I've gone through a rather convoluted process of reflections growing out of fairly incorrigible re- and rereading of Stephen Jay Gould's and others' work on evolution. What I'm left with is a curiosity as to whether or not so-called "civilization" among humans isn't fully as much a part of "nature" as our rawest and most self-centered instincts. The dichotomy claimed by many between "nature" and "civilization" may not even exist. "Civilization" may instead be part and parcel of our "nature" -- one and the same when it comes to humans.
If our rawest and most self-centered instincts have indeed played an "evolutionary" role -- and most would claim they have -- then isn't it probable that the more sophisticated "civilizing" trend toward "feeding and clothing the hungry", etc., is also just as intrinsic a building block in evolution? If so, can one determine what it is that has made that latter caring process tick through the millennia?
Well, going by the paper trail that we now have, fragmentary as it is, it would appear that the earliest extant expressions of concern for the hungry, the left out, the abused and the neglected always emerge from within a context of some highly individual and innovative slant on deity as well! Coincidence? Or is there an intimation that this possibly "evolutionary" concern for the neglected and abused among us can not emerge at all in any intelligent species absent some kind of awareness of this thing called deity as well?
If -- a big "if", granted -- self-generated and peer-bucking and new-minted professions of sensitivity through the ages toward the afflicted and the abused are an intrinsic part of human evolution, then is it possible that the context where these earliest professions uncannily appear -- alongside self-generated and peer-bucking and new-minted engagements with deity -- are just as intrinsic to evolution as well? And if these engagements with deity are indeed part of evolution as well, then what might that say about the reality or non-reality of deity itself? How logical is it that a possible building block in humanity's evolution would be based on some self-evidently pathbreaking spin that is mere fiction? I would view that as rather unlikely. Instead I would view it as more likely that, if new-minted awareness of deity is part of evolution at all, then deity itself is (probably, though not certainly) as real as the waxing and waning of all species here on earth.
Operacast