It is speculated that two factors of our development as a species differentiate us from other primates: 1) opposable thumbs; and 2) larger brain size. Anthropologically, anthropomorphically, and paleontologically the opposable thumb and the larger brain size is theorized to come about because of the following: A. Opposable Thumb development stems from an evolutionary adaptation of the need to develop refined tools (for hunting) from stone, copper, bronze and iron in order to survive being eaten by either our Neanderthal or the tiger. B. Larger brain development came about as our waning need to have a larger mandible (chewing mechanism) to masticate bone or as a defense. As we began to genetically trigger development of smaller mandibles, our skull capacity for larger brains increased the development of cerebral structures and material conducive to the development of "consciousness."
That's a new way of appreciating the epithet: "hand to mouth existence." Or more skeptically, we might question whether or not our intelligence is a result of "hoof and mouth" disease. (Chimps are Laughing Out Loud, as is Johnny Weissmuller).
The truth is this: There is something beyond our own evolution or devolution which begs a larger question depending if you are behind or in front of the camera, what speed the film is set at, the depth of field settings, the quality of the lens, and above all - "the lighting."
Language could not have come about without the changes in our biological structure. Without language or complex symbology, there could be no understanding of anything in the present, much less, in remembrances of past, or contemplation of futures. Without the opposable thumb, we could not have ever held a quill or a stone with the precision required for ancient art, or even base graffiti, drawings of ancient aliens, or whatever they were representing on caves 30 million years ago.
Do these thing disprove creation accounts? Do these interpolations of paleontological, genetic and other scientific findings prove the non existence of God or the existence of the directional nature of "consciousness" toward some destination? Certainly, it does not end in the apparent ignominious deaths of a Peking Man, Cro Magnon Man, or Australopithecus if they are the reason we are here. In other words, even their destinations might just be our destination beyond carnal existence into a "somewhere" indescribably "true" and unchangeable.
Can opposable thumbs hold a snowflake? Can an opposable thumb hold "sound?" Can a larger brain hold the concept of existing outside the cranium? When my brother and I were children, we used to play a little game of trying to "go outside yourself." We would close our eyes and try with all of our will and heart to extend our existence outside our bodies. Obviously, we did not succeed but that's not to say that it is not possible since the concept itself is can be formulated and there are also evidences of telepathic communication. Additionally, there have been legends and testimonies of persons who had the ability to bilocate. I've digressed but, my point is that "we", homo sapiens are more than our genetic development, more than our findings in archeology, paleontology, biology and genetics. We are synergistic outcomes of a supernatural "thought" resulting in "words", "sentences", "paragraphs", poems, novels, rap songs, symphonies, epics, frescoes, cave art, icons, sculpture, etc. etc. This "intelligence" is not a direct result of more grey matter or opposable thumbs at all. This intelligence is a result of a supernatural sharing of a truth that exists outside ourselves, one which penetrates our bodily boundaries and even our "sentient" limitations. The source of this intelligence has "no" limitations. Only the source of this intelligence can calculate that which exceeds a "googolplex" of symbols because the "reality" and the symbol are two different phenomena. The reality preexists the symbol as sound pre exists the hearing of it. Sounds like Plato was onto something, or perhaps it was his teacher, Socrates for without Socrates, there could not have been Plato and without Plato there could not have been Aristotle. I think if we studied more the origin of language and symbology, we would be able to better understand why we are truly not evolved creatures but rather, inspired creatures unlike any -- forming a "tree of life" likened more to a "tree of thought" that is different (vis a vis divergent) from the anthropomorphic tree of life postulated by Darwin.
Comments
Post a Comment