Jim West puts a finer point on his question here in the comments by asking:
Why would one care what happens to human beings if they are just animals like all the other evolved mammals?
I am zooming in on my response here and expanding it slightly for further debate, if there is even a debate at all.
If our planet is to survive and remain habitable we must, as the top of the food chain and direct cause of environmental toxicity, re-engineer the planet. As human beings who are conscious of evolutionary processes, we are responsible to consciously and intentionally direct evolutionary processes around our obligations to each other and the planet. Dr.’s E.O. Wilson and Peter Ward among others have argued as much. A fantastic resource for these issues can be found here. Even Mr. Bush is catching up with this concept.
Couched in terms of obligation to neighbor, this is not a utilitarian argument wherein one would practice genetic manipulation in order to clean up the gene pool like so many cattle, dog, and plant breeders do. Humans have value to the degree that they can receive the good and flourish by it. Those humans who cannot receive the good such as those in Darfour, are those to whom we are obligated to restructure the conditions for living in which they can flourish and re-claim their humanity.
Human beings are the only species in existence that can claim the responsibility to continue the habitability of this planet. Our uncanny knowledge of evolutionary and physical properties gives us the tools in order to accomplish this feat. It is here where evolution and Christianity meet.
Evolution therefore, has everything to do with love of neighbor and the call to stewardship - it always has.
1Sarah Glass
on Apr 16, 2008 at 9:39 pm:
interesting post, drew…. what do you think Calvin would say? hehe jk
2Beyondwords
on Apr 17, 2008 at 9:08 am:
I’ve never understood the logic that says evolution reduces humans to the same level as animals. I think one problem may be a notion of spirituality that is contrary to incarnation. We falsely assume anything that can be explained by “natural” processes precludes the possibility of a spiritual apsect. But we are so much more than those natural processes. Our capacity to think, for instance, can be explained by biochemical processes and electrical impulses. But that doesn’t reduce our thoughts to chemicals and electrons. Our capacity to love our neighbor can probably be explained by hormones and electrical impulses, too.
As far as I know, humans are the only animals aware of their own mortality. That’s another place where Christianity and evolution meet. Our stewardship of the planet is a component of a stewardship of love as modeled by Jesus and it’s only thing that gives us hope and meaning within that terrible awareness.
3Drew
on Apr 17, 2008 at 10:31 am:
“As far as I know, humans are the only animals aware of their own mortality.”
This is a good point too. We are the only species I know of that tries to make sense out of death through various forms of creating order. Death is the greatest source of disorder and dis-equilibrium with our environment. Other creatures mourn and move on (like a wolfpack does). We dwell on it and avoid it incessantly.
4Alan
on Apr 19, 2008 at 10:59 pm:
Why would we care, if… This seems to imply that we consider whether or not to care about our fellow human beings in some hyper-rational way, and come to a conclusion yea or nay based on some perception that we are “not just animals”.
I don’t think we decide quite like this whether or not to care for one another or to care or not about the fate of humanity in general. As social animals, whoes existence is dependent on the interactive existance of others, we must care about one another and about our collective fate in general. That is where our evolution has taken us.
We can come up with all sorts of reasons why humans are very different from other animals, and why we are really, really special. All true! But the real reason we care is that that is just who we are.