The Opus & The Subplot

[Guest guest]

P: Evolution is one of those words which flatter us,

and that comfort us. We love to think things are,

and will, get better. The motto, the signal word,

which embodies all the hopes of our culture

is " Progress. " Darwin gave that ball a mighty

kick, and even Christians, who hate the mere

sound of the word 'evolution,' love and swear

by its identical twin, " progress. "

 

But if you believe, think, or have apperceived

God, Self, the Absolute, or just a primordial

X, as an unchanging, immutable, and eternal It,

does the word evolution apply to the whole?

 

 

 

 

Phil: Yer right, it doesn't apply to the whole, but lets be honest here,

none of us gives a damn about the whole. We're just concerned with our

experience, and perhaps the experience of those around us. So, the only

place

where

evolution needs to apply is right here in the experiential illusion.

 

 

Pete: I wrote that post for another list to rebut the

notion advanced by some poster there, that

the whole had a purpose toward which it

is evolving and that realization was to find

and fall in line with that purpose. Curiously,

he didn't tell what that purpose was, but of

course, it was implied, he knew, and if

people asked, he would be compassionate

enough to tell. An old obvious trick to look

superior. Well, no one asked him.

 

That is not a new idea, the Greek author who

wrote " Zorba The Greek " wrote a very nice poetic

long piece about that idea. It's a very old idea

which has surfaced in many forms since the time

of Lamarck and Darwin. No doubt, there is change.

A movement toward more complex orderly systems

since to be going on since the big bang. But are

we justified in calling that change, a goal oriented

progress, or evolution toward the better? Is it not

that assessment an anthropomorphic bias? And

even if it were, to think we are the leading crest of

that wave is sheer vanity.