|
|
Mythology
fills a necessary place in the history of human ideas. It arises when
man first demands some explanation of the strange surroundings in
which he finds himself, some comprehensible guidance in the frightening
chaos. The human mind has not at this stage been able to penetrate
beyond the surface of things, to discover the deeper relations of
events, or to illuminate the dark confusion with the light of science.
Myth is thus a rationalization; it is an ad hoc support framed by
our intellect to sustain our existence, and the formation of myths
is bound to continue in any domain so long as our desire to know and
to understand is confronted and overtopped by our ignorance.
In later
stages, however, mythology is inevitably modified by new knowledge
and experience, and in the long run becomes supplanted by science.
Science may not be able to give ultimate explanations, but at least
it can, as time passes and knowledge accumulates, provide rational
understanding. The myth is thus eventually replaced by the scientific
description, the comprehensible account of the facts of nature.
The making of myths has thus not been confined to early stages in
the development of mans ideas. Some myths, like that of progress,
are quite recent
Yet even
if myths can be stretched to include new scientific knowledge
[and] even if they retain a value long after their original crude
rationalization has ceased to have a meaning, there yet comes a
time when it is desirable to reject and demolish them, to start
building a wholly new scaffolding for the human mind, on the frank
basis of naturalistic description and scientific method.
This time
of rejection is approaching for the mythology of mans destiny
By myths of human destiny, I mean all those fabulations which purport
to give man, both as individual and as race or species, an explanatory
picture of his life in relation to its setting, to rationalize the
process of change we see everywhere both in and around us, and to
indicate the relation between human desire and purpose on the one
hand and cosmic chaos and indifference on the other
One of the
myths of human destiny is that of progress. Professor Bury in an
interesting book has shown how recent has been the growth of this
idea. [Ed: see The
idea of progress] Apart from temporary flickers, it dates back
no earlier than the Reformation. Its rise was undoubtedly connected
with that of modern science, which, following on the great explorations,
revealed not only new realms of possible knowledge, but new possibilities
of control over culture.
The myth
of progress has taken two main forms, which have sometimes remained
separate, sometimes been intertwined. One is the myth [that] asserts
that if only man gets rid of some old obstacle or creates some well-defined
and realizable new social mechanism, humanity will leap forward
to a utopian state of general well-being and happiness. The eighteenth-century
apostles of revolution believed that what was needed was the abolition
either of kings or of priests (or preferably of both). Some of the
more zealous apostles of the nineteenth-century industrial revolution
believed that what was needed was to make the applications of nineteenth-century
science available to everybody, and to teach everybody the three
Rs: if these conditions could be fulfilled, then everythingto
put it rather crudelywould be All Right
.
In our Western
world the myth of progress has now fallen on evil days. It was attacked
in general terms by Bury in his previously cited book, and by many
writers since then on the more specific grounds that the idea of
progress cannot be reconciled with the retrogressions of Fascism
and Nazism and the horrors of the recent wars
However,
the patient labours of the students of evolution, whether stellar
evolution, biological evolution, or social evolution, have revealed
that progress is not myth but science, not an erroneous wish-fulfillment,
but a fact. On the other hand, progress as a scientific doctrine
reveals itself as very different from progress as a mythical dogma.
The scientific
doctrine of progress is destined to replace not only the myth of
progress, but all other myths of human earthly destiny. It will
inevitably become one of the cornerstones of mans theology,
or whatever may be the future substitute for theology, and the most
important external support for human ethics
Evolution
in the broad sense denotes all the historical processes of change
and development at work in the universe: in fact, it is the universe,
historically regarded. It is divisible into three very different
sectorsthe inorganic or lifeless, the organic or biological,
and the psychosocial or human. The inorganic sector is by far the
greatest in extent. On the other hand, the methods by which it changes
are almost entirely those of mere physical interaction, and the
highest rate of evolution so slow as to be almost beyond our comprehension.
[Ed: i.e. the lifetimes of stars and galaxies]
The biological
sector is very much more limited in extent; however, with the emergence
of the two basic properties of living matterself-reproduction
and variation (mutation) a new and much more potent method
of change became available to life, in the shape of natural selection.
As a result the possible rate of evolution was enormously speeded
up...
Finally there
is the human sector. This is still further restricted in extent,
being confined to the single species, Homo Sapiens. But once more
a new and more efficient method of change is available. It becomes
available through man s distinctively human properties of speech
and conceptual thought. Objectively speaking, the new method consists
of cumuon. Through these new agencies, the possible rate of evolution
was again enormously speeded up
Evolution
in the human sector consists mainly of changes in the form of society,
in tools and machines, in ideas, in new ways of utilizing the old
innate potentialities
These three
sectors [the inorganic, the biological, the cultural] have succeeded
each other in time. Perhaps the next fact that strikes one concerning
the process as a whole is that the physical basis and the organization
of what evolves becomes more complex with time, not only in the
passage from one sector to the next, but also within each sector.
