I was writing Kaniyu Part 3, and used the word 'evolved'. Now, as what I meant by it was not the textbook definition of it, I felt obliged to clarify. but that clarification turned out somewhat long, also misplaced diversion in the story. Its therefore here as a stand alone topic.
It was only few years back that I came to know of a strange fact - that there are some parts of the world where people still learn, teach (in a govt approved way it seems), believe in, creation theories (I haven't googled it what 'exactly' it means, but the way I perceived it is something like 'God' created everything while in mood to do so.) as against that life evolved to what it is in a slow (from individual's perspective), long journey.
Regarding my own education, I actually don't remember what words and what details textbooks told me apart from stages of evolution and some timeline wrt to the long journey. but I remember I have never exactly believed in what is meant by 'The evolution theory'. That is because, I personally think life is not lifeless - and therefore, it has more control of things happening to it compared to control lifeless things have over what happens to them. i.e. that journey from a single cell life to an elephant, dolphin, human, termite or ant is not exactly similar to say, creation of major geographical features. .. I have trouble imagining a life so lifeless whose evolution purely depends on mutation happening to it by pure chance (and so whole of evolution story is pure chance mutation + survival of fittest) In fact, only one thing is needed to collapse that kind of evolution theory back to creationist theory. and it is, if mutations happening turns out not purely random. Even Slightest non randomness will mean (if we continue to assume that life is quite lifeless and exerts no control over mutations happening to itself) that the world is created quite leisurely rather than all at once. i.e. it makes theory of evolution a theory of creation, only with creator employing slightly different strategy to create.
For me, life is essentially alive. Striving for betterment with guidance of its own intelligence. trying, failing sometimes, succeeding at others, trying to remember and analyse failures and successes and keep trying. Evolution then is result of life's own efforts to evolve (aided/hindered by many chance mutations and external events at different times.)
Now, meaning of word 'evolved' used in above sense is completely different from what is meant by theory you get if you google 'theory of evolution' so I thought I should clarify.
and btw, on a side note, as you know I have been reading Asimov again these days, I found out that one of his story that I had liked very much, was his own favourite story too (yes, out of all the gems, that one was what he thought as his best story - If you can lay your hands on it - do read 'The Last question'.)
It was only few years back that I came to know of a strange fact - that there are some parts of the world where people still learn, teach (in a govt approved way it seems), believe in, creation theories (I haven't googled it what 'exactly' it means, but the way I perceived it is something like 'God' created everything while in mood to do so.) as against that life evolved to what it is in a slow (from individual's perspective), long journey.
Regarding my own education, I actually don't remember what words and what details textbooks told me apart from stages of evolution and some timeline wrt to the long journey. but I remember I have never exactly believed in what is meant by 'The evolution theory'. That is because, I personally think life is not lifeless - and therefore, it has more control of things happening to it compared to control lifeless things have over what happens to them. i.e. that journey from a single cell life to an elephant, dolphin, human, termite or ant is not exactly similar to say, creation of major geographical features. .. I have trouble imagining a life so lifeless whose evolution purely depends on mutation happening to it by pure chance (and so whole of evolution story is pure chance mutation + survival of fittest) In fact, only one thing is needed to collapse that kind of evolution theory back to creationist theory. and it is, if mutations happening turns out not purely random. Even Slightest non randomness will mean (if we continue to assume that life is quite lifeless and exerts no control over mutations happening to itself) that the world is created quite leisurely rather than all at once. i.e. it makes theory of evolution a theory of creation, only with creator employing slightly different strategy to create.
For me, life is essentially alive. Striving for betterment with guidance of its own intelligence. trying, failing sometimes, succeeding at others, trying to remember and analyse failures and successes and keep trying. Evolution then is result of life's own efforts to evolve (aided/hindered by many chance mutations and external events at different times.)
Now, meaning of word 'evolved' used in above sense is completely different from what is meant by theory you get if you google 'theory of evolution' so I thought I should clarify.
and btw, on a side note, as you know I have been reading Asimov again these days, I found out that one of his story that I had liked very much, was his own favourite story too (yes, out of all the gems, that one was what he thought as his best story - If you can lay your hands on it - do read 'The Last question'.)
No comments:
Post a Comment