I recently enjoyed a good
conversation with a thoughtful friend: Thomas J. Kaiser, a Senior Tutor at
Thomas Aquinas College. The exchange was
conducted by email and you can read it all at Starting
Points Journal. Tom expresses very
well the reservations that many of my friends, trained in classical thought,
have about Darwinian theory. I argued
that those reservations are unnecessary.
Read the two parts of the exchange, and be the judge.
This post may be considered as an
addendum to that conversation. I take as
my starting point this quote from Leo Strauss:
It is safer to try to understand the low in the light of the
high than the high in the light of the low. In doing the latter one necessarily
distorts the high, whereas in doing the former one does not deprive the low of
the freedom to reveal itself as fully as what it is.
Like a lot of Strauss’s famous
quotes, this one is pregnant with meaning; however, midwifing the birth can be
challenging. What comes to mind just now
is the case of Oskar Schindler. What is
the low in this case? He was a two-bit
conman making a load of money off the Nazis.
What is the high? He spent the
last years of the war trying to save as many Jews as he could.
Why was the latter “high”? Because it was beautiful and good and, not
the least, almost miraculous. Why was
the former “low”? It was no more
admirable or hard to explain than a dog chewing on a meaty bone. Yet the former was as real as the latter and
to try to explain his heroic action in terms of some venal drive would be to
blind oneself to the reality of it. On
the other hand, recognizing Schindler’s heroism for what it was does nothing to
blind us to the nature of his original business.
I wish to apply Strauss’s
principle to a simple case which I hope will help to explain my view of
Darwinian explanations. Some years ago,
I had a meal at The Commander’s Palace in New Orleans. When we sat down the waiters brought us white
linen napkins. One of the waiters
noticed that my mother was wearing a black dress and brought her a black napkin
to match. That is what a great
restaurant is like.
The appetizer was a star of three
split green pods with a shrimp nested into the three angles. The center was a tangle of something red (red
onion?). All this rested on a bed of
green sauce flecked with red bits. See
above. I remember the turtle soup
(unbelievable) and the entrĂ©e… something must be left to the imagination.
What occurs to me now is that
everything on the plates could be explained by a biologist. Why do we like these colors, protein, fat,
sugars, etc.? The elements that lay like
a painter’s palate in the Chef’s mind are all products of our evolution as
mammals. No biologist can explain why we
went to the Commander’s Palace to get them.
We went there for something beautiful.
We human beings are capable of putting together the elements that satisfy
our basic biological appetites in ways that do not serve evolutionary functions
at all. They do more than satisfy us;
they make our lives beautiful and interesting.
I suppose that all the things
that we regard as high and noble‑heroic deeds and self-sacrifice, Ionic
columns, Turner’s paintings, Shakespeare’s plays‑are like that meal. This one animal can transform the elements of
animal satisfaction into something that is beautiful beyond any merely animal
urges.
Evolution is a mechanical
process. It is not goal-directed. In so far as it has any direction, it is only
to push organic life into new ecological niches. For that reason, evolution cannot confer
value on anything. Yet evolution
produces sentient animals that, while necessarily meeting the demands of
natural selection, also pursued their own agendas. When one elk faces off against another, he is
not trying to reproduce; he is only trying to dominate his rival. That is a kind of freedom.
This one animal expanded that
freedom into a coherent world, with the possibility of beauty and nobility in
it. In order to understand the high, we
must begin with the high. What we want
as human beings is to live lives that are interesting and admirable. The low, our evolutionary heritage, is both illuminated
and ennobled by this beginning.
No comments:
Post a Comment