The most recent and refined version of the evolutionary worldview that was first presented in Evolution’s Arrow can be found in the 34 page document The Evolutionary Manifesto which is here
Chapter 1. Introduction
|
The emergence of
organisms who are conscious of the direction of evolution is one of the most important
steps in the evolution of life on any planet. Once organisms discover the direction of
evolution, they can use it to guide their own evolution. If they know where evolution is
going, they can work out what will produce success in the future, and use this to plan how
they will evolve. Living
things can evolve without having any knowledge of the direction of evolution. The
diversity and complexity of life on earth is testimony to that. Organisms can try to deal
with the future by blindly making changes to themselves or their offspring and seeing how
the changes work out in practice. But this takes a lot of costly trial-and-error,
particularly when the future is complex or changes rapidly. It is a bit like trying to
drive a car through peak-hour traffic blindfolded. It will not be a winning strategy for
organisms whose competitors can predict future events and use this to evolve more
effectively. The
alternative is for organisms to guide their evolution by forming a picture of how
evolution is likely to unfold in the future. They can try to find trends and patterns in
this evolution that might impact on their future chances of survival. They can then use
these patterns to see how they must change themselves and the way they are organised in
order to continue to be successful. On this planet, the organism that appears likely to take this
significant evolutionary step is us. Our growing understanding of evolution is providing
us with the knowledge that will enable us to see that there are large-scale patterns in
the evolution of life. And it is a short step from this to recognising the evolutionary
significance of using these patterns to guide our own evolution. But this significant step
will not be possible until we have developed a comprehensive understanding of the
direction of evolution and of its implications for humanity. The development of this
theory will itself be an important step in our evolution. Key issues that it will have to
address include:
These
are the central themes of this book. In the
chapters that follow, I will argue that evolution has direction, and that the direction is
progressive. I will also show that this direction is important in answering the
fundamental question of how we should live our lives. Awareness of the direction of
evolution is capable of providing direction to our lives and for humanity as a whole. To clear
up one point of possible confusion immediately, I will be showing that evolutionary change
progresses in evolutionary terms, not in human terms. Organisms improve as evolution
unfolds in the sense that they become more competitive and better adapted than those they
replace. They get better at surviving. But they will not necessarily get better against
criteria that are important to humans. For example, the competitiveness of an animal might
increase if it develops the ability to physically terrorise other members of its species
to get a greater share of food. This would be an improvement in evolutionary terms, but
many of us would not consider it to be progress in human terms[1]. This
distinction is particularly clear in human evolution. The idea that human society
progresses has taken a battering in the 20th century. We have seen the largest scale wars
in human history. Six million Jews and twenty million Russians died in the Second World
War alone. And modern societies have not necessarily produced better lives for their
citizens. Members of earlier tribal societies arguably experienced happier and more
meaningful lives than members of technologically advanced nations. Much
change in human society has not been progressive in human terms. But this does not mean
humanity has failed to progress in evolutionary terms. Most of us now live in nation
states that have proved their evolutionary superiority to tribal societies by replacing
them over most of the planet. There is
a further important difference between these two different types of progress. The criteria
used to assess whether evolutionary progress has occurred in any instance are objective.
If organisms have improved their competitiveness and their adaptive fit to their
environment, they have progressed in evolutionary terms. This may be difficult to assess
in practice. But it is not fundamentally subjective like deciding the criteria that should
be used to assess whether change is progressive in human terms. There are as many ways of
defining progress in human terms as there are different sets of human values. Our
ability to assess objectively whether evolution progresses does not mean the issue is free
of controversy. Evolutionists do not currently agree on whether evolution is progressive.
Most believe it is not. The view that evolution is progressive and that humans are now at
the leading edge of evolution on this planet is not supported by most evolutionary
thinkers[2]. A major task of this book will be
to show that they are wrong. Progressionist
ideas about evolution were popular until the middle of this century[3], but have since come under
increasing attack. This is largely because progressionists have been unable to identify
any plausible evolutionary mechanism that would continually drive progressive change along
some absolute scale. Anti-progressionists
such as the noted American evolutionary writer Stephen Jay Gould argue that there is no
such mechanism. They say that current evolutionary theory does not include any process
that would produce general and on-going improvement as life evolves[4]. Natural selection adapts
populations of organisms only to the specific local circumstances encountered by each
population. This may produce some short-term improvement and directional change as the
organism adapts better to local conditions, or as the environment changes. For example, a
population of snow hares might progressively evolve thicker fur if average winter
temperatures increase from year to year. But the directional change will end when the
opportunity for improvements in local adaptations is exhausted, or when the local
environment changes again in some other direction. And, Gould argues, better adaptation to
local conditions will not produce general advance or progress. Changes that adapt a
particular organism to its specific environment would not improve it for many other
environments. A fish has no use for a better wing, or a bird for more efficient gills.
