Extinctive Behavior of Evolution

After the fall of modern human morality rising with dissemination of Charles Darwin’s opus ‘On the Origin of Species’ a plethora of ideas and interpretations about the form and meaning of evolution theory grew amidst the literati and government leaders that flowered like a thousand forms of ragweed as well as sober scientific data. Many came to view evolution as an inevitable progressive ascent of mankind. The fact of natural history-an earlier name for evolution history of life on Earth- that for every continuing biological line there probably were countless others that went extinct, generally did not trouble humanity that viewed the future with rose-colored glasses.

Especially for those that felt oppressed by traditional Christian morality (that was in itself usually misunderstood and already instead conformed to model certain forms of secular social organization rather than that of a priesthood of believers) evolution became a secular license to abandon all morality while developing the idea that any sort of previously immoral behavior leads to progress as a higher state is evolved. That human behavior too can readily be extinctive behavior leading to the extirpation of individuals or even the entire race didn’t enter into the evolution-as-amoral-goodness-leading-to-progress way of thought.

One might wonder about evolution in the natural history of the Universe or Multiverse and ask what role life has in it? Every physical process since the start of the Universe has occurred inevitably because of prior physical states of mass and energy. There were no accidents nor randomization about the phase changes in the Universe that occurred throughout it from the first instant of existence. A unified physical force presumably part of a larger unified force somehow was released into the void. It broke down into the Universe-spanning forces of nature in existence today allowing numerous smaller particles and wave forms to exist.

Gravity aggregated much of the mass together to form stars, elements and planets, at some point more complexity or breaking down of the initial somewhat monopolar unified field/force let life exist. Life is a stage in the way of the natural history of the Universe that inevitably unfolds; yet one wonders what its role is and what phase change follows.

Jesus Christ said that unless a seed is buried in cannot grow. He may have been speaking about his own life and resurrection. It is possible that he was also speaking about the role of life in the evolutionary Universe. The teleology of life may be to give rise to sentience and spirit reborn with faith unto a higher stage of progress.

Evolution of life in a Universe that does not give rise to spirit would be in a conundrum of paradox. Though it can produce complexity in phase with the general physical direction of the breakdown of the initial unified force, the complexity endangers its existence and may be self-negating.

Life on Earth today is in what natural historians call the Anthropocene Era (of mass extinction). Human beings are bringing perhaps the largest mass extinction of species on Earth to fruition. If biological diversity that enables a variety of forms to exist that may allow some or even one species to adapt to new environmental challenges is eliminated by human beings, life’s chances of surviving environmental challenges are much reduced. In fact, if humanity is the sole large mammal that remains on Earth eventually and humanity must successfully adapt to environmental change and cannot, then the last mammal will perish too.

It may have been the evolutionary biologist Jay Gould who wrote that the most successful life form on Earth is the simplest and most numerous- one that can survive nearly any environmental change. If I remember correctly it was simple prokaryotic, multi-cellular life form. The complexity of larger organisms through evolution make them more vulnerable to extinction. Present human activities on the planet exemplify the problem.

The Lord Jesus Christ replied when asked once when he would return for his third coming (His resurrection and appearance to his disciples was the second coming of Christ) that it would be when the Age of the Gentiles was fulfilled. The time of the fullness of human life on the Earth could be taken to mean several things including the time it is most populous on Earth with no prospects left for survival because of over-population, or it could mean when humanity has served its purpose of birthing souls destined for eternal life through salvation through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. It is difficult to know exactly what he meant when there are several alternate and equally valid meanings that might be given to interpretation.

Evolution theory brought many to simply abandon theological interest and faith in God. That is rash as is the assumption that evolution is inconsistent with Biblical creation; it isn’t at all an a wrote and that topic in a couple of books. One is free to download named God, Cosmology and Nothingness. What is rash is overlooking the meaning and structure of evolution as it pertains to human life and its role in existence. In no way does evolution entail the necessity of human progress toward a secular Valhalla of immorality and hedonistic fulfillment. Humanity should not abandon rational thought about finding the best ways to adapt to existence on Earth given the phenomena of biological life and limited natural resources. Self-determining philosophical failure or neglect to comprehend the multifarious and complex mechanisms of evolution and its place in natural history would tend to doom the prospects for human life on Earth rather than support them.

If humanity needs to adapt free enterprise creative and the distribution of private and public capital to perpetuate human life in an optimal way then it must. If halting environmental loss of bio-diversity and habitat is necessary then humanity cannot afford to wait until it is lost to respond to the challenge. There are innumerable ways to fail along the lines of evolution rather than a few. In fact, humanity cannot theoretically determine its own place in natural history comprehensively any more than one can create a set of all sets including itself per Kurt Gödel’s incompleteness theorems. The hubris of belief that one can entirely determine human species destiny as a self-reinforcing philosophy of greed is not reasonable to keep. However, humanity may be unable to meet the ecospheric challenges of adapting its social and economic needs to the natural and social realties it experiences these days. Leadership is lacking thanks to the profusion of bad eschatology and the godless drift of the Democrat party under the amoral philosophy of evolution. Democrats acquiesced with devolution to membership in business-owned union sycophancy under corporatist leadership.

The shift of private capital into the control of a tiny minority is itself destructive as is the destruction of secure national boundaries and properties of rights under the aegis of godless corporatism and miscellaneous social collectives. He challenges of comprehending evolution and Christianity simultaneously are great for a world population increasing too quickly toward ecospheric breakdown. That too may be the very next phase though it seems insufficient for the purpose of life in a theology of natural history.

There are many directions for humanity and political economy to take along the evolutionary line that are wrong. Maybe there are fewer that are right or that lead to survival. It is difficult to know prospectively rather than retrospectively what economic and political lines would work effectively and support human happiness too given the challenging economic, environmental and socio-political challenges for avoiding mass extinction of all mammalian life on Earth. Evolution is a backward-looking science. Its use as a forward-looking political ideology isn’t well-suited.

As a phase of matter, evolution has no meaning beyond whatever teleological values humanity may infer that God provides for it. For-itself as an empirical idea evolution is entirely meaningless. It is a state akin to the oriental concept of joss such that whatever is, is.

Transhumanist theorists may exploit some Darwinian ideas of progress and of directing evolution yet directed evolution by humanity hasn’t any right direction. A thousand different designs could be said to be equally right or wrong even though they are in complete conflict as anti-thesis to one another. The complete complex of compresent anti-thesis of evolution in-itself is an evolutionary state of affairs as meaningless as any of the individual directions being developed, and each have reciprocals interacting with and evolving in relation to each directed evolutionary vector of human design. Fundamentally it is better to use the word evolution with less liberality than it is presently applied to virtually any desire to change social structures where the implication is that it advances biological Darwinian progress to a higher state. People may entirely evolve beyond an ideal state or into a deleterious and extinctive state as readily as moving toward a superior position viewed of course, subjectively. It is better simply to reason with classical virtue and philosophy toward good political and economic affairs respective of God and the concept of divine grace, providence and trust that honest work and due diligence are the better efforts even while respecting individual rights of others as much as mackerel respective the space of other mackerel schooling in the sea.