The Creation
From the Covalence Archives
by E. O. Wilson: A Review
Science and religion are often considered antagonistic or warring factions. E.O. Wilson’s book, The Creation, is an attempt to engage the evangelical and scientific communities on the subject of saving life on earth. Although Wilson does not dismiss the philosophical differences between science and religion, he attempts to find common ground between them by examining the health of the planet and the necessity to protect, teach and sustain biodiversity. He argues that “each species is a masterpiece” with characteristics and genes that allow it to fit precisely into its environment. It follows then that the defense of creation is a universal value common to both science and religion, whether you believe that organisms were designed or “tested in the crucible of natural selection.”
The book is presented as an extended letter to a pastor of a fictitious Southern Baptist congregation and is organized into 5 parts: 1) The Creation, 2) Decline and Redemption, 3) What Science has Learned, 4) Teaching the Creation and 5) Reaching Across. Wilson provides sobering statistics for the decline of biodiversity or the “pauperization of planet Earth.” The current extinction rate is 100 X the rate at the dawn of humans and exceeds the global species birth rate by 100X (for those who believe that for every species that becomes extinct, another species will replace it.) Currently there are between 1.5 and 1.8 million known species on earth although he estimates that the true number is between 3.6 and 112 million. Wilson predicts that by the end of the century more than half of these species will be extinct. This decline in biodiversity is attributed to: 1) Habitat loss, 2) Invasive species, 3) Pollution, 4) Human over-population and 5) Overharvesting.
The fact that humans appear indifferent to this loss of biodiversity, he believes, is based upon the “false assumptions” that only a few species of domesticated plants and animals are capable of supporting the human population and that a “cocoon of urban and suburban life” is sufficient to provide for human needs, both physical and emotional. He further notes that it is “Not the nature of human beings to be in a glorified feedlot” and argues that there is an “innate tendency” for humans to associate with nature. Most humans prefer to live on a height overlooking a natural setting with trees, near a body of water. This setting would be consistent with the “savanna hypothesis of human evolution.” Other studies indicate that post-surgical patients recover faster and report less need for pain medication when looking out to a natural setting with trees than the walls of buildings. This affinity for nature may be due to our long evolutionary history and may therefore be deeply embedded in our genes. I would also suggest that many people argue they experience the presence of God in Nature and yet we are bent on destroying these areas. This environmental damage and loss of biodiversity therefore contradicts our “inborn physical and emotional needs.” As species are lost to environmental damage, we will not only lose vast sources of scientific information, but also opportunities in undiscovered medicines, crops and petroleum substitutes to name a few.
Wilson also deals with some of the exemptionalist arguments that human’s special status lifts us above the laws of Nature, i.e., that we shouldn’t change course because human ingenuity will provide or that we are in God’s hands. There are also the dismissal arguments 1) that extinction is natural, why do we need so many bugs anyway? or 2)that our priority must be economic growth, jobs, military defense, etc. He suggests that if man were to go extinct, only three species of lice would be lost. In contrast, if insects become extinct the consequences would be catastrophic and result in the disappearance of plants due to lack of pollinators and turnover of the soil currently accomplished by insects.
Wilson identifies three problems. First and foremost is the decline of the living environment that is occurring at a rapid pace. Secondly, he argues that humans are unable to articulate why stewardship of the earth is important due to an inadequacy of science education. He offers several suggestions for teaching biology, instilling a love of nature in our children, and promoting programs that allow scientists to collaborate with citizens in the advancement of science. Finally he argues that the exponential growth of knowledge in Biology has provided a feeling of moral confusion. Instead Wilson argues that this rapid growth in knowledge should be viewed as a “magic well” from which we may continually draw more knowledge.
While many religious individuals may be put off by Wilson’s constant references to man’s evolutionary history, he pulls no punches. He clearly articulates the process of science and presents Intelligent Design as a default argument that could never replace positive evidence. However, even with their differences, religious people and scientists are still humanists whether based on science or religion. Wilson argues that this provides common ground which may help to align science and religion into powerful allies in the fight to save the Creation.
Written by Janet Cooper