In Daniel Gilbert’s 2006 book Stumbling on Happiness (page 104-105 in the hardback version) he has this to say about distance.
About fifty years ago a Pygmy named Kenge took his first trip out of the dense, tropical forests of Africa and onto the open plains in the company of an anthropologist. Buffalo appeared in the distance — small black specks against a bleached sky — and the pygmy surveyed them curiously. Finally he turned to the anthropologist and asked what kind of insects they were. “When I told Kenge that the insects were buffalo, he roared with laughter and tole me not to tell such stupid lies.” The anthropologist wasn’t stupid and he hadn’t lied. Rather, because Kenge had lived his entire life in a dense jungle that offered not views of the horizon, he had failed to learn what most of us take for granted, namely, that things look different when they are far away.
Which is just to prep for the main point I’ve taken away from this.
Just as objects that are near to us in space appear to be more detailed than those that are far away, so do events that are near to us in time. Whereas the near future is finely detailed, the far future is blurry and smooth.
This seems to be a route to discussion of evolutionary theory, and how some people (myself 5 years ago included) have a hard time grasping the concepts. The articles that really gave me a sense of understanding, turned on the light-bulb over my head as it were, in regards to evolution were Rob at Karmatics piece on evolution and the wisdom of crowds and his follow-up pieces.
Conventional wisdom suggests that the primary reason why so many people do not accept Darwin’s theory of evolution is that they find it threatening to their religious beliefs. There is no question that religion is a big part of the reason behind the large number of people who reject evolution. But I am convinced that just as often, the cause and effect is reversed: people hold onto their fundamentalist religious beliefs because evolution by natural selection — the strongest argument against an Old Testament-type creator — is so counter-intuitive to so many.
The idea I’m trying to tie together here is that evolution is counter-intuitive to so many of us because of the way our brains work. Items nearer to us in time have detail and “make sense” whereas things in the distant future and past are blurry and less easy to understand. It is easier and more comforting to us to think things in the distant past were handled by the “hand of God” a few thousand years ago, than it is to try and think of the detailed steps necessary to turn us from pond scum into Paris Hilton (and when you put it that way, have we really evolved that much?).
In the same vein of thought, it is necessary to have a much higher understanding of the theory of evolution or general relativity to think in cosmological or evolutionary terms than most people have a need for in their every day lives. It was fairly easy to explain and demonstrate to the “average joe” most of the scientific understanding prior to 1850. That information was also more practically useful for improving every day life, there was real benefit for a sailor or farmer in understanding the basics of planetary and celestial movements. There is less practical use for evolutionary theory for the guy who is framing up my house, or fixing my car. Likewise, my dental hygienist doesn’t need to understand the cosmological constant or how we calculate distances from stars to get my teeth clean.
For some people there is a “let the scientists tell me what’s going on” mentality, but those people are making the same choice as the “let the religious leaders tell me what to do” group is. I’m not sure that it is in our own best interests, as individuals, to understand these things. For most people, will it make them happier or bring more joy to their life if they understand how these things work? I know for myself, and many others, the knowledge and learning are their own rewards, but I’m not sure that is a universal truth. I am a bit of a nerd after all.
Post a Comment