Scientist A: What you just stated further explains my theory. Man has developed a sense of survival based on his outside environment. Man evolved as a result of having an advantage of language and intelligence, so further evolution of ideas and behaviors such as the ones you just stated are pretty much inevitable. Evolution can account for the development of such behaviors because as man grows stronger as a physical human being and as a more intellectual being, his behaviors will reflect the growth. There is somehow an inborn instinct of survival and to do so, man will go to any lengths, including war and other violent activities. Adaptation and how to do so is not set in stone, so man will find many ways to acquire new knowledge of how to feel at home in his own world and to feel in control of his own world. The process of evolution does not stop at any place because man grows smarter and stronger every day. Back in the days of Cro-Magnon man, he had to survive based on physical existence. He killed when he needed to in order to protect himself and the ones closest to him and also as a provision. Today, man is surviving not only in a physical sense, but also emotionally and mentally. If he feels a threat has been made against him or to those closest to him, he will respond in a manner fit to the situation. If it be in the form of language, or of war, man will defend himself. Violence is not always the right solution to a problem, but since we humans were all once a part of the primate family, we have an inborn sense of survival of the fittest, and doing so usually requires violence. Animals cannot communicate with another species with words, but rather with actions. You don’t see cats talking to dogs, trying to sort out their differences. You see them chasing each other around the room, marking their territory, and resorting to violence if one breaches another’s personal space. Man is only following in his evolutionary path of survival and adapting it to his environment today for complete and satisfactory efficiency.

During Scientist A and Scientist B's debate over the theories of evolution, I believe that Scientist A would have replied to scientist B by stating the fact that he agrees with Scientist B about his theory of evolution and that everything can be explained through scientific laws. When Scientist B asks him how he would explain language, mind, self, and consciousness and how it can be formed through evolution, I believe that Scientist A would say that it is all a part of evolution. He would say this because he believes that since everything can be explained by scientific laws that govern matter in interaction, he would believe that it was just some sort of a complex chemical reaction that helps the human to adapt to their environment. Even though scientist B says that examples such as suicide, murder, joy, and modern medicine do not help you to adapt to your environment, Scientist A would say that he disagrees because all of these things have formed as the humans have lived their lives and that is how they chose to handle their situations. Therefore, they are adapting to their individual environment. Also, to Scientist B’s statement about technological violence and more people being killed in this century than any other century before, I think scientist A would agree. But, Scientist A would also believe that this is a very good thing good thing. Even though there have been many deaths due to things such as guns and machines, it has helped our culture develop into what it is today. We have been able to adapt to our surroundings and to those who are advancing along with us. Through the deaths we have had the capacity to understand all that we, as humans, are capable of doing, making, and conceiving technologically. This not only allows us to advance our culture, but it allows us to use our minds and expand them to a new capacity. These deaths have allowed us to overcome many problems we would have faced such as cancer and other medical sicknesses. Therefore, this whole idea goes back to the idea of adaptation. We are adapting to things that are thrown at us, ex. Cancer, by coming up with new ideas of how to overcome them. This is how we came to the idea of modern medicine. We, as humans, are expanding our minds to their greatest capacity in order to further adapt to our growing culture and our world.

This is how I believe Scientist A would answer Scientist B.

Scientist B, I feel that this concept of self that you speak of is just another example of my theory. Thinking on the concept of the self is a behavior that we have evolved just like any other behavior we exhibit for our survival in the world. Most animals that live and breed in societies have hierarchies. The may favor the young over the old, the strong over the sick. Every animal must find his place in this hierarchy. Human hierarchical systems are indeed complex, but they do exist. Humans favor the confident over the insecure, those who know themselves over those who are ill-prepared to define a niche in the system for themselves. These selves in the system of man help us delegate work and distribute resources. Any man has the capability to rebel against the system or re-define himself to better his position in the hierarchy, though not all succeed. A pauper can call himself a prince, but the prince will likely defend his high position in the system and his high view of himself to refute the pauper’s claim.
I disagree with your comment that it is fact that “with the appearance of man there also appeared for the first time in the Cosmos . . . language, mind, self, and consciousness.” We have no knowledge that the creation of man brought about these phenomena. Science is an amazing thing but when it comes to the science of the past, we are somewhat limited in what we can claim as absolute truth. There is little evidence to suggest that human beings were the first creatures that had a concept of self. There is even less to suggest that humans were the first to have language. All animals communicate with the world. We simply don’t have the knowledge to say one way or the other that humans were the first to have language.
Finally, sir, I feel that the disasters you speak of, the bombs the mass murder, the sex and Charles Manson are simply the random mutations that drive all evolution. In this case, these mutations (i.e. the mutation of Charles Manson’s self to cause him to exhibit erratic behavior) have affected the way humans operate in the world. A chain reaction, if you will.

Scientist A would probably reply:

The fact that humans have evolved differently than many other organisms does not inherently prove that some sort of "other" force manipulated our development. Plenty of simpler species show evolution of not only physical attributes, but behavioral ones. Many animals found relatively safe areas to spawn, and shaped their entire existence around the periodic travel to that point. My point is that the development of the human species - and all its consequences - is based on evolutionary forces every bit as much as the changing physical structures of other creatures. There are two important characteristics within this:

First, humans have developed pro-active behavior evolution habits. Rather than be satisfied with the current environmental situation and self-sustainability, humans seek assurance that reasonable future changes will be guarded against. An example is the technology advancement of our dwellings. The consistent improvement of human homes and structures has been steady over the course of history, and in general it can be attributed to the need to feel secure against the extremes of weather. In fact this is something that man is still struggling to accomplish in full, with even the sturdiest of structures falling to natural disasters. Yet, we still constantly attempt to improve our approaches to this, guarding against future possible disasters.