Gould cannot envisage improvements that would be better in all conditions. Gould
and his supporters conclude that the earlier enthusiasm for progressionist views has no
sound evolutionary basis: there is no mechanism within evolution that drives on-going
progress; natural selection is a process that produces only local adaptation, not general
advance or progress; and both the fossil record and the pattern of life we see about us
are consistent with this. According to Gould, the belief that humans are at the leading
edge of evolution is best explained as wishful thinking. Progressionist
views are currently in a similar position to evolutionary ideas prior to Darwins The
Origin of Species. In the centuries before Darwin, many thinkers had come up with the
idea that some form of evolution best explained the pattern of plants, animals and fossils
they saw in nature[5]. But they could not identify a
plausible mechanism that explained how this evolution could occur. Evolutionists prior to
Darwin could demonstrate that some aspects of the pattern of nature were consistent with
evolution, but this consistency could easily be dismissed as lacking any causal basis.
Like patterns of stars in the night sky that resemble shapes significant to humans, the
consistencies could be dismissed as the product of creative imagination, not the result of
real, causal relationships. Darwins
great contribution was not the idea of evolution. It was to identify natural selection as
the cause of evolution, and to demonstrate that natural selection was the inevitable
result of sequences of tangible, concrete events in nature. He showed that evolution would
occur wherever some organisms were more successful than others due to differences that
could be passed to their offspring. If
progressionist views are to gain the widespread acceptance achieved by evolutionary
theory, progressionists have to meet the challenge of identifying a concrete, causal basis
for evolutionary progress. Without this, it is not possible to distinguish between
patterns and trends that are accidental and meaningless, and those that are necessary and
real. A central task of this book is to meet this challenge by showing that evolution
includes processes that drive it in a particular direction, and that the direction is
progressive. I will
show that the direction of evolution is towards increasing cooperation between living
organisms. As evolution proceeds, living things will increasingly coordinate their actions
for the benefit of the group rather than acting only in their own individual interests.
Cooperators will inherit the earth, and eventually the universe[6]. Part Two
of this book (Chapters 3 to 7 inclusive) is devoted to demonstrating that evolution is
progressive, and that it produces increasing cooperation amongst living processes. Part of
the argument in favour of this position is not controversial: it is beyond doubt that
cooperation can be efficient and effective in evolutionary terms. Whatever challenges
organisms face during their evolution, the challenges can be met more effectively through
cooperation. But how
can evolution progress by exploiting these benefits of cooperation when, as Richard
Dawkins and others have shown so clearly[7],
evolution favours organisms that put their own selfish interests above all else? We will
see that there is a solution to this apparent paradox: cooperation can flourish without
organisms giving up their self-interest. Organisms can be organised so that beneficial
cooperation is also consistent with their self-interest. When organisms are organised in
this way, it is in their interests to be cooperative. Within
such an organisation, individuals will benefit when they cooperate, and will be harmed if
they hurt the organisation. An example is a human business that is organised so that
employees who work together to develop a new product obtain a share in any profit or loss
it produces. In a group organised in this way, individuals who follow their own interests
will also generally serve the interests of the group. Wherever cooperation pays off for
the group, cooperation will generally also be in the interests of its members. Evolution
progresses towards greater cooperation by discovering ways to build cooperative
organisations out of components that are self-interested. It has done so repeatedly
throughout the history of life on earth. Cooperative groups of self-replicating molecular
processes formed the first simple cells, groups of these cells formed larger and more
complex cells, these in turn formed cooperative groups of cells that became multicellular
organisms, and groups of multicellular organisms formed cooperative insect societies and
human social systems. One
thing that is striking about this is that the cooperative groups that arose at each step
in the sequence became the organisms that then teamed up to form the cooperative groups
(and organisms) at the next step in the sequence. The result has been that all
larger-scale living organisms are made up of smaller-scale living processes that are in
turn made up of still smaller-scale processes and so on. And for the organism to operate
effectively, all these layers of living processes must cooperate in the interests of the
organism. All organisms, each of us included, are cooperative organisations. It is
also obvious that this sequence has direction. As the sequence has unfolded, the scale
over which living processes cooperate has increased. In the evolution of life on this
planet, cooperation between living processes began over very small scales and has
progressively increased through the formation of larger and larger-scale cooperative
groups and organisms. And in the last 10,000 years, this trend has accelerated enormously.
