Gods and Monsters: The Scientific Method Applied to the Human Condition - Book II Page 5
Chapter 1:
Cosmic evolution, biological evolution and human evolution
Some discoveries have demonstrated how the forms more primitive the biological elements have existed, on Earth, almost from the beginning of the formation of the planet and that, therefore, the occurrence of life is a phenomenon, in some way, intrinsic to the essence of the matter that make up the planet (1). The discovery of the existence of biological elements in the so-called “Interstellar medium” demonstrates how the basic elements of life have been formed simultaneously with the solar system and can exist in many other Star Systems (2). The “positivism” was hoping to get to know the law of progress, since he considered it as inevitable: namely, hoped that it would be born a theory able to highlight the laws of manifestation of progress. This conception found a scientific support in the Evolutionism Darwinian and had the opportunity, as well, to become a faith of scientistic type (3). The "Enlightenment" had considered, generally, progress as implemented by the human being assumed as positive fact, based on certain parameters established in advance, which also took on the meaning of development (which can be: development of production, or the development of the mercantile society, namely: of the market).
The “neo-evolutionism” affirmed that evolution takes place in a natural way or automatic and the selection or the environmental conditions affect the evolution itself, in an indirect manner, namely determine secondary characteristics or adaptive of the evolution itself. The “neo-Darwinism” appears a genetic conception acceptable. It says that the evolution of the species occur for reasons purely natural, namely, there is a central vein of the evolution, which prescinds from environmental conditioning, since the latter is limited at valorise the secondary aspects of the species, enabling them to adapt at the mutable environmental conditions. This, also, excludes the hypothesis of an influence of the historical structures and of their evolution on the psychic abilities potential of the human species, and of living species in general. The natural evolution takes place in such a way as to favor the characteristics more innovative and progressive of various species. This, in stark contrast with the structural reality in historical, in general, and statual, in particular, where is favored who is more violent or more overpowering and, therefore, he who is morally the worst and the less advanced.
The entomologist Kinij Imanishi, as many evoluzionists before him, he thought that the passage of species in species is determined not by natural selection, but from internal causes like, we think, the “élan vital Bergson" (4). This stated, time ago, the entomologist Giorgio Celli, recognizing as the “natural selection” may not be able to explain the mutation of species.
The evolution, understood as conditioning or determined by the “natural selection”, although it is constantly evoked and cited as if it were a dogma (or paradigm of an scientific axiom) from “science journal”, ends up being apparently forgotten, every time you are in front of a species of living that, adapting himself to specific environmental conditions or anomalous with respect to the generality of living on earth, show some biological characteristics originals, or different from “norm”. This is the case of the micro-organisms found in the Yosemite Park, considered “Aliens”, because they live in an environment rich with arsenic (5). All this demonstrates how to act is not the so-called “natural selection”, namely, a passive adaptation to the environment, but an active adaptation to the environment, where the environment is co-agent of evolution, the causes of which are outside the terrestrial environment, but not from the cosmic nature, that is together: inorganic, organic and vital.
If the application of the concept of natural selection to the social reality is constantly denied by sociologists and anthropologists, for not to appear to be “politically incorrect”, however, its very existence as, alleged, main cause of the biological evolution, constitutes a powerful support to all the ideologies, which have their main purpose in finding a justification “scientific” at the social stratification.
The recent environmental genomics “study the connection between the expression of genes and the external conditions”. From these studies clearly emerges as the environmental conditions can change the internal variations to each species, between race and race or between individual and individual, in relation to the environmental conditions, but highlights such as the environmental conditions do not modify the species, if not favoring some at the expense of other (6). The birth of the “epigenetic”, as new science, is demonstrating how the behavior of individuals can be transmitted to the offspring, without involving the genetic heritage, but it is not excluded that can, gradually and cumulatively, involve the genes, causing a genetic mutation, resulting from behavioral mutation acquired through experience. This can explain better the biological evolution, with respect to the random adaptation at environment, theorized by Darwin (7).
The “principle anthropic”, although if not postulate the existence of the cosmic universe in function of the human being, however assumes the existence of the human being as the basis of the natural constants, being the general nature logically linked and interdependent with human nature. This conception provides an implicit natural teleology (8), which is inherent in the cosmic nature. The most recent philosophy of science (epistemology) has rediscovered the teleological concept or of the purpose, concept that science had abandoned from the XVII century e. v. (9).
The nature pre-human can be, occasionally, in contrast with human nature, the which last evolves with autonomous criteria and different with respect to the nature pre-Human. There is an irrationality, or better to say, a randomness, inherent in the cosmic nature that it is inevitable, and is analogous to the irrationality real present, also, in humans. Some scientists have shown how the irrational, or better: the case, both inherent with the same cosmic nature and biological. In the subatomic physics the irrationality is inherent in the same quantum mechanics and in the existence of abnormal particles. At genetic level, the irrationality, is inherent in the processes genetic anomalous, as is the case of the mutant plants that do not follow the genetic laws. The genetic mutations follow precise laws, except the faults “random” (10). However, the human being seeks to remedy the imperfection of the nature, the rationality is definable not as perfection, but as a synonym for the full humanization of man: the realization of full rationality, namely, of the behavior consistent with the authentic needs of the individual and the fullness of self-consciousness, namely, of the aforesaid authentic needs.
Popper distinguished between: conditional trends confluent, often, in scientific laws, and “absolute trends” or dogmas anti-scientific (11), between which inserted the “Prophecies”. Popper defined: world “physical closed” (12) what we consider the physical universe deterministic (albeit with wide margins of randomness). However, Popper itself and some physicists, define this world “physical closed” as: not determinist, where it is not possible to create interference from outside of “closed system of physical entities” (13). This conception it is suitable for sorting of the essence of reality historical structural. The determinists consider: the case, as an alternative to determinism (14), rather than as an indirect determination, where even the type of bond “indirect” is determined. Popper theorized a dualism, which he defined as dichotomy, between possession of a component and its use (in analogy to the dichotomy between biological evolution and social evolution or structural) (15). He put this dualism in antithesis to the “genetic monism”. By associating this conception at the Darwinism, led him to consider the biological evolution as subtended and dependent on the structural evolution (16): in a mechanical manner. Nevertheless, he considered there was a dependence of biological evolution from the structural evolution, albeit indirect, namely operating through the “natural selection” or environmental (17). It was hypothesized the possibility of the emergence of a “new man” in following the overrun of the historical structures (hypothesis, however, already formulated so instrumental from the misleading ideology of the “Marx-le
ninism”). This “new man” must, however, be understood as manifestation of the authentic nature of human beings, the which nature, however, evolves with the own autonomy, with respect to its numerous possible, manifestations.
Morgan, also theorizing a fundamental influence of scientific and technical progress on the historical evolution, however, recognized that “inventions and discoveries” are between them in a progressive report, while institutions “grow one on the other”, namely they do not constitute a real progress since, he said, it has gradually come evolving (all) from a few primary germs “of thought”, having, precise, components in common. They respond, namely, to a single logic, and evolve with its own logic, extraneous to the willingness, to conscience and to the real human progress. Morgan stated that the structural evolution historic is predetermined and established within specific variables, in their turn are, indirectly, connected with the logic of the human psyche. Since the psyche is in continuous evolution, the structural evolution can come into conflict with the further psychological development, as suggested, also, the teleologies of various philosophies and religions (18).