It is such contradictions that probably lie behind creationists' desire to do away with inconvenient evolution altogether.Originally Posted by scroll33
I don't see it as a contradiction myself, rather that evolution is entirely unconnected with an afterlife. Man never "evolved" to survive death because evolution has never been a concept applicable to afterlife thinking.
Yes, but at some point humankind evolved awareness of self, consciousness, and imagination. I'd imagine this came along with inability or discomfort at the thought of imagining ones own lack of existence and so ideas of afterlife?
That poses the question; if chimps and a few other animals have a concept of 'self' (which I believe has been proved) do they also have any concept of an end to their lives? Or an afterlife?! Hmm...Surely not...
Many great writers, musicians and other artists have communicated from the other side to create new books, operas, etc. Unfortunately they seem to lose their edge once they are dead and the resulting works are generally piss-poor; almost as if it wasn't the work of the deceased genius at all. No doubt scientists lose their scientific edge once exposed to their god's love, or something, and realise that science doesn't know everything plus other believer cliches.
After the expulsion from The Garden Of Eden of course!
(Genesis 3:23-24)
It is likely, though difficult to know, that non-human animals are not aware of the inevitability of their own demise. Perhaps the concept of the afterlife is a hangover from the time before himans became aware of their own mortality.
Yes, I'd agree that's unlikely non humans are aware of their mortality.
I wonder at what stage this awareness emerged in humans? And what other developments were linked to it? I would not be surprised if it was at a similar time as early language. The ability to have those kind of complexed thoughts must have involved huge leaps in other areas.
I find this area of human development mind boggling and endlessly fascinating!
Yea I would imagine it started along with other practices like living in social groups and the basic structures and ritual that made the groups closer knit. I suspect the gap that the death of a useful member of that small community left needed to be filled with 'something' and with the explanations that Animism (first religion I am aware of) brought were no doubt woven into that. I doubt that it was anything as complex as surviving death though. I do remember having a tour round a living archelogical site up here in Aberdeen and the Prof who was giving us an insight into early man in Scotland talked a bit about burial practices some 20/30 thousand years ago and claimed that in these small groups the dead were simply discarded on the bone pile.
I wonder at what stage in a child's development that it becomes aware of its own mortality.
Hypothetical situation: Would a child/or group of children raised in isolation from outside influences (no communication/education/exposure to death) have an awareness of their own mortality?
skb
I'm not at all sure that the more intelligent animals are unaware of their mortality. I recall reading of the responses of elephants and the great apes to deaths among their groups, in which they appear to be showing signs of mourning. Let's face it, they see members of their groups growing up, getting older and dying; why should they not understand that it happens to all of them?
I doubt it very much. They would have to be living in a family group and observe people growing old and dying before they would realise that it could happen (until they grew old enough for it to start happening within their group, of course).
Perhaps. There is a difference between noticing and feeling the loss of a mate/group member and being aware that your own end will come. I'm not sure that apes or elephants are able to make that leap. I wonder how we could tell?
I'd agree with Tony's point. I'd suggest that this may be one difference between humans and apes. The ability to realise that if death inevitably comes to others it will certainly come to you too.
I'd love to believe apes and elephants have this awareness. I'm not (at present!) convinced, but happy to wonder about it!
Fascinating stuff.
I'd have thought that it's difficult to imagine anything a nonhuman animal can do that would count as showing awareness of its inevitable mortality.
As far as I can see, any such awareness must be expressed in language. If that sounds a touch precious, consider whether an animal can be described as worrying where its next meal is coming from. Perhaps? Now, what can an animal do that counts as worrying about its next meal but three? Or worrying that there may come a time when it can take no meals even when there is plenty to eat?
Yes...
On the "meal" question; how can we differentiate between "worrying, looking ahead, planning" and "instinctive, subconscious" behaviour in animals? Certainly squirrels 'seem' to plan when hoarding. But this is instinct rather than conscious thought (I think?!).
Mortality; without language, short of observing apes building a church (which would be awesome and depressing at the same time!), I can't see how we could know.
I'd always assumed that these abstract imaginative thoughts (awareness of mortality, complicated planning ahead, lying) must evolve alongside, and be linked to, language. That may not be the case! Animals could, in theory, have these conscious thoughts without language.
It's pretty tricky, certainly.
One question that occurs to me is whether there is anything that a nonlinguistic human ( by reason of nonage or dotage or grave injury) can do that counts as showing awareness of his mortality — that is, a behavioural but nonlinguistic criterion.
And here I'm stumped. As far as I can see, what allows us to say that someone is aware of his own mortality, as opposed to being aware of something else entirely or just being a bit jumpy or off-colour, is that he says so ( or at least can say so if he is asked and chooses to answer candidly). It isn't so much that we don't or can't know in nonlinguistic cases as that there is nothing that would count as letting us know except our being told.
If that's right for nonlinguistic humans, then it's right too for animals. Mind you, I may simply be lacking in imagination about behavioural criteria.
I recall reading various reports of great ape behaviour which indicate deceitfulness (usually to find a way of keeping a choice piece of food for themselves). I have also read of examples of altruistic behaviour (helping others to get to food when there is no prospect of immediate return - and even helping their tame humans to obtain something which is out of reach).
Both of these suggest that apes are aware of other apes and even people as being individuals like themselves, can put themselves in their minds and work out what they might want, and respond accordingly.
While I agree that it isn't possible to be certain, such an awareness of others does indicate that when they observe that all apes older than themselves grow old and die, then they may also understand that it will happen to them.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks