10.11.08
Has (eonic) evolution stopped? The perspective of the eonic effect
Human evolution stopping? Wrong, wrong, wrong.
The whole debate over Jones’ thesis as to evolution stopping is misplaced: we aren’t talking about real evolution here. The scenario of NS/RM or genetic drift just don’t explain the case with human evolution.
It is impossible to answer this question, has ‘evolution stopped?’ without considering the eonic effect as a manifestation of macroevolution in human history, with a strong question mark about earlier stages of human evolution, and particular headscratching about the Great Explosion (whatever the evidence for that).
We have to suspect that, while microevolution, NS/RM, GD, are relatively constant, other things being equal, the real ‘macroevoluton’ that we see in the eonic effect is intermittent over long periods of time.
Macroevolution in the sense of the ‘eonic evolution’ seen in the eonic effect switches on and off with system memory over periodic intervals (millennia). In the eonic model given World History And The Eonic Effect this ‘eonic macro’ factor is currently, off. The book makes the argument, or rather asks the question, ‘has eonic evolution stopped altogether? Reasoning: the ‘evolution’ seen in the eonic effect is clearly seen to stage its own replacement in human self-evolution as evolution turns into history.
Thus the question of whether evolution has stopped requires distinguishing micro and macro components, and, !!, gettting a grip on this ‘macro factor’ as depiction in the eonic effect.
It is important to consider and try to understand this question, because the periods after the ‘switch off’ of eonic evolution (witness the outcome of the Axial Age) can show rapid decline/deviation/chaotification and loss of general advance.