Answer:
In his essay "The Study of Administration," Woodrow Wilson talks about the "Newtonian" and "Darwinian" ways of looking at the world. Wilson uses this difference to criticize how the founders of the United States saw the Constitution.
Wilson says that the Newtonian view of the world was common during the Founding Era. This way of looking at the world saw the universe as a machine with rules that could be found and understood by using logic. The American Founding Fathers took this Newtonian view and applied it to politics. They thought that the government could be based on natural laws that could be found by using reason and observation. They thought that the Constitution set up a good way for the government to work for the good of everyone.
But Wilson said that this Newtonian view of the world was not enough to understand how complicated and changing modern government is. He thought that the Darwinian view of the world, which stressed the importance of change and evolution, was a better way to look at modern government. Wilson said that the government shouldn't be bound by fixed principles but should be able to change to meet the needs of society as it changes.
Wilson thought that the way the American Founders understood the Constitution showed that they had a Newtonian view of the world. They believed that the Constitution provided a fixed set of principles that could guide government for all time. Wilson, on the other hand, said that this method wasn't good enough to meet the complex and changing needs of modern society. He thought that the Constitution shouldn't be seen as a fixed set of rules that could be used in all situations. Instead, it should be interpreted and changed to meet the needs of society as it changes.
Overall, Wilson used the difference between the Newtonian and Darwinian worldviews to argue for a more flexible and adaptable approach to government, one that could meet the changing needs of modern society. He said that the American Founders' understanding of the Constitution was too rigid and fixed, and he said that the Constitution needed to be interpreted and changed to meet the changing needs of society.