left biblioblography: …FROM THE WOMB OF EVOLUTION SPRANG

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

…FROM THE WOMB OF EVOLUTION SPRANG


Now that I’ve left Paley’s Watchmaker Theory in smoky ruins (I can almost see the metaphorical smoldering from here), let us explore one of my favorite concepts: more proof that evolution formed this world.

From the womb of evolution, sprang religion.

Little doubt that there will be wide and varied responses to THIS one, all righty.

No magic tricks, nothing up my sleeve. No fancy legerdemain, long complex formulas, statistical analyses, I will use nothing more than simple cause and effect with a dash of sense to prove my point.

Of course, the presupposition is that evolution (which is the backbone of biology, and the source of many wonders we employ in modern medicine today, take THAT, Intelligent Design!) is a theory that has sufficient evidence to back its play.

By theory, I mean of course, from answers.com, definitions 1 and 2:

  1. “ A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

  2. The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fine musician who had never studied theory.

So we begin.

In the beginning, back when first our ancestors swam the murky depths of the ocean, the thought (or concept, or perhaps just a whim: who’s to say what prompted the entire thing?) occurred to move towards the light, in one of our far-flung ancestors. It may have been an accident: likewise, movement of the school towards better hunting grounds.

And so it began. That upward drifting, that reaching towards warmer waters, that ever always-out-of-reach circular thing that cast bright shadows through the liquid atmosphere.

Why that first air-breather flopped onto dry land, gasping air instead of water, is a mystery yet unsolved. Food, perhaps, or some form of activity that threatened survival (volcanic or otherwise), that required an escape onto the sand.

From there, the progress was always upwards and onwards. Up and up we strove from there. Growing always, reaching for the sun. Until our hairier great-great (far too many of those to list here) grandfather/mother began to climb upwards. Because, after, all, up is good. The offspring is inevitably smaller than the parent: so from birth, all land-locked creatures are always looking in one particular direction more than any other. For food, for behavior to mimic, for all things good and proper.

Even as our ancestors took to the treetops, again the progression occurs. Upwards is good: upwards is where the predators weren’t, as opposed to the ground: upwards is where the food is: down is a plummet, the fall, the rending tooth, the bloody claw.

So perhaps Chesterton wasn’t so far off, after all, inasmuch as his concept of ‘instinctive’ worship.

Stumble Upon Toolbar

15 comments:

say no to christ said...

I really had to think about this. I guess up is the all good, but there are preditors in the sky as well, although not as many. Maybe that is where the battle between good and evil came into play. Many gnostics believe Jesus and satan are one in the same. Evil does spring forth from the good and there is a lot of evidence to that in the bible.

Thanks for giving me something to think about while I'm out shopping today. :)

HairlessMonkeyDK said...

How I'd wish.. and sorry if this sounds familiar... that Erwin-Neutzsky-Wullfs book "God" was translated to english.
It's just that his way of reasoning, understanding and accepting, seems so close to yours.
And, no, I'm no ultra fan of his, either.
I just see complimentary thoughts shared.

Krystalline Apostate said...

SNTC:
but there are preditors in the sky as well, although not as many.
Point taken, but how many photos has anyone seen of large birds snatching up primates? Probably not a whole lot'd be my guess.
Many gnostics believe Jesus and satan are one in the same.
??? That's a fairly new 1. Which gnostics, exactly? Valentinian? Samaritan?
Afraid I've forgotten most of my gnosticism.
Down is usually associated w/bad. Burying loved ones is a prime example of this. Falling is another. Usually 1 hurts oneself when falling.
Thanks for giving me something to think about while I'm out shopping today.
Thanks. I aims to please.

Krystalline Apostate said...

HMDK:
Erwin-Neutzsky-Wullf
Now you've got me terribly intrigued. Any info re: his work(s) being translated in the near future?
t's just that his way of reasoning, understanding and accepting, seems so close to yours.
Wouldn't be surprised at all.
Way back when, I was writing a short story (which became a novella of sorts) about the Undead, my pal read it, we were talking about it, & he mentioned that "your work parallels Anne Rice." To which, I replied "Who?" Thereupon, I began reading her trilogy (quadrilogy, what-evuh).
And, no, I'm no ultra fan of his, either.
What, so you're not a fan of mine?
I'm crushed. Hehehehe. Just joshin' ya.

HairlessMonkeyDK said...

Reluctyloon... Anne Rice?
Ewww!
I scrape enough adolescent shit off my boots every day!
Don't gimme senile shit as well!
With Rice it's both extremes at once...

Mesoforte said...

Something to think about when I have time. Too much blasted homework though. T_T

Krystalline Apostate said...

HMDK:
I scrape enough adolescent shit off my boots every day!
Hey, Rice ain't that bad. Kinda lost interest in the whole kit & kaboodle by the 3rd book.
Besides, 'paralleled' don't mean 'equivalent'. Along the same lines, is all.
I can think of much, MUCH more inferior writers. She's nicht schlecht, is all.

Beowulf said...

“From the womb of evolution, sprang religion”

Or,

“From the womb of evolution, sprang [atheism]”


It works both ways.

Even if one grants evolution, it doesn’t really say anything about the truth or falsity of any religious or atheist claim.

Krystalline Apostate said...

BF:
“From the womb of evolution, sprang [atheism]”
It works both ways.

Not true. Anaxagoras was perhaps the first atheist.
Wikipedia - atheism - "A diversity of atheist opinion has been recognized at least since Plato, and common distinctions have been established between practical atheism and speculative or contemplative atheism."
Even if one grants evolution, it doesn’t really say anything about the truth or falsity of any religious or atheist claim.
There really isn't any atheist claim. Other than we just are, & we are just here.
We cast no shadows of ourselves on the universe.
We are, and it just is.
All else is guesswork.

HairlessMonkeyDK said...

Witness the peurile theist!
bf, short for "god's boyfriend",
tries to make a joke...
witness as we all fail to laugh,
since making a JOKE, means actually possesing a sense of humor.

Beowulf said...

HMDK:

I think you may have misunderstood. It wasn’t a joke.

Krystalline Apostate said...

BF:
Well, honestly, I didn't become an atheist due to evolution. I was a liberal semi-theist (read: lukewarm). I was even contemplating writing a thesis that balanced evolution w/religion (ah, the warm fuzzy feeling of hubris!).
In fact, I was seriously considering joining your ranks. Until I sat down & did the homework. I approached it w/a 'let's see if it holds up' attitude. I like to think I approach everything from that perspective.

I'd rather you were right.

I mean, life would be that much easier, if I could just hand everything over to some unseen abstract concept, my responsibilities as a moral being, my need for answers, everything.
Unfortunately, logic contravenes everything religion stands for.

I regard religion now in an entirely new light.
It's all guesswork.

HairlessMonkeyDK said...

Bf so sayeth:
"I think you may have misunderstood. It wasn’t a joke.".
Okay, and sorry.
Yet, it only makes it that much worse.

say no to christ said...

Ra
Smaller monkeys are hunted by some larger birds. I think the skyward look traces back to the sun. The sun is the greatest energy source and is what sustains complex life. Without it we would all still be sigle celled organisms. I guess the more upward we look, the more complex we become and the further up the food chain we move.

say no to christ said...

RA

I forget which of the Gnostics believed Jesus and Satan to be one. There is also some Gnostics that believe god is the evil and satan is the good. I do know that both of these Gnostics were out of Egypt. Elain Pagels covers them in a couple of her books. I cant remember which one off hand, but I have read the Gnostic gospels, Adam, Eve and The serpant, the secret gospels of Thomas and the origins of satan. It was probably the Origins of Satan. All good books and very unbias.