Friday, August 20, 2010

Beck's dangerous idea

It's marvelous that Charles Darwin still scares the hell out of people. Marvelous that is, if you're not convinced that our species has little survival potential because the peculiar adaptation to a changing world we share with no other species, is beginning to make it impossible to adapt to the changing world brought about by that adaptation. Human intelligence is a very new development and far from making us the pinnacle of evolution, it may yet prove to be another example of overspecialization making us vulnerable to extinction as our existence depends ever more on coping with an ever more complex world.

That we may have risen to the level of our incompetence, beyond the level of the average person's capability to understand invokes the Peter Principle. That there are people like Glenn Beck who thrive on breaking the tools we've used so get us this far, subduing intelligence and reason and critical facilities as well as the body of information we've accumulated, assures the eventual end of civilization and without civilization, we're not exactly the fittest things in the jungle, are we?

It may seem strange to cite Glenn Beck when talking about matters of intelligence, but it's no stranger than listening to him make that old and silly and certainly illegitimate claim that Charles Darwin is the "father of modern racism." It's an argument that can't be seen as such by anyone familiar with the modern, scientific concept of evolution or indeed someone smart enough to realize that Darwin didn't invent that process any more than Newton invented gravity or inertia making him culpable when someone hits you over the head with a rock. It takes, in fact, something more than Beckian stupidity and something more like mens Rea, as the lawyers call it: evil intent. Evil intent is a distinctly human property as Mr. Beck amply demonstrates. Darwin didn't invent humans.

Ask the moron on the street what Darwin was all about and he'll likely say "survival of the fittest" and he'll be wrong. He'll be unlikely to revise his opinion since the natural algorithm that produces speciation and biodiversity is more complex than he's willing or able to assimilate and the body of evidence might as well be buried on Mars for all he knows of it. Survival of the fittest is a flattering concept anyway, since we've survived so far and therefore can call ourselves fit and masters of all we survey.

It's a fairly short non-sequitur from there to "only the fit should survive" which of course is not Darwin and certainly not Dan Dennett but Republican, Conservative, Libertarian, Glenn Beckian. How better to describe the contempt and lack of concern for the helpless and unfortunate than to link it to the Scroogian "let them die and decrease the surplus population?" It's not Liberals after all who decry compassion when it costs us anything, it's Conservatives.

That evolution occurs and is the process through which all existing life forms have differentiated themselves from other life forms, right down to whatever primitive life-like chemistry preceded them, is not conjectural. It's not in doubt and not without an overwhelming preponderance of evidence. It's more solid, I could argue, than Newtonian physics, but the important factor is that it's not about survival of the fittest and doubly not about the idea that one racial or ethnic group needs to enforce the fallacy by persecuting another. Darwin is about an inevitable natural process and inevitable and natural things don't need enforcement.

The Nazis did not seek to eliminate other "races" than their mythical Aryan brotherhood because of Darwin or Huxley or any of the countless archaeologists and geneticists who have cemented evolution as a basic science -- they used a fallacious and mendacious misstatement of it because they were racists seeking scientific basis, just as Glenn Beck does. Make no mistake, I give the comparison in all seriousness. Fake science, bad science and specious arguments lie behind many movements, most of which are highly dangerous. The public hasn't the brains or the knowledge to see through it and many who have have been hypnotized by one Svengali after another.

Using a fake simulacrum of science to bolster animal instinct, putting a stolen lab coat on greed, bigotry and racism does not serve to smear real science. In fact as Glenn Beck uses such tools to burn science in effigy he may be making stupidity an important survival factor.

6 comments:

  1. Capt. Fogg,

    Yes, Darwin and most particularly his disciple Thomas Henry Huxley emphasized that human beings had done so well because they developed as a social species, not as predatory loners.

    I think "social Darwinism" gets its start with chaps like Herbert Spencer (though he doesn't exactly slight the "cooperation" theory, if memory serves), who thought that coal miners followed "the law of the direction of motion" down into their perilous occupations and station in life.