Most of the inorganic sector is composed of atoms or of the still
simpler subatomic units, though here and there it attains the next
higher level, of molecules. Further, in a few rare situations it
must have reached the further stage of organic macromolecules, which
can comprise a much larger number and a much more complex arrangement
of atoms. It was from among such giant organic molecules that the
living or self-reproducing molecules of the biological sector were
later evolved.
These are
more elaborate still, consisting of many hundreds or perhaps thousands
of atoms. In turn, their vast but still sub-microscopic complexity
provided the basis for an even greater visible elaboration. The
complexity of the bodily organization of a bird or a mammal is almost
inconceivable to anyone who has not systematically studied it. And
this visible complexity has increased with time during biological
evolution. A bird or a mammal is more complex than a fish, a fish
more complex than a worm, a worm than a polyp, a polyp than an amoeba,
an amoeba than a virus.
Finally,
in the human sector, a new complexity is superimposed on the old,
in the shape of mans tools and machines, idea-systems, and
social organizations. And this, too, increases with time. The elaboration
of a modern state, or of a machine-tool factory in it, is almost
infinitely greater than that of a primitive tribe or the wooden
and stone implements available to its inhabitants.
But it is
not only complexity of organization which increases with time. In
the biological sector, evolution has led to greater control over
the environment, to greater independence of its changes and chances,
and to a higher degree of individuation. It has also led to an increase
of mental powersgreater capacities for acquiring and organizing
knowledge, for experiencing emotion, and for exerting purpose. This
trend towards fuller knowledge, richer emotion, and more embracing
purpose is continued in the human sector, though by different methods
and at a much increased rate. But to it is superadded another trendan
increase in the capacity to appreciate values, to appreciate experiences
that are of value in their own right and for their own sake, to
build on knowledge, to work through purpose, and to inject ethical
values into the process of social evolution itself
Thus, whatever
may have been the origin of the universe and whatever its final
fate, it has in fact shown a certain trend which may properly be
called progress. This is discernible within the few hundred million
years of its history about which we can draw reasonable conclusions,
and can be extrapolated with a high degree of probability into the
few thousand million years of the future about which we can make
reasonable prophecies.
This trend
is measurable most clearly by the upper level attained by certain
attributes of the existing world-stuff, rather than by their average
level. These attributes vary according to the sector of existence
which is being considered. In the inorganic sector the only criterion
is complexity of organization. In the organic phase of evolution
complexity continues to increase, but other criteria become more
importantnotably the capacity to control other parts of the
universe, and to become more independent of changes in the environment,
while in its later stages the dominant criterion shifts to increased
capacity for knowledge, emotion and purpose, notably the capacity
for profiting by experience. All these criteria are still involved
in progress within the psychosocial phase, but new criteria are
superaddednotably increased understanding and attainment of
intrinsic values
Although
we have no right to regard this trend as embodying a cosmic purpose
or a Divine intention, we can properly say that it constitutes a
desirable direction of evolution, as contrasted with those numerous
other trends which are less desirable or undesirabletrends
leading to cultural degeneration or extinction, to one-sided specialization
or to stagnation
It is true
that the range of undesirable possibilities increases at the same
time, that in the human sector at least any rise implies the possibility
of a deeper fall and greater good involves the possibility of greater
evil. But this in no way impugns the positive trend I have outlined.
The level of desirable qualities and attributes attained by the
existing world does rise; that does not cease to be a fact because
of the existence of any other facts, even of antagonistic ones.
I want now
to deal with the question of the inevitability of progress. In biological
evolution progress is in one sense inevitable, in another sense
not. It is inevitable in the sense that, given the struggle for
existence and natural selection in our world or any world similar
to ours during the last thousand million years, it is apparently
unavoidable that true progress should occur in some of the lines
of life. But it is not universally inevitable: the great majority
of biological stocks either show no progress, the reverse of progress,
or a progress which is only partial and limited. It is conditioned
by accidents; if the identical stock which showed progressive evolution
on a continent could have been transplanted to a small oceanic island
with different competitors, it would assuredly not have progressed.
If the world
had not had the accident of a great climatic catastrophe befall
it at the close of the Cretaceous, the ancestral mammals would not
have supplanted the reptiles so completely nor embarked upon such
rapid new advance. And it will always remain subject to accidents.
If some virus or bacterium were to arise which exterminated the
human species, that would almost certainly be the end of any hopes
of major progress on earth. If the temperature of the earth were
to fall sufficiently, progress would undoubtedly stop and would
eventually be totally reversed.
In the human
sector for some considerable evolutionary future, progress is probably
inevitable, in the sense that the upper level of desirable qualities
in point of fact is bound to rise. But it is not inevitable in the
sense that it must be steady; on the contrary, there may be serious
regressions interrupting the general rise of level, as we know from
history and from all-too-personal experience. Nor is it inevitable
But given the present state of the human race, its thirst for knowledge
and betterment, and the extent of its accumulated tradition, I regard
it as certain that some degree of progress will for some time inevitably
continue to occur
Progress
at the present juncture may be inevitable, in the sense of being
in the nature of things. But it is also in the nature of things
that progress will not come about without human choice, human effort,
and human purpose. With the coming of man, evolution itself comes
to have a subjective as well as an objective component
The method
of human evolution in general, including that by which progress
can be effected, is different from that found in the biological
sector
Natural selection, as operative in biological evolution,
depending on the differential survival of types with different genetical
endowment, has ceased to be of major importance. It still operates,
but in a quite subsidiary way, and it is no longer the prime agency
of change. The prime method of change is now change in cultural
tradition. Much of the struggle and consequent selection is between
traditions and ideas, or between nations, classes, or other groups
embodying those traditions and ideas
We can now
consider our present situation. In evolution as a whole, it is obvious
that there are two major critical pointsthe origin of self-reproducing
matter or life, and the origin of self-reproducing culture or man.
But there are also minor or secondary critical points, decisive
not so much because of their immediate effects as for the new possibilities
which they open up. The secondary critical point in inorganic evolution
was the formation of giant carbon-containing molecules, rightly
termed organic since without them living organisms would
have been impossible. The secondary critical point in biological
evolution was the origin of learningthe formation of mechanisms
for profiting by experience. This was of importance partly because
without it the evolution of man would have been impossible
The secondary
critical point in human evolution will be marked by the union of
all separate traditions in a single common pool, the orchestration
of human diversity from competitive discord to harmonious symphony.
Of what future possibilities this may be the first foundation, who
can say? At least it will for the first time give full scope to
mans distinctive method of evolution and open the door to
many human potentialities that are as yet scarcely dreamt of. Meanwhile
anything that can be done to increase the interpretation of traditions
and their fruitful union in a common pool will help, and is itself
assuredly a prerequisite of full progress
The most
important of all the prerequisites for future progress is the acceptance
of the fact of progress, and the understanding of its nature; for
we cannot expect to achieve what we do not believe in. We command
nature by discovering and obeying her laws. The fact of progress
has now been discovered; but it is not yet generally acknowledged,
still less its laws adequately understood.
Once we accept
the fact of progress, no longer need our beliefs be restricted to
anything so partial or ephemeral as a particular nation, a particular
religion, a particular culture
This is truly a continuing
process. It has lasted for thousands of millions of years, and shows
no sign of drawing to an end. It has already raised the upper level
achieved by the world-stuff from the aimless jazz of electrons and
atoms through a whole series of astonishing stages.
The first
origin of life, with its attainment of self-perpetuating organization:
the evolution of sense-organs, with the attainment of knowledge
of the world around; the miracles of beauty, efficiency, and grace
that are the higher birds and mammals: the evolution of brains which
can store and profit by experience: the present culmination of life
in the emergence of manman the microcosm, the time-binder,
with brain and mind capable of annihilating the sequence of events,
and tying them together in the unity of consciousness; capable of
confronting alternatives and making decisions; capable of acquiring
knowledge and producing beauty almost immeasurably beyond anything
previously realized by any single evolutionary line; capable of
appreciating and creating values, and of utilizing them as standards
and goals; capable of throwing his thought forward into the future
and of realizing that advances equally enormous (but equally impossible
to visualize beforehand) are possible in the millennia to come
And as regards
our own personal lives, although nothing can make up for blind and
cruel blows of fate, we can see them in a truer perspective. Paradoxically
enough, this enables us at one and the same time to realize our
pettiness and insignificance, but also our unique value and importance.
For we are at one and the same time mere organs of the evolutionary
process, operating through society; and also, whether actually or
only potentially, the transcendent outcome of evolution, through
whom alone the full flower and fruit of progress can be actualized
and embodied.
Through the
doctrine of progress we can be both consoled and exhorted to effort;
we can be guided and we can be warned; we can be given an enduring
foundation, and also a goal. Our acceptance of the fact of progress
and our understanding of the doctrine of progress constitute the
major prerequisite of our further progress.
|
|
|
|