Macrobius
11-24-2007, 03:42 AM
Four part book review of Nicholas Wade's book, posted in the Chronicles book log section:
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=98
Before the Dawn: Recovering the Lost History of Our Ancestors by Nicholas Wade. Penguin 2006.
It has been many decades since I tried to read Charles Darwin’s The Descent of Man. Like many other writers on human evolution, Darwin seems addicted to just-so stories, and, although he was a patient and careful naturalist and an often brilliant commentator on what we would today call eco-systems, his basic account–apart from his theory of natural selection (and that is admittedly a big “apart from”)–is no more advanced or more probable than what we find in Lucretius, who borrowed it from Epicurus, who took much of it from the Fifth Century philosopher-poet Empedocles. Basically, men once lived like beasts, fighting and stealing, feeding, fornicating, and killing until, driven by necessity, they made non-aggression pacts with each other. Necessity also inspired language and culture–an early version of B.F. Skinner’s equally unsubstantiated theory of human development.
For Epicurus and his disciples, it did not matter too much whether or not a scientific account of thunder or language was true, because the real point was to discredit non-materialist explanations and thus religion. It is no accident that when Western science began to take off, Epicurean theories came back into vogue, stimulated in part by the discovery of a ms. of Lucretius. Nicholas Wade’s foray into science-journalism is only the most recent popular account in a long line of Darwinian just-so storytellers that includes Thomas Henry Huxley, Julian Huxley, and Richard Dawkins. Wade is not a science but a science reporter. Nonetheless, his book has been blurbed by James D. Watson and E.O. Wilson. One may well regard Watson as something of a hustler and Wilson as philosophically naif, but both are important scientists who have made valuable contributions to our understanding of life on earth, whether of termites or the mythical Tasaday.
I have chosen to discuss this book two reasons: first, because it provides a lucid and readable survey of recent developments in genetics and archeology that help us gain a more detailed picture of the gap between baboons and Babylonians; second, because Wade illustrates the failure of scientists to think coherently and avoid drawing unjustified conclusions from partial evidence. Intellectually, he and the scientists from whom he draws his material are a giant step backward from Epicurus, who knew, consciously, when he was making up a scientific myth and for what reason.
I am only going to go into a few interesting details but am happy to discuss anything in the book that strikes the fancy of a reader. I do want to avoid some of the pitfalls of earlier discussions. I am, therefore, stipulating from the beginning that this is to be a rational, not a theological discussion. First, there are to be no givens, whether materialist or Christian, though naturally we are all free to express what we believe. What I wish to avoid are arguments over whether or not the Bible or the Pope contradicts evolutionary theory; second, we are going to apply Cato’s formula, rem tene or “stick to the point.” I do not at all object to diversions that are relevant or even tangential, but responses that are personal, irrelevant, personal, or long and rambling will be removed. Please do not take a removal personally and please do not write in to apologize.
...
Part II: http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=139
Part III: http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=151
Part IV: http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=162
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=98
Before the Dawn: Recovering the Lost History of Our Ancestors by Nicholas Wade. Penguin 2006.
It has been many decades since I tried to read Charles Darwin’s The Descent of Man. Like many other writers on human evolution, Darwin seems addicted to just-so stories, and, although he was a patient and careful naturalist and an often brilliant commentator on what we would today call eco-systems, his basic account–apart from his theory of natural selection (and that is admittedly a big “apart from”)–is no more advanced or more probable than what we find in Lucretius, who borrowed it from Epicurus, who took much of it from the Fifth Century philosopher-poet Empedocles. Basically, men once lived like beasts, fighting and stealing, feeding, fornicating, and killing until, driven by necessity, they made non-aggression pacts with each other. Necessity also inspired language and culture–an early version of B.F. Skinner’s equally unsubstantiated theory of human development.
For Epicurus and his disciples, it did not matter too much whether or not a scientific account of thunder or language was true, because the real point was to discredit non-materialist explanations and thus religion. It is no accident that when Western science began to take off, Epicurean theories came back into vogue, stimulated in part by the discovery of a ms. of Lucretius. Nicholas Wade’s foray into science-journalism is only the most recent popular account in a long line of Darwinian just-so storytellers that includes Thomas Henry Huxley, Julian Huxley, and Richard Dawkins. Wade is not a science but a science reporter. Nonetheless, his book has been blurbed by James D. Watson and E.O. Wilson. One may well regard Watson as something of a hustler and Wilson as philosophically naif, but both are important scientists who have made valuable contributions to our understanding of life on earth, whether of termites or the mythical Tasaday.
I have chosen to discuss this book two reasons: first, because it provides a lucid and readable survey of recent developments in genetics and archeology that help us gain a more detailed picture of the gap between baboons and Babylonians; second, because Wade illustrates the failure of scientists to think coherently and avoid drawing unjustified conclusions from partial evidence. Intellectually, he and the scientists from whom he draws his material are a giant step backward from Epicurus, who knew, consciously, when he was making up a scientific myth and for what reason.
I am only going to go into a few interesting details but am happy to discuss anything in the book that strikes the fancy of a reader. I do want to avoid some of the pitfalls of earlier discussions. I am, therefore, stipulating from the beginning that this is to be a rational, not a theological discussion. First, there are to be no givens, whether materialist or Christian, though naturally we are all free to express what we believe. What I wish to avoid are arguments over whether or not the Bible or the Pope contradicts evolutionary theory; second, we are going to apply Cato’s formula, rem tene or “stick to the point.” I do not at all object to diversions that are relevant or even tangential, but responses that are personal, irrelevant, personal, or long and rambling will be removed. Please do not take a removal personally and please do not write in to apologize.
...
Part II: http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=139
Part III: http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=151
Part IV: http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=162