You are a modifed chimpanzee not the center of the universe

The evidence for evolution is so overwhelming; to reject its veracity will be to reject your own sanity.  The fact that fossil, anatomical, genetic evidence pile up against the so called mystical/mythological origin of mankind and render it―nothing but a kind of social order and ideology; which has no business in metaphysics. Totalitarian vagary of mystics in rejecting evolutionary and scientific facts will never do any change to metaphysical facts on the ground. The facts will remain the same. Religion as a manmade system of arrogant fiction has no business sticking its nose in metaphysical inquires and explanations; but it can be used as a system of culture in which a society makes use of it as recreational escape into mythology. The struggle to make man the center of creation in mythology is so erroneous and a misguided manner of thinking.  The question that comes to me—most of the time; when I contemplate about reality is that: what type of force would allow the evolution of sentient beings and abandon them as orphans with cold blood callousness; even worse ―it designs them to feed on one another? Why type of creator should we call this? A sadist, mindless, or blind? It is really mind boggling. Furthermore, why would nature care about another animal out of the thousands and thousands of species that she created over billions of years of evolution? Why would man be ‘unique’? Why should nature care about a monkey’s opinion anyway? Nature does not care about our aspirations, hopes and dreams as well as wish list. Man is like some sort of unwanted fungus which happen to emerge out in a goldilocks zone; on a planet that happen to have surface water by chance; I say by chance because when we look at Venus; our neighbouring planet we do not see surface water or a thriving fauna and flora; which we see on earth to lead us astray into thinking that earth is made for us; but Venus is a hellish planet where Sulphuric acid rains; can you imagine sulphuric acid raining on a planet? If there were creatures on this planet would they assume that the planet is made for them? Would they assume that they are the chosen ones? If you go further back in our solar system we will find moons of planet Saturn like Titan for example where it so cold that methane rains; imagine methane as rain and as a lake? Considering all these facts and observing our surrounding in the solar system as well as our own body from head to toe and we will come to the conclusion that we are just another variety of creation by natural forces.  Evidently, our planet earth is a green hell and a land of cannibalism; where one species is designed to eat the other— that is why there is so much suffering on the planet; if earth was designed for us; if we were the center of creation—it should have been a utopia; but, unfortunately it is not. Anything that crawls, swims, walks, flies wants to eat you. That is the reality; if this so; if a house is designed without considering the occupant; then, we can safely deduce that the house is not made for the man. The most amazing thing that always comes to my mind is that in 3.8 billion years of evolution what nature could come up with is a superstitious, irrational, pugnacious, sloven mutant chimpanzee i.e. human as her Magnus opus or masterpiece; now does this show or indicate to us any purpose in creation? Our evolution has to be some sort of natural mandate or something―due to the laws of nature. Which needed to happen; not so much that it was chosen to happen. Now, let us see our true origin backed up by fossil, anatomical, and genetic evidence.



When Darwin published his book in 1871 there was no fossil evidence for the descent of man; but despite the condition—Darwin was certain our origin cannot be any different from other animals in nature; the Lucy skeleton for example was discovered in 1974 by Donald Johanson more than a century after the publication of the book. Other similar fossils which possess both human and animal features like bipedal locomotion were discovered later on. Especially, Homo naledi which was discovered recently in South Africa is a solid fossil evidence for our true origin; it possess in a striking manner both human and monkey features; it has a head of monkey but a foot of a human; which really scares you at first glance; you practically observe the work of nature and evolution in real time. Which indicates to us that man is just another modified animal who must be grouped with other animals who possess the same homology; he can never be seen as ‘unique’ like Darwin says on the preface of his book The descent of man—“man must be included with other organic beings in any general conclusion respecting his manner of appearance on this earth.”



In anatomical comparison which is a magnificent way of studying nature and its species; because there is only one tree of life; everything in nature whether plants and animals all branched from the same tree of life; thus, parallelism gives us a vivid and crystal clear idea and comprehension of the origin of species. In The descent of man which I recommend for you to read; the first three chapters are dedicated to homologous and rudimentary structures as well as reproductive similarities between man and other animals.  Your body itself is an evidence for your origin; your skeletal system; early embryonic development is the same with other animals. Bone structures like reduced tail bone or coccyx, your canines that you have like any dog; anatomical similarities that you posses with you cousin chimpanzees like your limbs which  are almost identical; drugs which work on you also work on your cousin apes— all  this points to the deduction that you are just another animal. As Darwin says―“It is notorious that man is constructed on the same general type or model with other mammals. All the bones in his skeleton can be compared with corresponding bones in a monkey, bat, or seal. So it is with his muscles, nerves, blood vessels and internal viscera. The brain, the most important of all the organs, follows the same law, as shown by Huxley and other anatomists. Bischoff, who is a hostile witness, admits that every chief fissure and fold in the brain of man has its analogy in that of the orang; but he adds that at no period of development do their brains perfectly agree; nor could this be expected, for otherwise their mental powers would have been the same.” [1]



