Having read On The Origin Of Species, I can firmly state that I understand even less about the world than I thought (and, originally, I thought very little of my knowledge).
I think I understand the idea of adaptation. I admire Darwin's sneaky cover-your-ass idea about time. These adaptations do not occur over-night, the timeline for adaptation can be larger than we can imagine. It is safe for Darwin to argue his point because nobody will be around long enough to have proof to the contrary. We also do not necessarily have proof for Darwin. We need to reach that infinite time span to be able to see if this is true or not.
But his ideas feel right. And seem to make enough sense on a logical level that we can accept them. I'm not arguing that on this basis we ought to accept it. I'm simply saying: I think I know what you're selling Darwin, and I'll buy it.
Curiously, I am confused even more about how things came into being. If everything evolved from something else, how do we know what was here first? Species that rely on the existence of other species in order that they can feed...which was first, predator or prey?
Or worms, from our other book Darwin's Worms, I'm curious about something here too. Darwin credits the worms with having been responsible for the Earth because they eat some dirt and shit the rest out. But the stuff they ate was there before them, or they could not have eaten it to shit it out. So the dirt had to be there in the first place for the worm to eat it. Does this mean dirt requires worms somehow? I have no idea about anything anymore.
Monkeys. The safe explanation here is that we have common ancestry with some monkeys. I say safe explanation because Darwin points out that in order for his idea to be correct, the lesser fitted version of the species would necessarily die out when making way for the better fit. So we really aren't that related to monkeys like popular science allows us to conclude. I do not mean that popular science tell us we are, though in some places it does, I mean that popular science takes us to the edge and when we realize the argument we leap and think that the leaping was their idea instead of ours...even though their conclusion was that leap and all they did was stop shy.
Darwin does not offer us a 'this-is-how-the-world-came-into-being' statement. He doesn't have to either. What he does do is give us a way of looking at and understanding this place we call Earth. His observations are seemingly very accurate, if not the truth.
Our immediate ecosystem is a lot more complex than we think at first glance. I gave the following example in class to demonstrate how related or connected things are in our immediate surroundings:
There was a ridiculously cute kitten in our cul-de-sac. He liked to hunt birds. He caught or scared away all the birds in the cul-de-sac. There were no more birds of any type. The birds weren't there to eat the insects and spiders. So, there were many, many spiders around. And plenty of insects for them to feed on. I hate mosquitoes, and spiders, especially spiders, so I was none too impressed with this. Everyone in the neighbourhood knew it was the kitten. Everyone talked about it. None of them were scientists, they simply observed this kitten and the changing environment. The kitten eventually grew very large, having feasted so well, and was in great shape. Until it was hit by a car. Accident?
Here is a picture of the culprit:
No comments:
Post a Comment