I want to address a question that was posed to me and is often posed by Freethinking minds or critical minds, that wish to find holes in evolutionary theory. If we evolved through progression, who was the first human? The point is, how can a new species pop into existence and begin to procreate? The irony about science is that the unbelievers of its findings are often its best friends, allowing the process to self correct any errors made along the way, or any monster errors that mislead our species about reality on a grand scale, See. Newton and how Einstein overturned Newton. Anyway, Steven Hawking stated that Philosophy was dead in his last documentary. I can not disagree more. Natural Philosophy (science) has neutralized many philosophical questions save one; ethical philosophy, this philosophy asks what is our moral structure atop all that has been gleaned by science? not my query here, so I will leave it. Another way philosophy is not dead, is how metaphysical philosophy can be used anew, to assist in understanding the subsequent concepts. About 347 BCE or BC, Plato suggested the material world was nonexistent. He argued that when we point to a material object, say a dog, and identify the animal as a dog, we are doing so in relation to the concept dog, and animal having features that a dog has. Plato found a major problem with this process. He felt that the dog identified was very different than the last dog he observed. And after many processes of identifying dogs, he discovered each dog to be different than the other; some were big, some little, some had long hair, some short, some were brown, some black, some had long snouts, some had short snouts, and some did not even look like the others, even tho he new they were known as dogs. So he asked, which dog was actually a dog. Plato concluded the dog in his mind was the only real dog and that all other objects he perceived shared the same lack of completeness as his experience with the dogs. Plato suggested the world of perception to be an illusion, while the real world is what he coined the World of Forms found in the mind or true world he believed the mind had access to. (PLATOS PHILOSOPHY WAS FAR MORE BRILLIANT AND PROFOUND, BUT FOR BREVITY I USED THE DOG EXAMPLE) Platos argument of illusion in reference to first species or species in general applies to the question posed. When we ask, if evolution is accurate, who was the first man? we have abandoned Plato and by extension expressed a common human flaw. There was no first human, because there is no such thing as a Human in the external world! The idea or form human is only a reference point for which we are able to conclude this or that object is human, dog, etc... it is a Human creation, only language. I ask, what human will we use as a reference point when asking who was the first human? We use a concept and the concept is not real, or is it? who knows, Plato thinks the concept is more real than what we use it in reference to. Anyway, there were so many variations, and still are, in DNA, Intelligence and appearance; that the gradual (AND I MEAN GRADUAL) process of evolution would never have aloud a first human; maybe the first appearance of the first species of human-like creatures, but even then the creatures would have varied among themselves, just as my beautiful wife, and daughter vary from me. There would have been cancers and other diseases in some, and on a minute scale some would not have evolved in the same direction as the others. There is no such thing as Human there are characteristics that satisfy criteria allowing us to identify what is human-like, but no human exists and this is why there was no first human.
Posted on: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 04:49:10 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015