Abstract
The process of biological evolution can be compared to the evolution of musical instruments. Because the evolution of those instruments stretched over millennia, no single mind could oversee it, nor, as far as we know, did any person at any time predict how musical instruments would develop. Despite this lack of a unifying mind to guide development, a philharmonic symphony orchestra is today a wonder to hear, especially when playing Mozart’s Symphony Number 41 (“Jupiter”) flawlessly. Obviously, there must have been an underlying logic that substituted for an actively guiding hand.
“Where shall I begin, please Your Majesty?” he asked. “Begin at the beginning,” the King said gravely, “and go until you come to the end; then stop.”
—Lewis Carroll
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland
All we physicists strive to do is to trace His lines after Him.
—Albert Einstein
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Encyclopedia of Evolution pp. 375–376.
Ibid., pp. 387–388.
A. I. Oparin, trans, by Sergius Morgulis, Origin of Life on Earth ( New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1953 ), p. 133.
Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1992, vol. 15, pp. 604–607.
The same does not seem to be the case for other musical instruments, probably because they are not as complex. Also, wind instruments self destruct from moisture after 80 years of use. Moreover, their design and tonal attributes have changed in the last 100 years so that even if preserved, old wind instruments can no longer be used by modern orchestras.
The Encyclopedia of Evolution (New York: Facts on File, 1990) makes no mention of Oparin, and the last issue of the 14th edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica (1973) briefly mentioned him only once. In the 15th edition, however, Oparin now rates a two-column article in the Micropaedia, and his work is cited in four other articles.
Ibid., p. 77.
Ibid., pp. 83–84.
Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1992, vol. 19, p. 714.
J. Travis, “Third Branch of Life Bears its Genes,” Science News, August 24, 1996, p. 110.
The Harper Dictionary of Modern Thought p. 917.
The New York Times, September 24, 1993, p. A10. Dr. Michael Grodin, head of the Ethics Committee at Boston University School of Medicine, summed up the case with the statement “technology has the life not the patient.” The only known ethicist to side with the mother was Dr. Robert M. Veatch, of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics at Georgetown University. He agreed that from a medical viewpoint, the baby’s life should not be prolonged, but nevertheless the mother had the right to decide otherwise.
THE INGENIOUS MIND OF NATURE
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1997 George M. Hall
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hall, G.M. (1997). Blueprint of Evolution. In: The Ingenious Mind of Nature. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-6020-7_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-6020-7_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-306-45571-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4899-6020-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive