Gottschall writes that according to literary scholar Jiro Tanaka, "although
Hamlet wasn't technically written by a monkey, it was written by a primate, a great ape to be specific. Sometime in the depths of pre-history . . . 'a less than infinite assortment of bipedal hominids split off from a non-quite infinite group of chimp-like australopithecines, and then another quite finite band of less hairy primates split off from the first motley crew of biped. And in a very finite amount of time, [one of] these primates
did write
Hamlet.'" (xiii)
This is not the last time the subject of evolution will come up in the book. Is this an important issue for you? If so and you feel like weighing in, let us know why this an important issue for you. If not and, again, you feel like weighing in here, let us know why.
And here's a related question: what does someone's opinion on evolution tell you about that person?
As Gottschall says, although science seems cold and unrelated to the warm seduction of stories, science can help explain the reasons humans are moved by stories. True, but we must remember that stories came first, and only with each story inspiring another, did science develop. I would suggest that stories are and have from the beginning, been the basis for scientific thought.
ReplyDeleteThe tongue in cheek experiment of monkey writing Hamlet may had some value, i.e., that their reactions were normal & therefore may provide a base line for future similar experiments. As any creature would, the monkeys examined the only item in the cage that they had not seen before. It may have been interesting to observe whether the first stroke was completely accidental, perhaps during the "is this food" period, or were the keys actually "discovered," and the result noted on the monitor. Certainly Gottschall's conclusion was a reasonable one: that it would take an infinity to develop the skill. What we observe in our world and what we uncover from archaeological discoveries, are as they are In other words, due to our lives being finite, we did not have the opportunity to watch the development of life and intelligence as it is today. We have observed that that with much human patience and teaching, chimps can reach a point of intelligence that we expect from a two year old human child. - And we have observed some apes teaching their offspring to wash their food before they eat it. We conclude that these animals have larger or more developed brains than others. I believe this note expresses my opinion on evolution. I dare go further: I do not see a conflict between creation and evolution as we understand it.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of immortal monkeys writing Shakespearean plays if given a massive amount of time as well as trial and error is a classic exercise in logic but also, I believe, in trying to grasp the concept of infinity. It is the concept of infinity and other concepts like this that lead me away from the idea of "straight" evolution and causes me to lean more toward the idea of creation. While I do find examples of adaptation and the concept of "survival of the fittest" to be evident in many places. I do think that it would require an intelligent designer to both give us the diversity in the animal kingdom as well as the need to try and solve things that can't be easily explained thus creating our need for stories in the first place.
ReplyDelete-Dylan West
While I do not foresee a monkey or an ape teaching itself any written language, much less type out a literary work as complex as a Shakespearean play, even given massive amounts of time, I do not see that as proof against evolution. The two-millennium-old debate of evolution vs. creation is one that I feel will never be fully settled. This debate is one that will be left to each to resolve individually.
ReplyDeleteThe subject of evolution is unwaveringly important to me, as it should be to all humans. The idea of evolution versus creation is a question that plagues all individuals, regardless of whether or not they choose to weigh in on the subject. Personally, I have formed an affirming view of creation after assessing both views from a neutral standpoint.
ReplyDeleteWebster defines evolution as “the process by which changes in plants and animals happen over time.” According to the words of Darwin, “life does not jump.” I absolutely believe in minimal evolution, as it is a fact of life. All animals and plants experience gradual, minute changes for the improvement of their kind. “Survival of the fittest” is proved in nature every single day, but I have yet to see solid evidence of extreme evolution, such as one creature turning into an entirely different creature (aside from metamorphosis during development). The belief of an intelligent creator makes more sense to me than the occurrence of extreme evolution. While I do not in any way condemn individuals who choose to believe in the jumping of life through extreme evolution, I choose creation.
- Dillon Rea
A person’s opinion on evolution could tell you a variety of things about that person. One thing someone’s opinion could tell you about them is how they were raised. If someone’s view on evolution is strictly related to a particular religion, it is safe to say that that particular person was raised in a religious environment. Another thing that someone’s opinion about evolution could tell you about that person is their intelligence. The average child begins to learn about evolution between the second and fourth grade. Many children learn that humans have evolved from monkeys because that is one of the easiest ways to explain evolution to a person does not have the intellectual capacity to understand the biology of it. Now, as a person goes through school and higher level classes they begin to learn the science of evolution, that humans evolved from a common organism, and develop their own ideas and opinions about the theory. If a person has gone through school without wavering in the common locution that humans evolved from monkeys then it can be assumed that that person does not has the intelligence to develop a more detailed and complex opinion of the theory for themselves. A person that has average intelligence usually takes in what they learn in classes and their opinion becomes intermixed with their knowledge on the subject. People that are above the average intelligence level often take what they learn in the classroom and continue to add to that knowledge on their own time because of a pure interest and will to know.
ReplyDelete-Talor Stewart
Evolution is indeed an important issue to me. It is important because it is what has been taught since our early childhood, even if we or our parents did not agree with it. Evolution in itself does not offend me, however much it may offend others of the Christian faith. Evolution does, in my opinion, however, seem as controversial to teach in schools as creationism, if not more so. I do not begrudge those who believe completely in evolution, it simply is not my belief that humans are descended from primates.
ReplyDeleteSomeone’s opinion of evolution can tell you many things. If someone was to find out that I do not believe in the entirety of evolution, they may be left with more questions about my belief of evolution and God. As such, just knowing what someone’s opinion about evolution is can also leave you with more questions than answers. Even so, it is something that can help us to determine what kind of individuals we may be around, whether they are of a similar faith and opinions as you.
-Nathaniel Starry
Evolution vs. Creation is a topic that I am extremely passionate about. I am completely convinced that we and the world we live in were created by the One all-knowing, all-powerful God. I look at the order and complexity of the world around us, and I know there is a Designer. Everything is so intricate! And if one piece of something is missing or not working, it throws off the rest of it. If it took millions of years of "trial and error" to get everything right, we would have died out long before we ever became operable in the first place!
ReplyDeleteI love God and I love science. The two are completely compatible. Nothing thrills me more than to spend time outside or in a lab studying how things are put together and how they work, all the while thinking about how incredible our God is and marveling at everything He has done.
The matter of evolution is not important, in my opinion. I believe that evolution is an attempt to explain something that does not particularly matter or change things in the present time. Some want to keep their lives filled with logical facts that correlate to one another and create a larger picture of neatly connected dots, some what to keep the connections out of their lives so that they may have this collective group of unrelated groups explained by a theory that can easily be accepted without definitive proof, and others explain what is of import to them and let the ties fade when convenient. In short, I am attempting to convey that the scientific theory of evolution is an attempt to show how we came to exist and what we started out as, where other things, like religion and personal philosophies, seek to explain how the source came to exist in the first place. Other than that base understanding of the tenuous relationship between the two opposing concepts, the theory of evolution does not hold any value to me. Now, what another individual believes reveals to me their ingrained ideologies, basic one that is.
ReplyDelete-Cheyenne Cooley