Cooperative human groups have increased in scale from small tribal societies to nation
states and empires, and now to forms of human organisation that operate on the scale of
the planet (e.g. multinational companies, and economic markets). Three
thousand million years ago, cooperation extended only between molecular processes that
were separated by about a millionth of a metre, the scale of early cells. Now, cooperation
extends between human organisms that are separated by up to 12 million metres, the scale
of the planet. And by up to 380 million metres when there are moon landings. Cooperation
between molecular processes and cells now also extends over these larger scales. When
humans cooperate in world-wide economic activities, so do their cells. And these increases
in the scale of cooperation are unlikely to end here and now. The same evolutionary forces
that drove the expansion of cooperative organisation in the past can be expected to
continue to do so. We will
see that evolution progresses towards increasing cooperation whatever the mechanism that
produces evolutionary change in organisms. As long as the mechanism is good enough at
finding better adaptation, it will discover and exploit the benefits of cooperation. Both
natural selection and the processes that produce cultural evolution in humans produce
progressive evolution. Furthermore, the advantages of cooperation can be expected to drive
progressive evolution wherever life emerges. On any planet where life evolves, evolution
can be expected to produce cooperation over wider and wider scales, as it has on earth. To exploit the benefits of cooperation effectively, groups of
entities must evolve an ability to discover the most useful forms of cooperation, and to
modify them as conditions change. They must be able to evolve and adapt their cooperation.
The better and quicker they are at discovering effective cooperation, the better they will
do in evolutionary terms. Imagine the evolutionary success enjoyed by the first groups of
molecular processes to discover how to cooperate to construct a cellular membrane, the
first groups of cells to produce a network of nerves to coordinate their activities, and
the first groups of humans to learn how to chase game animals off cliffs. So it is not only through increases in cooperation that evolution
progresses. It also progresses through increases in the ability of living processes to
adapt and evolve. The advantages of being better at adapting have driven progressive
improvements in the evolvability and adaptability of cooperative groups, and of the
organisms they eventually produce. The processes that adapt and evolve organisms have got
progressively better at discovering the most effective forms of cooperation amongst the
living processes that make up the organisms. Evolution itself evolves, and living
processes get smarter at evolving. Part
Three of the book (Chapters 8 to 12 inclusive) deals with this evolution of the processes
that adapt and evolve living processes. We will see how progressive evolution has improved
the ability of the genetic evolutionary mechanism itself to adapt organisms[8]. The genetic mechanism uses
trial-and-error to search for better adaptation. It tries out genetic changes when
offspring are produced. If a change improves the ability of an offspring to survive and
reproduce, it spreads throughout the population, producing organisms that are better
adapted. If these
genetic changes are made randomly, the majority will be harmful. Most changes made blindly
to a complex organism will kill it. Random change is a very inefficient way to search for
improvements. So a genetic mechanism that can target its changes will have an evolutionary
advantage. It can cut down on the number of changes that are harmful, and make changes
that have a greater chance of being useful. For example, a population of snow hares in an
environment in which general temperatures are changing widely every few years could target
its genetic changes at varying the thickness of fur. This would be more likely to pay off
than changing genes that are unrelated to environmental changes. A genetic mechanism that
can focus genetic change in this way would be more efficient at discovering better
adaptation. We will see that important features of genetic systems have evolved to target
genetic change. We will see that sexual reproduction itself owes its existence to its
ability to do this. Sex is smart[9]. But
improvements in the genetic evolutionary mechanism can go only so far in enhancing the
ability of organisms to adapt and evolve. The genetic mechanism can try out changes and
discover better adaptation only when organisms reproduce. It cannot search for
improvements during the life of the organism. Entirely new adaptive and evolutionary
mechanisms had to be developed to exploit the great advantages of doing this. The new
mechanisms had to be able to try out and test changes within the organism during its life[10]. Cells, multicellular organisms and
human societies have all evolved internal processes that discover new and better
adaptation in this way. Typical examples are our own physiological, emotional and mental
adaptive systems. We will
see how the advantages of smarter adaptability and evolvability have driven a long
sequence of improvements in these internal adaptive processes. A key milestone was reached
when organisms could communicate with each other about adaptive improvements they had
discovered during their lives. Adaptive discoveries no longer died with the individual who
made them. They could be passed on to others, and a culture of adaptive information could
be developed. Once this ability evolved, the internal adaptive processes qualified as
evolutionary mechanisms, able to accumulate adaptive discoveries across the generations.
On this planet, only humans and our societies have evolved this capacity to a high level. A
further key milestone in the progressive improvement of evolvability was the development
of a capacity for mental modelling. Again, on this planet only humans have fully developed
this ability. An organism capable of mental modelling can form internal mental models and
mental pictures of how its environment will unfold in the future, and how its actions will
affect this. To an extent, it can predict the future. So it is able to try out possible
actions mentally, select the one that produces the best future result in its mental
models, and only then try it out in practice[11].
It will be able to use its mental models to see how to manipulate its environment to
achieve its particular objectives. Over the
generations, organisms with this capacity can collect more and more knowledge about their
environment and the effects of their actions. This will enable them to build mental models
of their environment that are more comprehensive and accurate. Progressively the organisms
will be able to model how their environment unfolds over wider and wider scales of space
and time. Eventually the organisms will be able to model the wider-scale evolutionary
processes that have produced it and will affect them in the future. For the first time
they will see themselves as situated at a particular point in an on-going and progressive
evolutionary process. And they will not just become aware of the direction of evolution.
They will also become aware that their increasing awareness of the direction of evolution
is itself a significant step in evolution. The
organisms will see that their existing physical adaptations and their existing
motivations, interests, beliefs, and values are all the products of their evolutionary
history. These characteristics will have all been tailored and tuned by past evolution to
ensure that the organism survives. As their understanding of the direction of evolution
improves, they will also see what they will have to do in the future to continue their
evolutionary success. The organisms will see what they have to do both as individuals and
socially: they will understand that they must further exploit the benefits of cooperation
by forming cooperative organisations of larger and larger scale and greater and greater
evolvability. But will
the organisms use their awareness of the direction of evolution to guide their own
evolution? Will they choose to do what is necessary for future evolutionary success? Will
they care about their evolutionary future? The difficulty faced by all organisms at this
stage in their evolution is that they will be unlikely to find satisfaction and motivation
in what they have to do for future evolutionary success. Continued success will demand
radical changes in their behaviour and social organisation. But their existing
motivations, moral codes, and values will influence their willingness to make these
changes. The problem is that their motivations and other predispositions will have been
moulded by the needs of past evolution, not future evolution. Past evolution will have
tailored their motivations and values so that they find satisfaction in behaviours and
actions that would have produced success in the past, not those that will produce success
in the future. Up until the development of their capacity for mental modelling, they will
have been adapted by evolutionary mechanisms that were without foresight, and could not
take into account the needs of future evolution. It is
one thing for an organism to know what it has to do for future evolutionary success. It is
another thing entirely to want to do something about it. It is a bit like a person who
knows that it is in his longer-term interests to work long hours and save money while he
is young to provide for a comfortable retirement. As many of us know, awareness of our
longer-term interests will not automatically motivate us to do what is necessary to serve
those interests. The difficulty in finding motivation to pursue future evolutionary
success is even greater. The individual will often not benefit at all through support for
evolutionary objectives. It will often be only future generations who do so. A better
understanding of this difficulty can be had by imagining the following scenario: you are
able to travel back in time, and you have been given the job of going back 50,000 years to
show a band of human hunter-gatherers how they must change to achieve future evolutionary
success. You are to use your knowledge of how evolution has unfolded since then to get
them to change in the ways necessary for them for future success. How likely are you to
get them to change? Would they freely choose to reorganise themselves in the ways that
have proven successful for human groups since then? For example, would they want to band
together with other tribes, give up their nomadic way of life, give up hunting and instead
grow crops? Would they accept being ruled by a king who would collect taxes from them and
use these to fund irrigation schemes and an army, as well as a personal lifestyle
befitting a king? If they
