Waxing philosophical.
Time for some deep thought. I'm winging it and it's well past midnight, so, to quote Prince, forgive me if it goes astray. Besides, I haven't researched this in any way, so I might be kicking a dead horse here. Basically, what I'm asking is, humour me.
The question I'm pondering is this: does the understanding of evolution nullify evolution?
I think that it could be argued that we, as a species, have 'outgrown' evolution, in the sense that we have now (or have for some time now) reached such a degree of self awareness that the slippery hands of evolution can no longer get any purchase on us at all. The mere fact that we are aware of this invisible, natural process called evolution (shut up, creationists, you're silly) which has shaped our natural world in every way imaginable, great or small, visible or otherwise, could be regarded as proof of the fact that evolution no longer affects us. Much like Schrödinger's cat or the very electron, as soon as you observe the phenomenon and to a degree understand it, you affect it. And when this phenomenon is the very process that fascilitates progress and development (not aiding it but actually causing it), does understanding it not render it inactive? Or does it not, at the very least, offer us a choice (conscious or not) to not let it affect us?
We know what it is, how it works, what the ramifications of it are and we have the free will and the self awareness to ignore it, to circumvent it. Examples of this are plentifull. Monogamy makes no evolutionary sense but most of the civilised world practices it because we consider it morally sound (morality being an entirely different philosophical topic). Birth control, masturbation, even lengthy courtship under the guise of love and affection has no place in a world governed by the laws of evolution (look at the animal kingdom, a world inhabited by creatures unhindered by any sense of self awareness), yet here we are, secretly in love with that one person, pining, wanting, courting, watching The L Word, writing bad poetry and masturbating like mad, all the while not procreating, not breeding, not spreading our genes and our seed as far and wide as we possibly can. And why is this? Because we choose it. Because that's the way our civilisation works: societal norms ingrained in us to such an extent that they've become the very pillars upon which our existence is built, so much so that it overrides our evolutionary urges to the point where we no longer realise that we have them beyond the basest of instincts.
(Perhaps the initial question should've been: is the construct of morality as we've created it undermining evolution?)
Or perhaps that is exactly what evolution is, also: utilising the world around us, the laws of physics and the very building blocks of our universe, to further our development and increase our capabilities in as many fields as we can, thereby increasing our chances of collective survival. Perhaps the juxtaposition between natural evolution and this tangental 'technological/artificial' evolution is an entirely moot point. Progress is progress (is progress).
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
Come back to me when the duck is terraforming Mars, though.
The question I'm pondering is this: does the understanding of evolution nullify evolution?
I think that it could be argued that we, as a species, have 'outgrown' evolution, in the sense that we have now (or have for some time now) reached such a degree of self awareness that the slippery hands of evolution can no longer get any purchase on us at all. The mere fact that we are aware of this invisible, natural process called evolution (shut up, creationists, you're silly) which has shaped our natural world in every way imaginable, great or small, visible or otherwise, could be regarded as proof of the fact that evolution no longer affects us. Much like Schrödinger's cat or the very electron, as soon as you observe the phenomenon and to a degree understand it, you affect it. And when this phenomenon is the very process that fascilitates progress and development (not aiding it but actually causing it), does understanding it not render it inactive? Or does it not, at the very least, offer us a choice (conscious or not) to not let it affect us?
We know what it is, how it works, what the ramifications of it are and we have the free will and the self awareness to ignore it, to circumvent it. Examples of this are plentifull. Monogamy makes no evolutionary sense but most of the civilised world practices it because we consider it morally sound (morality being an entirely different philosophical topic). Birth control, masturbation, even lengthy courtship under the guise of love and affection has no place in a world governed by the laws of evolution (look at the animal kingdom, a world inhabited by creatures unhindered by any sense of self awareness), yet here we are, secretly in love with that one person, pining, wanting, courting, watching The L Word, writing bad poetry and masturbating like mad, all the while not procreating, not breeding, not spreading our genes and our seed as far and wide as we possibly can. And why is this? Because we choose it. Because that's the way our civilisation works: societal norms ingrained in us to such an extent that they've become the very pillars upon which our existence is built, so much so that it overrides our evolutionary urges to the point where we no longer realise that we have them beyond the basest of instincts.
(Perhaps the initial question should've been: is the construct of morality as we've created it undermining evolution?)
Or perhaps that is exactly what evolution is, also: utilising the world around us, the laws of physics and the very building blocks of our universe, to further our development and increase our capabilities in as many fields as we can, thereby increasing our chances of collective survival. Perhaps the juxtaposition between natural evolution and this tangental 'technological/artificial' evolution is an entirely moot point. Progress is progress (is progress).
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
Come back to me when the duck is terraforming Mars, though.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home