    In other words, you can try to describe human societies and interactions in terms borrowed from dynamics and physics, and in so doing, you end up stripping the human element down to the point at which exploitation becomes merely an instantiation of the iron laws of the universe: determinism.

    The eminent Victorians had this argument out just as they did others that still seem to be a going concern. And they did it much better than most of the ignoramus commentators who have probably never read a word of their predecessors' fine work.

    J.S. Mill, for instance, is a LOT more sophisticated on "liberty" than the modern libertarian screeds one is likely to come across on the Internet.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "most of the ignoramus commentators"

    There seems to be some sort of downward determinism that has arguments descending through ever more ignorant proponents. Of course our dear country is becoming more ignorant every day and more of a sucker for bad arguments and charlatans.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Captain,

    This is one of your most engaging articles, and I hope will consider posting it again in September when readers have returned from vacation.

    My personal opinion, the Beccary is not worth the attention, and the fuss and notoriety accorded him is overstated. If you follow the money, the trail takes you to Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes, who are far more deserving of our suspicion. The Beccary is merely their yellow kid.

    About your assessment of the human species, I cannot agree. Only humans have the hubris and narcissism to consider themselves godlike and above all other creatures! Intelligence – absolutely not! They consume ravenously and reproduce exponentially - hurtling themselves headlong to a fate of lemmings. Except for the tiny few who create culture and civilization, most human beings are merely talking monkeys. On the evolutionary timeline, the latest does not make them the greatest.

    Captain, the time has come … time for you to consider a species transformation before it is too late; and there are positions waiting to be filled … barnacle, periwinkle, wahoo, and more! The possibilities are as numerous as stars in the Milky Way. The Swash Zone has cephalopods, a talking dinosaur, Rocky Raccoon, and a fine flock of feathered friends. Soon you will be outnumbered. Resistance is futile. Metamorphosis now before it is too late!

    ReplyDelete
  4. "It's a fairly short non-sequitur from there to "only the fit should survive" which of course is not Darwin and certainly not Dan Dennett but Republican, Conservative, Libertarian, Glenn Beckian."

    Absolutely true, and that's why they do it- in an unfortunately successful campaign to take their worst criminality and incompetence and corruption, and convince the American people that both parties participate equally in their evils. Thus, Democrats are the real racists, Obama is stupid and incompetent, somehow it's the Democrats that are serving the rich elite, and on and on.

    And as I said, it is unfortunately working, with enough people that we may be in the process of turning the government back to the people who destroyed our economy only two years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree that this is a most engaging post. I think that your observations regarding the misreading of Darwin that leads some to sum up his body of work as being about survival of the fittest is quite accurate.Such a belief feeds the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" philosophy of those who deny any collective responsibility for the promotion of the common good.

    "Fake science, bad science and specious arguments lie behind many movements, most of which are highly dangerous."
    I think that your statement aptly applies to the pseudo-science of eugenics.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Such a belief feeds the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" philosophy of those who deny any collective responsibility for the promotion of the common good."

    I agree. How many times have I heard from the "self made" types who feel sorry for themselves that the upward trip was so difficult and won't have any part in making that trip possible for others? Self pity and the fear of being dragged down are in the soil in which that weed grows.

    "I think that your statement aptly applies to the pseudo-science of eugenics."

    It was meant to. I think the Eugenics movement is an ancient justification for a social structure in which one part exploits another part in hierarchical order. Slavery and exploitation were the natural order you see with the "fittest" on top.

    Darwin, which apparently few of them read or understood was latched onto to give a pseudo scientific basis in an age when science was beginning to become respectable. Of course Eugenics has a background in animal breeding which long precedes Darwin's observations.

    Of course no modern concept of evolution includes these deterministic concepts but is a model of how natural reproductive processes allow life to move into niches opened up by changing external circumstances. That's one of the reasons Conservatives don't want it taught in schools.

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil discourse from all people but express no obligation to allow contributors and readers to be trolled. Any comment that sinks to the level of bigotry, defamation, personal insults, off-topic rants, and profanity will be deleted without notice.