could have chosen to change their behaviour and organise themselves in this way 50,000
years ago, they would have a good chance of founding an empire that had a lasting impact
on human history and evolution. But to do so would mean acting contrary to their most
fundamental beliefs about how they should behave as members of their band. Based on
our experience of the few hunter-gatherer tribes that have survived until recently, many
of their attitudes, values and moral beliefs would have clashed with the changes needed to
progress in evolutionary terms[12]. In
hunter-gatherer bands, a man could not be respected if he did not hunt. A male who wanted
to plant and tend crops would be despised. The members of other tribes were often seen as
sub humans who had to be driven out of the tribes territory before they stole their
game and women. To band together with them would be unthinkable. And anyone who tried to
set himself up above the other members of the tribe as a ruler would be seen as a threat
to all, and to be stopped at all costs. Anything gathered by an individual was not his or
hers, it was the tribes. Only a deviant would try to accumulate possessions. And
deviants were seen as a danger to the band who should be expelled if they did not change
their ways. Such a
band would have very little capacity to change its fundamental values and beliefs, and
little desire to do so. The members of the band would not have the psychological ability
to find motivation and satisfaction in whatever behaviour and life style was needed for
future evolutionary success. Merely showing them how things would evolve in the next
50,000 years would not enable them to change their ways. They would continue to find
satisfaction in their existing way of life. But we
will see that an organism that develops a fuller understanding of the evolutionary process
and of its place in it will be more likely to break free of its biological and social
past, and develop the capacity to do whatever is necessary for future success. Such an
organism will become aware that its existing beliefs, motivations and values have no
special validity. It knows that if its past evolutionary needs were different, its
motivations and values would also be different. These predispositions will be seen as the
products of shortsighted evolutionary mechanisms that have been incapable of producing the
motivations and values needed for future evolutionary success. The
organism will know that all organisms that develop the capacity to mentally model their
possible evolutionary futures face a common challenge: to find motivation and satisfaction
in whatever actions and behaviours are shown by their models to bring future evolutionary
success. The challenge is not only to see what is needed for future evolutionary success,
but also to be able to do it. Where necessary, they must cease to serve the beliefs,
values and objectives established by their evolutionary past. They must develop the
psychological capacity to change their nature. They must be able to change as much as the
first cells had to change to produce multicellular organisms. And they must be able to do
this not just once, twice, or three times, but whenever necessary. If they
can develop this psychological capacity to adapt their behaviour in whatever way is
necessary, they can transcend their biological and social past. They can become
self-evolving beings, able to change their behaviour and objectives by conscious choice.
They will see themselves as evolutionary work-in-progress, with no fixed characteristics,
able to find satisfaction and motivation in doing whatever they choose. The
organism will also know that only organisms that choose to struggle to develop this
psychological capacity are likely to make a significant contribution to the future
evolution of life in the universe. Those who choose instead to continue to serve obsolete
values and motivations will be irrelevant to life, and face eventual extinction. The
organism will know that the choice that faces it is, in an evolutionary sense, a choice to
be or not to be. In
Chapters 11 and 12 we will look at how organisms such as ourselves are likely to develop
this psychological capacity. We will see that an organism can use its modelling capacity
not only to model and manage its external environment, but also to model and manage its
internal adaptive processes. It can develop mental models of the pre-existing physical,
emotional, and mental adaptive processes that determine how it behaves and acts. The
models will enable it to understand consciously how its pre-existing adaptive processes
operate, what useful effects they have, how they might be modified, and what the
consequences of this might be. Through self-knowledge they will develop the capacity to
gain control over their internal adaptive processes. Increasingly, this will enable them
to manage their physical actions, emotional and motivational states, and their beliefs and
other mental processes in whatever ways are necessary to ensure they can do what is
required for future evolutionary success. They will develop a capacity for self-management
that enables them to revise and modify their previous motivations, beliefs and objectives.
