Richard Dawkins suggests that our brains are have not evolved to process the true queerness of the universe. Natural selection has developed our brains to model the world for our survival, not for the pursuit of space travel or pondering the origins of life. Because we have evolved to survive in “middle world,” we are cannot trust our common sense when it comes to explanations of the universe. Because of our inadequacies in understanding the true strangeness of our surroundings, the universe is “queerer than we suppose.”
Dawkins view is contrasted with Wilson’s conjecture that we are capable of knowing everything in the universe. Even a human being’s life can be predetermined through the gathering of genetic and social data. The fact that the human brain can evolve makes us capable of knowing and breaking all data down. When we reach the level of synthesis, we can move forward to even greater breakthroughs in science.
In my opinion, both Dawkins and Wilson have some truth to their arguments. Like Dawkins, my view is that blind faith is an excuse for belief without evidence. I do not suppose that anything my brain cannot grasp must have a mystical reason simply because I do not understand it. Therefore, as Wilson explained, everything in the universe must have an explanation and can be broken down.
The question remains as to whether we, as human beings, will ever have the capability of explaining everything scientifically. In this view, I stand by Dawkins— our physical limitations prevent us from possibly knowing everything. When we are able to overcome our intellectual limits and understand the true order of the universe, we will have evolved beyond what we know as human. Even so, the vastness of the universe will leave some knowledge forever untouched, generating the evolving melody that haunts Wilson in his search for knowledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment