Nature versus History

(This may get a tad technical.) There are things we no longer refer to and presume are settled once and for all, and which cast their spell over everything else we think, say and do. The small collection of first principles I referred to in an earlier post are among these, but they are few and shared by virtually all our ancestors. However, for the past two hundred years or so, there is a brand new tacit assumption, and one shared only by the recently ‘enlightened’; and this one is wrong. Still, once it grew powerful in its hidden corner (like the wizard of Oz behind his curtain), it became imperious and is flustered and cranky when forced into the light. It is the common assumption today that we live on the favored cusp of history. We quietly presume we have climbed up sufficiently high on the mountain of time to look back accurately, and damningly, upon the faltering past that brought us here. We are card-carrying historicists, although we tend to keep the card deep in our pockets. History, we silently decree, determines all and despite our current problems, we deem ourselves so blessed by science and technology that we can look down at the past behind us. We sigh gratefully that we are finally in a position to slough off old errors and behold the slow unveiling of final truth through the ministrations of science.

Now this conviction presumes something few of us would dare admit, but which follows hard on the heels of defining human beings as ‘children of their age’.  Some scientists, and quite a few philosophers, have already bought into this. It is the new, avant-garde ‘teaching’ that human nature changes. Obviously a corollary of philosophical spin-offs from evolutionary theory (though the link is scientifically tenuous), we presume that something deep and constitutive, and which has come to us uniquely through historical change, makes us qualitatively different from most of our forebears. And those forebears of the pre-modern West–and all of the non-Western–are made to look almost like a breed of subhuman primates because they were deprived of modern triumphs in explaining and controlling the world. Biologists will tell us, it is true, that appreciable evolutionary change requires not centuries or millennia, but millions of years. But not to worry–they are now applying principles of natural selection to culture and thought and, yes, even to recorded history. The stratagems they devise to escape the ever-present boogie man of self-referentiality (that is, their attempts to dodge the ricochet effect of their relativizing declarations on the validity of those very declarations) are often creative and amusing, but hardly convincing. But let’s remind ourselves of some facts.

In the deep recesses of our body’s 30 some trillion cells, the chromosomes still number 46, as they have for at least as far back as we are able to date homo sapiens sapiens, that is, hundreds of thousands of years ago (I suspect we go back long before that, but I won’t interject my amateur intuitions here). When they first deciphered Egyptian hieroglyphics, expecting to find arcane lore of some ‘totally other’ strain of human experience in that very ancient culture, they were surprised to read about sports, grocery stores, doctor visits and other human commonplaces. And the fabled ‘primitive’ cave-man has long been debunked as one prehistoric cave after another is uncovered with walls of mysterious artwork of his design.

My point is that our nature has not changed at all, and despite our current Frankenstein-like meddling with genes and clones, there is no reasonable projection of such change for the foreseeable future. Nature trumps history. All of our emotions and basic thoughts can be adequately expressed in any of the 6,000 plus languages still spoken on Earth. Although translation is often difficult and approximate, we are able to escort obvious meaning even from ancient and exotic tongues right into our own contemporary languages, as we listen through the unaccustomed phonemes to a common fund of human life and significance. The classics of the past–and the oceans of past experience, wisdom and beauty–are available to us, for we share the nature of those who produced them, and what we have in common with them far out-values the differences we possess in speed and power. Most of the frantic speed of our cars and planes, and muscle power of our computers, still serve human communion and communication. I may have more processing power in my smart phone than was in the rocket that took men to the moon in 1969; I still use the little power pack mostly to say ‘hi’ to a friend, or to order a pizza.

I, for one, would like to learn the secret of earlier centuries, which did not, like our recent and so celebrated 20th, slaughter over 100 million people in wars, gulags, concentration camps and collectivist follies, or fill oceans with more plastic sacks and bottles than there are stars in the sky. That century got human nature wrong, and thus nature itself bears the wounds.  By all means let science continue to grow (subdued applause here), and let us use the technology it provides (like this blog).  But be adventurous, and learn about your human nature’s other possibilities–they are still there.  Read Homer, Plato, Aristotle, Virgil, Augustine, Aquinas, Dante; take a look at an Upanishad, or the Analects of Confucius. Learn a classical language, with its far smaller vocabulary and far richer grammar, and you will be amazed at what marvels language can perform in the nature you possess. And make and listen to music rooted in more than the shifting topsoil of pop. Otherwise, the epidemic of Alzheimer’s will continue to spread to our collective psyche, and we will know nothing of anything that is not shiny and new. Cicero said somewhere that the worse captivity of all is to be a child of one’s time.