These will be revised and managed so that they support the ultimate objective of future
evolutionary success[13]. Part
Four of the book (Chapters 13 to 19 inclusive) use the ideas about evolutionary progress
developed in earlier Chapters to understand the evolution of life on earth. These Chapters
identify key evolutionary milestones since life emerged on this planet 3,500 million years
ago, and predict important future milestones. A major focus is how human cooperative
organisation has evolved, and how it is likely to evolve in the future. Cooperation
amongst humans has expanded considerably in scale over the past 100,000 years. Initially
cooperation existed only within small family groups. Since then, cooperative organisation
has progressively expanded in scale to produce multi-family bands, tribes, agricultural
communities, cities, empires, nation states, and now some forms of economic and social
organisation that span the globe[14]. We will
see that not only has the scale of cooperative organisation expanded rapidly, but so to
has its evolvability. Human societies have got better at discovering and supporting more
effective cooperation, and at adapting it as circumstances change. Modern human societies
can adapt and evolve continuously through internal processes during their life. They are
not limited to evolving through competition and natural selection between societies. But the
ability of human cooperative organisation to exploit the benefits of cooperation can be
greatly improved. Modern human societies are obviously not an endpoint of evolution. The
organisms that play a significant role in the evolution of life in the universe will not
be those that stop evolving when they reach the position we have. Guided by awareness of
evolutions arrow, they will go on to form cooperative organisations of larger and
larger scale and of greater and greater evolvability. First they will form a unified
planetary organisation that manages the matter, energy and living processes of the planet.
Then this organisation will be progressively expanded to form still larger-scale societies
of increasing evolvability. Matter, energy and life will be managed on the scale of the
organisms solar system and, eventually, its galaxy. The greater the scale of the
resources the organism is able to manage, the more likely it will be able to adapt to
whatever challenges it faces in its conscious pursuit of future evolutionary success. We will
look at how modern human societies could be changed to improve their ability to organise
cooperation to satisfy the needs of their members. Economic markets and governments are
the main processes in current societies that support and adapt large-scale cooperation. We
will see how these processes could be improved to produce human societies that are more
evolvable and better at exploiting the benefits of cooperation. These improvements would
establish a highly evolvable and cooperative planetary society. They would produce
benefits for all humanity by suppressing conflict and other damaging competition within
the society, and by efficiently organising cooperation to serve the needs and objectives
of citizens. But, by
themselves, these changes would not establish a society that would consciously pursue
future evolutionary success. The society would not achieve the critical evolutionary
milestone of using the direction of evolution to guide its future evolution. This is
because the society would satisfy the needs and objectives of its citizens, whatever they
may be. Until its citizens chose to consciously pursue future evolutionary success, the
society would therefore continue to serve only the pre-existing biological and cultural
needs of its members. The immense evolutionary potential of a society that could
intelligently manage matter, energy and life on the scale of the planet would be used to
serve values and objectives established by shortsighted and flawed evolutionary
mechanisms. The enormous power of our emerging technologies such as artificial
intelligence and genetic engineering would not be harnessed to achieve future evolutionary
success. Instead they would be used merely to satisfy obsolete desires and values that
conflict with future evolutionary needs. But this
would all change once humans become aware of the direction of evolution and develop the
capacity to use it to guide their own future evolution. As humans begin to pursue future
evolutionary success consciously and learn how to align their personal values with this
objective, they would produce a planetary society that also pursued evolutionary ends.
Because the planetary society would manage matter, energy and life to serve the needs and
values of its members, it would serve their evolutionary objectives. The society as a
whole would develop plans, strategies, projects and goals designed to maximise its
contribution to the successful evolution of life in the universe. And it would organise
itself to reward and support actions of its members that assisted the society to achieve
its goalsjust as our bodies reward and support the actions of individual cells that
contribute to meeting the bodys adaptive objectives. Finally,
we will look at what all this means for each of us as individuals, here and now. We will
see that a full understanding of evolution and its direction leaves an individual with
very limited choices. It is not open to us to choose to ignore the dictates of evolution.
