de órgãos rudimentares e à embriologia, Lamarck fez pouco uso do registro fóssil para fundamentar sua teoria. Em vez disso, forneceu uma grande massa de fatos mostrando a existência de uma progressão entre os grandes grupos de animais. O arranjo desses grupos em uma escala progressiva, entretanto, não proporcionou uma fundamentação empírica para o que ocorreu em termos cronológicos. Por outro lado, Chambers apresentou leis diferentes das apresentadas por Lamarck. Entretanto, apesar de não propor uma lei tratando da tendência para o aumento de complexidade existente na natureza em relação aos grandes grupos ou indivíduos como Lamarck, esta idéia permeou as concepções de Chambers sobre a transmutação das espécies