本文以杰克·伦敦的拳击小说创作为例,借助文学伦理学批评方法,从伦理身份和伦理选择等关键词入手,阐释拳击场上的胜负较量和现实生活中的生存斗争之间相互交织、相互影响的关系,对杰克·伦敦文学创作受到进化论影响的观点提出一种新的解读,旨在揭示杰克·伦敦在创作各个阶段对于进化论和伦理之间关系的不同理解。具体来说,杰克·伦敦借由拳击这一具有争议性的体育运动,探讨了自然斗争和人类伦理之间的矛盾和对抗,其晚期作品《墨西哥人》和《深谷猛兽》脱离了早期作品《拳赛》和《一块牛排》中对于社会达尔文主义思想的崇信。《墨西哥人》中利威拉的“人性”胜利意味着伦理进程对自然进程的制约;而《深谷猛兽》则可被看作一则关于人从自然选择到伦理选择的进化过程的寓言。

Although Darwinism played a major influence upon Jack London's life and literary creation, Jack London was never confortable with evolution's unethical aspects. This article, with a focus on London's boxing literature, attempts to examine various ways London explores in his works in reconciling his belief in Darwinism with his conviction that the ethical process is the defining factor in human civilization and social progress. His four works on boxing provide substantial evidence of development in his thoughts on Darwinism. In “The Game” at the same time that London demonstrates how Darwinian notion of “survival of the fittest” governs the reality of boxing, he shows his awareness of the ethical difficulties inherent in boxing. The influence of Darwin is also apparent in “A Piece of Steak”, but from the description of Tom King's miserable life and of his tears when losing the game, it is clear that London builds his sympathy for the old and weak boxer. London's later works such as “The Mexican” and “The Abysmal Brute” reflects his revisit and revision of his views on the Spencerian position of social progress. In “The Mexican” the game between Rivera and Danny is presented more like a parody, or in other words, a criticism of social Darwinism, as Rivera the physically weaker one wins the game and proves himself to be more “fit” than Danny by his devotion to Mexican revolution and moral superiority, other than by physical strength and boxing skills. “The Abysmal Brute” demonstrates London's departure from simple notions of social Darwinism. Joe's exposure of the corruption of boxing and his subsequent decision of giving up this career could be interpreted metaphorically as Joe's first ethical choice in his development from “a natural being” to “a social being.” It is in this sense that the text demonstrates London's increasing commitment to ethics and his belief in the cultivation of individual ethics as differentiating human beings from other living beings.