3.4 Theory and Ideology
Last modified 05/26/2008
|
We can the dangers of evolutionary theories! A theory is an emergent
process in history like any other historical process. And the question arises as
to its lineage in the eonic sequence, and as to its objectivity if it is taken
to apply as a universal generalization applicable to history. We now see the
confusing danger in Darwinian theory (which arises as an oversimplification of
the original insights of evolution that appear in the modern transition). We can
see that 'evolution' in our sense, eonic evolution, is a highly complex function
of all the factors of culture, a comprehensive spectrum, and is closely adapted
to the facts of human history, including its ethical action inside that history.
To sudden inject the Darwinian thesis of natural selection into the mix is
highly misleading and produces wrong action from the word go. History doesn't
work that way and it is a misapplication of theory to inflict the pretense of
natural selection on such a complex system. We can see that major evolutionary
advances proceed by a different process altogether!
It is significant that Lamarck, the real founder of evolutionary theory, saw fit to posit two levels to evolution. However inchoate his result, it corresponds correctly to the real needs of a true theory of evolution. Let us not that he was one of the first fruits of the modern transition-divide and preceded the instant confusion created by Darwin's degenerate form of that theory. One factor in that confusion was Darwin's unconscious confusion between Adam Smith and the population theory of Malthus. These are important theories in their own right, but they don't constitute a basis for explaining the issue of evolution in the large. The ideological component in the misapplication of these theories to evolution should suddenly be obvious.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||