The Story of the Earth and ManDawson, John William, Sir
Science
The Story of the Earth and Man
Dawson, John William, Sir
Human beings -- Origin; Paleontology
Here we have in the first place, the fact that an action, in the first
instance rational and complex, becomes by repetition simple and
instinctive. Does the man then sink to the level of the hound, or,
what is more to the purpose, does this in the least approach to
showing that the hound can rise to the level of the man? Certainly
not; for the man is the conscious planner and originator of a course
of action in which the instincts of the brute are made to take part,
and in which the readiness that he attains by habit only enables him
to dispense with certain processes of thought which were absolutely
necessary at first. The man and the beast co-operate, but they meet
each other from entirely different planes; the former from that of the
rational consideration of nature, the latter from that of the blind
pursuit of a mere physical instinct. The one, to use Mr. Huxley's
simile, is the conscious inventor of the calculating machine, the
other is the machine itself, and, though the machine can calculate,
this fact is the farthest possible from giving it the power of growing
into or producing its own inventor. But Moses, or the more ancient
authority from whom he quotes in Genesis, knew this better then either
of these modern combatants. His special distinctive mark of the
superiority of man is that he was to have dominion over the earth and
its animal inhabitants; and he represents this dominion as inaugurated
by man's examining and naming the animals of Eden, and finding among
them no "help meet" for him.[BH] Man was to find in them helps, but
helps under his control, and that not the control of brute force, but
of higher skill and of thought and even of love--a control still seen
in some degree in the relation of man to his faithful companion, the
dog. These old words of Genesis, simple though they are, place the
rational superiority of man on a stable basis, and imply a distinction
between him and the lower animals which cannot be shaken by the
sophistries of the evolutionists.
[BH] Literally, "Corresponding," or "Similar," to him.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account