Whether we choose to pursue only the values and motivations established in us by our
biological and cultural past, or instead decide consciously to serve the future
evolutionary interests of humanity, we will be following evolutionary objectives. The only
choice is between serving goals established in us by evolutionary mechanisms that are
incompetent, or by mechanisms that are the best available. We can choose to live a life
that serves obsolete evolutionary goals established by inferior and shortsighted
evolutionary mechanisms. Or we can use awareness of the direction of evolution to guide
how we can consciously contribute to the future evolutionary success of humanity. Once
individuals become aware of the direction of evolution, if they decide to continue to
serve the dictates of past evolution they are choosing evolutionary failure, in the full
knowledge that they are doing so. Individuals that make such a decision are choosing a
life that is meaningless, absurd and ridiculous from an evolutionary perspective, and know
that they are making such a choice. Individuals
who instead use the direction of evolution to guide their actions obtain a clear answer to
one of the most central questions of their existence: What should I do with my
life? They see that they should do what they can to promote the awareness of the
direction of evolution amongst others and to develop in themselves and in others the
psychological capacity to do what is necessary for future evolutionary success. They will
also want to contribute to the formation of a cooperative and evolvable planetary society
that manages the matter, energy and living processes of the planet to form organisations
of yet larger scale and of greater evolvability. And they will be aware that their actions
are contributing to the next great step in the evolution of life on earth. One of
the most important steps in the evolution of life on any planet is the emergence of
organisms who are conscious of the direction of evolution and who use this to guide their
own evolution. The actions of individuals who are living now can help ensure that the
organism that achieves this milestone on earth will be us. |
|
[1]. A clear discussion of
the distinction between human and evolutionary progress can be found in Ayala, F. J.
(1988) Can Progress be Defined as a Biological Concept? In Evolutionary
Progress. (Nitecki, M. H. ed.) pp 75-96. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[2]. The great majority of
the leading evolutionary theorists who attended a major international conference on
evolutionary progress in 1988 opposed the view that evolution is progressive and that
humans are at the leading edge of evolution on this planet. The key papers delivered at
the conference are in Nitecki, M. H. ed. (1988) Evolutionary Progress. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
[3]. For example, see: Blitz, D.
(1992) Emergent Evolution: Qualitative Novelty and the Levels of Reality.
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; and Ruse, M. (1996) Monad to Man. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
[4]. See Gould, S. J. (1996) Full
House: the Spread of Excellence from Plato to Darwin. New York: Harmony Books; and
Maynard Smith, J. (1988) Levels of Selection. In Evolutionary Progress. (Nitecki,
M. H. ed.) pp 219-236. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[5]. For a history of
evolutionary thought, see Bowler, P. J. (1984) Evolution: The History of an Idea.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
[6]. These ideas were first
developed in detail in Stewart, J. E. (1995) Metaevolution. Journal of Social and
Evolutionary Systems 18: 113- 47; Stewart, J. E. (1997) Evolutionary
transitions and artificial life. Artificial Life 3: 101-120; and Stewart, J.
E. (1997) Evolutionary Progress. Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems 20:
335-362.
[7]. For example, see
Dawkins, R. (1976) The Selfish Gene. New York: Oxford University Press; and
Williams, G. C. (1966) Adaptation and Natural Selection. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
[8]. Our discussion in
Chapter 9 will build on the ideas outlined in Stewart, J. E. (1997) The Evolution of
Genetic Cognition. Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems 20: 53-73; and
in Moxon, R. E. and Thaler, D. S. (1997) The Tinkerers Evolving Tool-box. Nature
387: 659-662.
[9]. See Stewart, J. E.
(1993) The Maintenance of Sex. Evolutionary Theory. 10: 195-202; and
Stewart: The Evolution of Genetic Cognition. op. cit.
[10]. Our discussion of the evolution of
internal adaptive mechanisms in Chapter 10 will build on the ideas developed in Dennett,
D. C. (1995) Darwins Dangerous Idea. New York: Simon and Schuster; Stewart:
Metaevolution. op. cit.; and Stewart: Evolutionary Progress. op. cit.
[11]. The significance of being able to
first try out innovative behaviour mentally rather than in practice is emphasised by
Popper, K. R. (1972) Objective knowledgean evolutionary approach. Oxford:
Clarendon.
[12]. See, for example, Klein, R. G.
(1989) The Human Career: Human Biological and Cultural Origins. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press; Boehm, C. (1993) Egalitarian Behaviour and Reverse Dominance Hierarchy. Current
Anthropology. 34: 227-54; and Knauft, B. M. (1991) Violence and Sociality in
Human Evolution. Current Anthropology. 32: 391-428.
[13]. The discussion in Chapters 11 and
12 will build on the ideas first developed in Stewart: Metaevolution. op. cit.; and
Stewart: Evolutionary Progress. op. cit.
[14]. A well-written broad sketch of the
evolution of human society can be found in Chapter 14 (pages 265-292) of Diamond, J.
(1997) Guns, Germs and Steel. London: Jonathon Cape.