0 thoughts on “Darwin

  1. DL Emerick

    All right — I’ll bite.

    Darwin Awards? Survival is a negative accident for a species — it comes from being, asa group, in the wrong place (on the ecological tree) at the right time to be terminated.

    Hence, the folks who run the Darwin Awards are, if you consider the matter thoroughly, simply abusing the concept of survival — as if it were a term applicable to individuals, a term capable of singularization and of particularization. Thus, they are linguistic morons, ones who are abusing and confusing language in order to promote a Neanderthalian sociology long ago and repeatedly discredited — a sociology that despises both altruism and charity, as well as every impulse towards human decency and human dignity.

    I did not find it funny to read of accidental deaths, though I did not find those reports quite morbidly curious. But, morbid curiosity — of what happens when one breaks some taboo — is precisely what motivates the readers of such articles of people breaking a taboo and of suffering, bizarrely, yet randomly, from that violative act.

    You want to slake your morbid curiosity? This story will do that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_and_Loeb.

    But, is the underlying question one of survival or ennui?

    I hold for the latter.

    The fact of the matter is that ennui is a surfeit of survival. (I just discovered that I am not the first to use the phrase “s. o. s.” See http://www.bookcase.com/~claudia/mt/archives/000921.html, for an example.)

    Surfeit itself, of course, refers to a nauseating excess: as, for instance, reported at http://www.bartleby.com/61/45/S0914500.html.

    But, the plain fact of the matter is Social Darwinism is just another form of racism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism.

    The more subtle wrong lies in the cruel idea that competition is superior to cooperation: the wrongful idea that concentrating wins (or mass) in the hands of a few favored ones leads to a “better” society.

    The only thing certain about such principles of social concentration is that they lead, inevitably, to social concentration camps and to the murders of masses of people, all those deemed unfit to survive.

    The so-called Theory of Capitalism is just a variant form of Social Darwinism — dressed up in the rags of an economy — the very rags that its marginalist practices compel the masses to wear.

    Fit to survive?

    Well, my view is that none of us, individually, is fit to survive. No man is immortal. More critically, the human race is merely the passing dominance of one species upon a planet. Someday, no matter the outcome of the inter-species “survival” struggle here on the planet Earth, the Sun will go nova and so would discover, if we can speak as God for a moment, that none of this struggle will have mattered to the vast indifference that we call our most statistically improbable universe.

    But, it is the hallowed way of every hollow man, in the idylls of his copious idleness, to make of his reason nought.

    Alas, Babylon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alas,_Babylon
    We can survive, but not as who we are — but only if we adapt and change from being us — and start becoming what we are not and yet must find a way to be.