Genetic science is relatively a new science former scientist like Darwin did not have genetic evidence to analyze; they just studied embryology to compare and contrast the similarities and differences between species. And you will be thrilled to know that more that the fossil or anatomical evidence; the genetic data is unequivocally solid; you and I have 46 chromosomes that we inherited form our parents; where each contribute 23 chromosomes; which we call haploids; when they become 46 it  is called diploid cells. Now, chimpanzees have 48 chromosomes amazingly human and chimps had the same amount of chromosomes until 5 million years ago but a mutation made human chromosomes 46 by attaching the second chromosomes together; thus our second chromosome which has 251 Million bases i.e. genetic codes of A-T and G-C; used to be two separate chromosomes in the past. This hiccup in nature gave birth to a mutant chimp called human; who erroneously prides himself or should I say fools himself as the center of creation. Can you imagine a drug resistant mosquito priding itself as ‘unique’ from other mosquitos? We should not be amazed by mutations; they happen all the time in viruses, bacteria, and in humans giving birth to several manifestations of pathology like Ebola, HIV, superbugs, and Patau syndrome as well as the evolution of new creatures that never existed before like Transgender sexuality and so forth―these aberrations in genetics are called by various terms like monosomy, trisomy, inversions, deletions, translocations, and transposition and so on. Thus, the evidence for our origin from some lower form is vivified even more by genetic evidence; which solidifies evolution as a fact without a doubt.



Thus, finally as we have discussed above in three sections in this essay in a short manner; man could only be a bi-product of evolutionary processes; he can never be unique and the center of the cosmos; at least not with his current intelligence today; what has been said hitherto in this essay of course contradicts the Bible and the Quran; but, honestly speaking who really cares? It has to contradict it anyway because modern day scientists are honest and much more sophisticated than ancient shepherds and mythologists. When a quote starts by saying that the ‘Bible says’ or the ‘Quran says’ it must be translated as ‘a poet says’ or ‘a mythologist says’ this and that. Christianism and Islamism are ideologies concocted as social orders they are not natural studies. We all live inside nature not in the kingdom of Narnia or Alice in wonderland; who cares about poets and mythologists? We are natural organisms; thus, our origin can only be solved by rational naturalists because the origin of man as many wise philosophers and scientists have stated is absolutely natural; but his destiny is uncertain will he perish like his counterparts of other several species in nature like the Mammoth and the Dinosaurs; without any significance or will his intelligence allow him to persist longer and even spread into the multiverse with the assistance of his technology and his machines? This is an open question but what has been settled is his origin and true identity; which is a wise animal that came about by mutation from some lower form.

[1] The Descent of  man; 1871: 10

Pdf  article available


The Individual Good

In discussing the issue of ideology in the context of ethics applied in a society we see two very different ideas; the idea of individualism and the idea of collectivism. There seems to be anincongruity between the supporters of these concepts—they quarrel and disagree among themselves. But I think what is extremely important and comes as a winner is individualism. I think the so called collectivists have a very confused mind and anarchic attitude; they place the cart before the horse.A society is made up of diverseindividuals. The individual good always comes first―to go ahead and establish the so called ‘common good’. This ‘common good’ is the summation of identical aspirations of several individuals; this is called the common good. Without individual good there is no common good.The individuals must have agreeing aspiration and ideas in order to create the common good; but, despite the disparity in aspirations and interests among individuals—there can never be a common good; because, there is no common ground; a union which does not place the interest and aspiration of the individual is a dictatorship in disguise. The individual good is superior and comes before the cart so to speak.Thus, in ethics when we establish a society it must be based on individuals; not collectives or a mixed and confused system of individualism and collectivism that as we are seeing in Chinese systems of government today of ‘hands on and hands off system’;which is even worse and toxic to health and existence of the individual than hands on policy of collectivism; these system will create a society of mad men; than collectivism could ever achieve. Thus, our only option is to go into the grass roots level and start with the individual good; we must ask: what do individuals want?  What is in their best interest? The question should never be: What do leaders want? Even if they are not capable of choosing for themselves; we must not be autocratic; but follow the four steps of the thesis of this article that I will discuss below.We shall aggregate people who have identical aspirations in order to help them create the common good. It must be noted that social connectedness is also very important and as we discussed in social hedonism; it can be a source of health and happiness as well as a source of disease and despair if like aspiration is not aggregated with its own kind. The source of health and happiness in a collective is the aggregation of individuals which share the same aspirations and interests; they will get along just fine; complementing each other with mental, emotional, physical, social and economic well being and the source of disease and despair in the collective is the aggregation of individuals who share different aspirations and interests causing mental, emotional, physical, social and economic distress for each other. This is the reason that I said earlier the individual good always comes first; we must consult it. It is the pillar on which the so called collective is erected. Thus, in order to have a successful, blissful and happy society we need first to understand the concept of individual dignity; second individual empowerment; third individual selection or consent and fourth,individual self-regulation.



First, there is this perpetual cycle of derision directed at the individual in history where tyrants rise and be autocrats abusing the individual and creating more suffering on the planet. But, for those who have watched diligently they will realize that the source of autocracy is the negligence of the above mentioned four important concepts in the thesis of this essay. This perpetual cycle of violence and suffering as is the case in autocratic countries is due to the neglect to dignify the individual as a sentient being and bestow upon him the benefit of the doubt. The individual has been derided and belittled leading to his subjugation and stupefaction; his stupefaction brings about anarchy behavior and anarchy triggers autocratic behavior by leaders. Thus, we have cycle of perpetual derision (of the individual), subjugation and stupefaction (of the individual)leads to ignorance (of the individual), then ignorance leads to nihilistic behavior (of the individual), nihilistic behavior of the individual triggers autocratic attitude (by leaders) which always leads to conflict and bloodshed.Thus, the error lies in the leadership of societies they immediately become autocratic when they observe the individual out of control and stagnate him in a state of ignorance; which perpetuate even more violence and instability; pouring more water to the ignited magnesium; the cycle just goes on and on.



The second step after individual dignity is individual empowerment; which means the education and sophistication of the individual in order for him to understand his rights and obligations; do’s and don’ts. Leaving him be―as he is; to go through several ideas and concepts in several topics in human civilization so that he can acquire wisdom; letting him read and write on several topics; then, he will be ready to make sapient choices in his behavior and stay away from nihilistic and autocratic attitudes. He must be informed that his interest lies in respecting the rules and regulations that he  choose to promulgate with others for the sake of his own interest.He must be free from psychological,emotional,physical, social and economic coercion to bury his face in books and establish friendship with intelligent people to be the wisest man on earth. He must philosophize, study other ideologies, go through all human knowledge,and ponder on philosophy in the pursuit of metaphysical and ethical truths which will change his personality benefitting him and all of society.



The third step is individual choice; it does not matter how educated a man is—he always has choice to do evil and do well. Thus, he must be encouraged always to do well; because that is also in his interest that he will receive from others by the same token. This step also includes choosing what he participates in; in a social contract with others; which is extremely critical in combatting autocracy and the perpetual cycle of violence that I talked about above. This is the climacteric point; where the society either transcends into success or descends into chaos; because unwilling participation of individuals is always enforced by the nihilistic altitude of leaders; which is a simmering concoction of a rebellion (on the behalf of individuals) which will lead to conflict, war, assassinations, and all hell will descend. All because of the very important concept of ―neglecting consent. Leaders might pride themselves as the upper dogs with an armed army to stifle any dissent but they should realize that they themselves are mortal beings open for attack by their disgruntled fellow citizens; a society established without individual section or consent and his aspirations will descend into nihilism—which does not benefit either the leaders or the members of the society.



The fourth step is individual self-regulation—which means that the individual has been informed that the laws and regulations in a society that he established stand for his own good; which of course he can alter any time by consensus with others.He has been dignified in the first step; empowered to know everything and  made extremely smart even to assume leadership in the second step; allowed to make a choice and establish a common good  and rules that he voted for with his own kind of individuals;and learn from his choices in the third step. Now,  the last step is the fourth step―he must obey the rules and way of life that he choose to establish with his identical fellow individuals who share common interest and grounds for that moment in time; but still the rules are always mutable by common consensus of the members. Rules stand for the benefit of the individuals who set them up; it is for their own interest that they established a society of whatever kind so that they can acquire mental, emotional, physical, social and economic hedonism by doing so; thus, the rules stand to guarantee this interest;, the individuals must know their rights and obligations and self-regulate to sustain the individual good that brought them together. The motivation that they acquire from dignity, empowerment, and most importantly consent will lead them to respect the laws of their society and systems.


Therefore, to conclude my writing we must always understand that it is the individuals and their consent which establish any society; if they have mental , emotional, physical, social and economic leanings towards one another; it only here that a social contract or social engagement could exist.Individual dignity, empowerment, selection (consent), and finally self-regulation (to abide by the laws that he himself choose) are the foundations which establish a solid, stable, vibrant, health and mirthful social systems. Doing away with these consecutive four steps and squashing the individual for the so called “collective” is putting the cart before the horse as I said above and it will create a calamity in societies. It is the product of mental confusion and nihilistic mentality which does not benefit anyone. Thus, the individual good is the foundation for the common good not viseversa.

Pdf available


A Website.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: