History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Too bad, mr. pinker, is modernity doomed to decline? …small wonder the pinkers are fighting off a sense of panic…

February 19th, 2018 · No Comments

(I lose my wager with myself of yesterday, pinker starts with kant…I transfer a nickel from my left to my right pocket)…

Much of pinker’s thinking is useful and eloquent, but it is too narrow. After all this fuss, pinker will fumble the ball on darwinism and his whole thesis will shipwreck. And all this excellent jargon due to its narrowness can itself be an agent of decline. Pinker’s version has already eliminated the analysis of history in a macro model of some kind (mystical junk, as he reckons). Without that there are few grounds for thinking in terms of progress over history. And the moral is the failure of theories such as the darwinian to account for ‘evolutionary progress’, a something they completely reject. A fool and his money are soon parted.

Man as yet is helpless: look at the outcome of the axial age: inexorable decline and medievalism. Not even christianity could stop it. The birth of rationalism in the enlightenment of classical greece simply evaporated and within centuries the roman games were par. Can the same occur in modern times? It seems we are progressing by leaps and bounds but a closer look suggests that the prime field of democratic emergence, the US, is already in a nosedive. We don’t know, but we can criticize pinker but we must broadly support such efforts to forestall disaster..
In fact, this can be a plug for the ideologues of progress such as pinker: we have to stop being helpless. But pinker’s analysis shows how wrong thinking can come to the fore and botch the whole analysis. A good example is the denigration of the romantic movement. Pinker has no analysis whatever of aesthetic issues.
The eonic model offers multiple failsafes against that. To be fair, I was after completing World History and the Eonic Effect a pronounced champion of progress after the fashion of pinker, and still am, in a more complex fashion.
Pinker fails to grasp the dilemma of classical liberalism, its match with capitalism, and the critique of such by the nineteenth century left. Come on, please: the classic engine of progress seems read to destroy the planet…

We will consider this at greater length but the example of proximate antiquity is telling: after a great era of progress in the early axial age, the larger occident proceeded inexorably to decline.
Small wonder the pinkers are fighting off a sense of panic…just don’t become the agents of such a decline…one can end like Oedipus, the agent’s of one’s doom in the attempt to forestall that doom…

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

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

Leave a Comment