Skip to comments.Revival of the Fittest: The Reestablishment of Man
Posted on 11/25/2008 3:22:35 PM PST by thinkingIsPresuppositional
by Gina L. Diorio
Note: Yesterday marked the 149th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life – more commonly known as The Origin of Species. I wrote the following piece several years ago but believe this week in particular merits its reprint here.
Revival of the Fittest: The Reestablishment of Man
Humanity is in danger of extinction. Earth’s physical environment does not seek to destroy the human race; neither does any non-human species attempt to extinguish it. Rather, humanity presents a case in which, for the first time in history, an entire form of life seems bent upon its own destruction.
To the casual reader, this assertion is absurd. Surely, with the bustling cities of the world and the rising concerns of overpopulation, only an ill-informed individual would dare make the claim that humanity teeters on the edge of annihilation.
Yet, the extinction to which I refer should not be mistaken for that typically understood by the word; rather, I speak of the destruction that will unavoidably follow humanity’s abdication of its unique and superior position among living creatures.
Throughout all of recorded history, the stability of any society has existed only as long as that society’s laws and mores have been based on the principle that human life possesses inherent value far above all other created life. This principle, in the most ancient of days, spurred the hunter to sustain his life with no remorse for the lost breath of the prey. This belief, during incidents of holocaust and genocide, refused to allow the world to remain silent. And, this standard, through millennia of progress and change, upheld all long-standing societies and cultures.
Yet today, humankind’s unique position of dominion on the earth is under fierce attack, and the very survival of humanity hangs in the balance. Advocates dedicate tireless efforts to nearly every cause imaginable—preserving the rainforests, saving the whales, boycotting meat—yet, often the same voices that with one breath embrace such lofty goals with the next call for population control, abortion on demand, and “death with dignity”. In all of our striving to save the earth, are we sacrificing ourselves?
Some will argue that no ideological inconsistency exists between the preservation of the earth and all of its resources on the one hand and the surrender of human life on the other. Yet, is not the underlying belief of such a dichotomy the opinion that human life is of lesser—indeed, not even equal—value than other life? And if this be the case, then would not humanity have, by now, found a way to extinguish itself without any assistance? Charles Darwin’s widely-held “survival of the fittest” theory would indicate as much. If the failure of humanity to suffer extinction thus far is evidence that the “fittest” has, indeed, survived, why, then, do we now seek to destroy ourselves?
From ancient civilizations through the early modern era, the prevailing view of mankind rested upon the foundational principle found in the Biblical writings of Moses: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them … [and he gave them] dominion over … every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” (Gen. 1:27, 28b)
Understanding of this principle resulted in recognition of the truth that the earth and all of its resources are intended for the service of man and not the reverse. When mankind, however, in his post-modern intellectualism rejected this foundational truth, he, by default, embraced the philosophy that all life is equal and that humanity possesses no characteristic to distinguish it from other living creatures.
From this position, the move to elevating all non-human life to a place of importance above human was only natural. After all, had not humanity, and not whales, rainforests, or cattle, been responsible for all of the avoidable ills in the world, such as warfare, prejudice, and injustice? The only logical step, then, was for mankind to deny his superiority over all creation and to relegate himself to a position of servitude to higher, nobler life forms. In essence, man denied his creation in the Imago Dei, the image of God, and instead recreated himself into his own image.
The inevitable result was the abandonment of the belief that human life carries any inherent value greater than other life. Consequently, today human life is expendable. Of course, most of us would never openly admit this. Rather, we take great care to ensure the use of more pleasant terminology: “population control,” “death with dignity,” “selective reduction,” “choice.”
While man has held as sacred animals and plants, many breeds and types of which have naturally become extinct over time, he has forgotten himself. The time has come for mankind to restore to himself the knowledge of his inestimable value. The time has come for humanity to reclaim its place of dominion over creation. The time has come for mankind once again to recognize in himself the image of God. The very future of humanity is at stake. Yes, the very survival of the fittest hangs in the balance.
Gina L. Diorio, M.A. is a full-time freelance writer. Please visit her website at www.LibertyWritingSolutions.com.
“... why, then, do we now seek to destroy ourselves?”
Not all of us do seek to destroy our species, only the angry, unreasonable, and filled with self-guilt seek to do so.
Remember, research shows that liberalism is a mental disease. The least we can do is to help the liberals end their torment.
One argument that should always be carefully scrutinized is the assumption that mankind is somehow “powerful”.
I don’t mean so from the point of view of all the neat gizmos we can invent, but from the Tower of Babel point of view. That is, that we will build a tower that will reach unto heaven, and we shall be like gods, ourselves. Because we are so powerful.
Be it Dr. Frankenstein, who imagined that he “created” life, by reanimating dead tissue; or Al Gore and company, who think that by producing a fraction of a percent of a gas that itself only exists as a fraction of a percent of the atmosphere, that somehow mankind can push around forces that control the world’s temperature. Talk about a bacteria pushing around a flea, that is pushing around an elephant.
Truthfully, mankind’s greatest claim to fame is that we currently outnumber mice as the most common mammal on Earth. Beyond that, not so much.
And even from a religious point of view, stating that “Man is made in God’s image”, should be looked at from the same humble point of view that a drop of water is in your image, at least when it is reflecting you. It’s not saying much about how “person-like” a drop of water is.
But the point of the article was ironically, about how thinking of ourselves as important leads to villainy, which it shouldn’t, because we are better than that. No nod to the value of humbleness, here.
Right now, there is a good chance that as many as a billion people could be wiped out in short order by the Avian flu, if it emerges in an easily transmitted variety. Mighty and powerful mankind taken down a notch by a virus that isn’t technically complex enough to be a life form.
Ordinary plankton can raise sea surface temperatures by a few degrees over a wide area. And if a hurricane comes about, that could turn it from a Cat-3 to a Cat-5. Let’s see humans do that.
Many, many lifeforms are tremendously older than man, and will probably still be here after we are gone, or evolved.
This isn’t to say that mankind isn’t important. But it’s a big stretch to say that we are “powerful”. We do make some neat gizmos, though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.