-Poul Anderson, "Wings of Victory" IN Anderson, The Earth Book Of Stormgate (New York, 1979), pp. 3-22 AT p. 14.
One good friend of mine thinks that bodies are mere vehicles for reincarnating souls and did not evolve although he has no interest in learning how they did originate.
Another acquaintance was horrified when I stated the belief that everything in us is an outcome of the biological evolutionary process. He thought that evolution was merely "physical" with no effect on anything "spiritual."
I have met people who think that, if an organ serves a biological function, e.g., to pump blood, then the only possible explanation is that this organ was consciously, deliberately and intelligently designed for that purpose. They have not understood natural selection.
I fully accept Anderson's character's statement but also wonder how many other readers do.
2 comments:
One of the benefits of human consciousness is that we can mimic natural effects -- like evolution -- memetically rather than genetically; and do so faster and more flexibly.
The downside is that because -we- make things by deliberate design, we're instinctually primed to see intent and design everywhere including places where it isn't.
This is an aspect of our ability to model the personalities of others -- itself a product of our evolution as social beings.
Kaor, Paul!
In addition to what Mr. Stirling said, I would add that my view is that of what we see Philippe Rochefort thinking in Chapter IV of THE PEOPLE OF THE WIND: "The reproductive pattern--sexual characteristics, requirements of the young--does seem to determine most of the basics in any intelligent species. As if the cynic's remark were true, that an organism is simply a DNA molecule's way of making more DNA molecules. Or whatever the chemicals of heredity may be on a given world...But no, a Jerusalem Catholic can't believe that. Biological evolution inclines, it does not compel."
And that naturally led me to recalling how the Catholic Church does not, per se, oppose or deny evolution. Beginning with Pius XII's cauthous statement in number 36 of HUMANI GENERIS (1950): "For these reasons, the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in so far as it inquires into the origins of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter--For the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. However this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both questions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faith. Some however rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, when they act as if the origin of the human body from pre-existing and living matter were already completely certain and proved by the facts which have been discovered up to now and by reasoning on those facts, and as if there were nothing in the sources of divine revelation which demands the greatest moderation and caution in this question."
From the caution of Pius XII we see the thinking of the Church evolving from agreeing evolution is not necessarily per se opposed to divine revelation to a later declaration by John Paul II about evoluton in the 1990's. Alas, I am not sure I still have a copy of what JP II said, but the gist was that so much evidence favorable for evolution had been found by then that it could no longer be considered merely a theory or hypothesis. Which means revelation had to be interpreted in ways that would take evolution into account.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment