
Having read about the personalities involved in the creation of the Natural History Museum in Short History of Nearly Everything by the wonderful Bill Bryson, my daughter and I were delighted to find that at the top of the main stairs, Sir Richard Owen's statue has been replaced by Darwin's statue. Sir Richard Owen, although creating The Natural History Museum, was a rather dislikable character by all accounts, so finding Darwin brought from the coffee shop to the top of the stairs was something that please us both. Darwin is only there temporarily, for Darwin's 200th Birthday , the celebration of which will occur on February 12, 2009; it will also be the 150th Anniversary of the publication of On The Origin of Species. In September 2009 the Natural History Museum will also open the stunning Darwin Centre. (pic below)


Since reading Primates and Philosophers I have become fascinated with questions concerning human's innate goodness and instinct. If the success of the new Batman film, The Dark Knight, is anything to go by, many other people are interested in the delicate interplay between good and bad which seems to make up humanity. For many, the most remarkable moment in the film was when two groups of people decide not to detonate bombs, even when their self-preservation is at stake. We seem to want to believe that we are innately good. (I realise that this is a bit like comparing Jane Austen and Star Wars, but it was a subject that was on my mind when I saw the film...)
De Waal describes how in his view, when considering morality that ‘actual behaviour is less important than the underlying capacities.’ (De Waal, 2006) De Waal further explains that:
"This distinction was understood by Darwin, who looked beyond the actual behaviour at the underlying emotions, intentions and capacities."
Richard Dawkins received criticism and was accused of dualism when he ended The Selfish Gene with the following words:
"We are built as gene machines and cultured as meme machines, but we have the power to turn against our creators. We, alone on earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators. (Dawkins, 1976)
In the 30th Anniversary copy of Selfish Gene, Dawkins defends his original statement by explaining:
"…it is perfectly possible to hold that genes exert a statistical influence on human behaviour while at the same time believing that this influence can be modified, overridden or reversed by other influences. ...
Our brains have evolved to the point where we are capable of rebelling against our selfish genes." (Dawkins, 2006Ed)
The intensely complex moral question of whether humans are innately bad, as believed by exponents of Veneer Theory, or that we are innately good, and have evolved to be good, as believed by De Waal, is an important one. However, what is really as interesting is our capacities. Within these capacities are our abilities to learn and develop during our lifetime, not rebelling against our instincts as Dawkins suggests, but understanding their influences in ways which help us choose to become thoughtful and fully integrated and cohesive human beings.
When asked why we should teach people about emotions and other biological human functioning I suggest that understanding how we function serves to increase our abilities to choose how we behave. I believe that it potentially increases our capacity for good, just as education does more widely. Muhammad Yunus discusses our capacities in the most inspiring way:
A human being is born into this world fully equipped not only to take care of him or herself, but also to contribute to enlarging the well being of the world as a whole. Some get the chance to explore their potential to some degree, but many others never get any opportunity, during their lifetime, to unwrap the wonderful gift they were born with. They die unexplored and the world remains deprived of their creativity, and their contribution. (Yunus, 2006)
Recent Comments