Telos and Human Evolution

That natural biological evolution is progressive and goal-oriented, with man as its pinnacle, has been a common and influential notion. From ancient and learned sources such as Plotinus, to the widely recognized and copied illustration "March of Progress" by Rudolph Zallinger, the idea can be seen in scholarly literature and also in more quotidian descriptions of evolution and human development. Even up to the time of Darwin and up to the Modern Synthesis, the idea of there being a telos, or goal, of evolution was not uncommon. As biological explanations became more distant from theological sources, however, the idea of telos and of goals existing in the activity of nature began to wane.

In the studies of modern evolutionary biology, the notion of man as the natural apex has re-emerged in a new form. While there is still a connection made by some between goals and evolution in a religious context or, more commonly, in the context of religious individuals attempting to refute the claims of Darwinian evolution in specific, most of the modern usage of teleology has been in a descriptive way. E.g. it is not uncommon to hear an expression of the function of a particular organ with respect to the goal which it accomplishes.

But this descriptive shorthand is very different from the tendency that has sometimes been present in biology to characterize man, and the particular animal stock from which he comes, as superior to other forms of life, or as the goal of the process of evolution, or even as the goal of the entire universe. Some scientists reject such claims out of hand, calling it mere "mammal-centricity" or humanistic hubris (depending on the intended object of the claim) and insisting that the statistical nature of (Darwinian) evolution necessitates a development based only on various factors affecting survivability and not a development that can look to any external goal.

As for humans as they currently exist, some scientists claim that human evolution has come to a standstill. The biological reasoning for this is that for populations to develop new characteristics, the "populations have to be small and effectively isolated genetically from their relatives". This currently is not, and will not be for the foreseeable future, the case for humans in the modern world. Populations that were almost completely isolated centuries or even decades ago can now come into contact with members of populations all over the world. Since human groups do not now breed within completely isolated groups and do not stay in the same environment for geologically meaningful periods, it is very unlikely that they will develop characteristics sufficiently novel to ever form a new species, pending severe ecological disaster or displacement of portions of the population (such as in permanent space colonies).

However, there may be other senses in which man can develop. As described in Humanity and Willed Evolution, man alone can participate in his own development and guide it through the externalization of the primary means of survival. What allowed homo sapiens sapiens to advance to the place of dominance of earth was information, i.e. data properly processed and utilized. Man's rise was, admittedly, a combination of his nature and of natural circumstance. And some may claim that other species should be given the title of dominant over man. Bacteria, for instance, are much greater in number and live in a wider range of environments (in their natural state, i.e. without assistance). Man, however, is the only species that can externalize internal experience. The lessons learned by each member of the species can be shared with all of the other members, today far more than at any point in the past. There are cases of group learning occurring in other animal populations as well, most notably, perhaps, those of the japanese macaques. These ingenious creatures have learned how to sift wheat from sand, and have taken on more amusing characteristics such as playing with stones, in the few decades since researchers began interacting with them. But the spread of such behaviors is limited to individuals in regular contact, and seems to stay at a simplistic level.

Man's ability to formulate internal states in a way meaningful to other members of the species in a permanent way is what sets him apart. The ways and means of spreading these externalized states, information, have evolved far more rapidly than man's biological form since their emergence, and they have given him a far greater advantage with respect to survival than any biological development. Since the time when speech and writing developed, there have been relatively few physiological changes to man. What has changed is his intelligence and the availability of information. And there are now more humans on planet earth than at all historical periods combined. Man can live in space, under the ocean, and anywhere on the planet that he chooses, given enough effort. It seems at times that, given proper circumstances, man can say "Our will be done", and not feel boastful, but merely self-assured, in thinking that he can accomplish any feat.

But aside from questions of ability, the control of man's evolution by himself, both physically through genetic engineering, and mentally and socially through information exchange, makes man a completion of the evolutionary process in a certain way. Evolution occurs because statistical effects on populations in a species result from environmental conditions and changes. Man's scientific advancements make physical changes unnecessary when environmental conditions change, not to mention the fact that, more and more, man can change those very environmental conditions himself as well as make physical changes himself by will and not chance. This is an idea more encompassing than the three stages of technological evolution of Radovan Richta. Information is what gives man an edge, and a new kind of edge. It takes little imagination to imagine mankind in the not-too-distant future being in a position such that little save for inner turmoil on a drastic level or a universal shift such as the Big Crunch would threaten his physical existence.

This, then, is how mankind is understood as the end, or final achievement, of evolution: he alone can move the aspect that must change to fit his environment, the aspect of adaptation, outside of himself, through the creation of information. The movement can come to an even more complete fulfillment once it becomes possible for individual members of the human species to fully remove themselves from a biological medium. When this is achieved, along with the developments that it entails, man will no longer have to be concerned with the vast majority of concerns which drove his biological evolution. This will allow for a new type of man to emerge: homo sapiens sapiens will become homo excelsior, man in complete control of his form and his future. He will be truly only limited by his imagination, which needs have no restraints.