History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

The eonic effect, art, language, and evolution

September 29th, 2008 · No Comments

Comment from Larry Arnhart on post on language and evolution

Larry Arnhart said,
September 29, 2008 at 2:39 pm ·
I say that the English language has evolved–and continues to evolve–through the utterances of millions of English speakers over centuries of linguistic behavior.
You say, No, it has all been designed by a “macro driver.”

Thanks for the comment. It is not surprising you are not sure what I am saying. I didn’t say that ‘it’ (language) has “all been designed by a macro driver”. Since I might be misunderstood let me state the point in the terminology of World History And The Eonic Effect.
What I did say is that in the category of the ‘eonic evolution of civilization’, whose characteristics are that of an ‘eonic sequence’ or drumbeat alternator (‘macro’ driver) in a frequency beat of 2400 years and drumbeat transitions about three centuries in length, the very late (relative to earlier forms stage of language and its evolution(s)) phenomena of poetic art show an evolution (as defined in the model of the eonic effect). The sudden flowering of poetic art sequences is thus strongly correlated with the eonic sequence (I never use design or causal language). This kind of analysis is on two levels, micro and macro. Systems don’t do art, people do. But in the mainline of the eonic sequence, there is a demonstrable correlation with a macro driver, which has its fingers in a lot more pies than the poetic, which is merely a side effect of a much larger transformation.
My point then is that if there is an evolutionary macro correlation at this late stage for the highest forms of art/language, my confidence in Darwinian explanations of earlier language plummet without recovery.
Note that I don’t claim anything like the eonic effect for earlier evolution (except as a possible suggestion in a footnote), because I don’t have the evidence. But there is something peculiar about the ‘evolution’ we see in world history, and it doesn’t square with Darwinian accounts, which, on consideration, are found to be without the proper documentation.
It is pure speculation to say that Darwin’s theory explains language evolution. Darwin suffers a typical confusion: linguistic differentiation is the same process as the ‘evolution’ of language as such. As with everything else the micro/macro aspects are confused, because the macro aspects aren’t observed.
Suddenly, with the eonic effect we observe some macro factor.

Tags: Evolution · History · The Eonic Effect · World History and The Eonic Effect

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment