As a matter of fact, we do retain our regard for ourselves in the full
light of our blood-relationship with men of all sorts of evil traits,
even brutish ones. Fox, tiger, serpent, viper, shark, blood-sucker,
vulture--all these epithets--some of them actually biblical--have long
been applied to members of our species. Within the consanguinity of the
most convinced Fundamentalist there are thieves, murderers, ravishers,
maniacs, and idiots. One whose self-respect remains intact in the
presence of this truth is simply self-deceived if he imagines that
his sense of human dignity would be affronted by admitting that the
anthropoids are his distant cousins. No, each of us readily asserts his
superiority to his relatives, so readily that the theory of evolution
simply cannot have had the effect supposed. At the most, advantage has
been taken of it to emphasize or reinforce notions that have their
source elsewhere. In the case of the Fundamentalists, antagonism to the
concept of evolution upon this ground is a cloak that is employed, more
or less unconsciously, to cover some other reason for the opposition.
The more one looks into the course of religious thought, and of
popular thought in general, since Darwin, the more certain becomes
this conclusion. Biologists and biological psychologists, as far as I
am aware, never claimed to add a single item to the already recognized
list of beast-like qualities in men, and theologians never attacked
evolution upon any such ground. Rather, what the new view of us added
was an explanation of “how we got that way,” and the explanation--mark
this--constituted a partial excuse (not justification, but excuse)
for much of our bad conduct. It actually lifted from us a part of the
condemnation that was inherent in the theological view of special
creation.
It is a fact, moreover, that--whether logically or not--from the
evolutionary view of the past men gathered confidence in their own
capacity for progress. Today we are actually embarrassed by the
too-easy identification of evolution with progress. Men’s self-esteem
was too much enhanced and soothed.
What is not less interesting from the theological point of view is
that the previously current views of the nature and work of God
were ennobled. Whether logically or not, men thought that they saw
more meanings, or saw them more clearly, in the system of nature.
“Star-dust, and star-pilgrimages,” to use Emerson’s phrase, were not
just “there”; they were getting ready to be the home of living things;
and the lower forms of life were regarded as pointers-forward to
higher forms. Again to borrow from the Concord “prophet of the soul,”
And the poor worm shall plot and plan
What it will do when it is man.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account