Another important point is that humans have developed evolutionary habits to guard against OTHER HUMANS as well as predators and the environment. This is very important because it helps explain why humans will often engage in actions that are not beneficial to the species as a whole. Most types of large-scale violence, for example, are either in reaction to perceived threats, or simply an extension of the requirement to insure the future of the person's group. Keep in mind that, as mentioned before, seeking to pro-actively improve one's current situation is a behavior that humans have developed over the ages. Thus, when combined, you can explain much of the counter-intuitive nature of the behavior of man as it has evolved.

Many of what you (Scientist B) have pointed out as aberrations that have happened due to changes in our modern society (supposed increase in violence for example) are not actually any different than what we have seen throughout history. However, the exponential growth of the population of humans on this space-limited planet will necessarily mean an increase in ALL types of interactions. More people, in a smaller space, will tend to interact more often and perhaps even more intensely. Ultimately, however, it is not due to a fundamental change within humans but to a change in the environment itself.

If scientist A had had enough time to answer scientist B’s questions then he would have said something like: “Although I can see where you are getting at, I cannot agree with you because I don’t believe that we are even discussing the same concept, while you talk about the mind and the development of self, we chose not to discuss them because, it needlessly complicates matters. You see, we are looking at data; things we can analyze with numbers, not because we are afraid to explore the vast regions of the mind, but because we believe that understanding of the world and ourselves can be reached, for our purposes, through quantitative data. Like the Greeks, we agree that art is pleasing to the self due to a ‘Golden Ratio’, which can be explained through geometry; while pleasure and rage can be explained through chemical interactions in response to a stimulus. Now this whole deal about self destruction can be approached in two ways. One, every single technological advance we are working on today is geared to help present and future generations, to protect or own offspring, Darwinism. Secondly, since just like our evolutionary ancestors, we seek to destroy anything or anyone who poses a threat to our community, this explains why we have wars with enemies. The world as we know it can be and is defined by our understanding of our sensory experience which unequivocally boils down to neurons and even further to atoms. We seek today, as we have ever since we have been human, to satisfy basic needs, I believe you’re familiar with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs? The point is that before we were not able to satisfy higher needs like self-actualization, but now due to technology we are able to be a part of social and self-esteem interactions because of scientists like you and me. If you were uncomfortable with being impartial to emotions, that in the end cloud your judgment, you should have gotten a doctorate in philosophy instead.” Unfortunately, Scientist A was unnecessarily harsh at the end of his response because he is jealous of Scientist B because he didn’t get a research position at the university where Scientist B graduated from.

While it is true that man is the first species of creature to reach such a high level of sophistication that we are able to develop such new and diverse things varying from the atomic bomb to Beethoven’s 5 the way that we came to be a species capable of innovations like these was the same path that has lead all other creatures to the state that they are in presently. We humans just like all other animals started out as primitive organisms and have evolved slowly alongside the rest of the cosmos through the survival of the fittest and selecting the traits that are best adapted to survival. The only difference being the level of evolution we have achieved. While all other creatures (seemingly) live at a survival level we have moved beyond that, where the most pressing issue that is always at hand is not merely if we are going to make it another day but what we are going to do with that day. Being the top of the food chain comes with certain perks, namely it is easy to stay at the top and doesn’t require the same innovations to merely not die out. Having made it to the top of the food chain, evolving in such a way that we can comfortably live without constant fear of another predator trying to make a snack at us, we are able to turn our attention to other pursuits. Just like if you examine the way that the first settlements of humans develop; at first just surviving at a subsistence level (in hunter-gatherer) where they are almost solely concerned with where or how they are going to get their next meal, then, whenever they discover and master agriculture they then have more free time to focus on things besides dinner and can then explore different possibilities in life. In these first tribes there still is not the range of possibilities open to most people these days; their “free time” was spent on things like learning to weave and make clothes or more permanent homes, but the principle is the same and this free time allowed them to have specialized workers who are no longer involved in finding food at all but have time to explore new avenues of study even more. While this is a somewhat abstract example to how people and animals differ, the principle is the same, once you have more free time to think beyond the survival instinct you have a chance to explore more of the world around you and expand your horizons in many ways leading humans to have the range of intellect that we have today. Whether this has led to good results, the expanded emotional level we enjoy over the animals, or bad ones like the nuclear bomb or the holocaust, the fundamental reason that made it possible for humans to have developed to such an advanced state is a natural one, merely following evolution on its due course.

Scientist A would reply:

And how does that negate my point? I have said that we are creatures of evolution. We humans have evolved from animals and I only listed off three examples of the changes that took place: opposable thumbs, the ability to speak and have language, and the cortex. Like I said, these are only three examples. You can also say that we have evolved this behavior that you speak of. We are the first to have this sort of behavior. Composing music, warfare, heroism, and other such behaviors have been observed to not be present in other animals. This is another facet of humans to which we have evolved into. Would it not stand to reason that nature is not done with its evolutionary process of our intelligence?

The first birds hardly looked like the birds we see today and most likely did not fly as high or as efficiently, but they were the first to develop flight. The things you have mentioned might not make sense now, but what about a million years from now? Aggression toward our fellow man could be wiped out by nature itself. Music and literature could evolve to become the foundations of our society in the future. Peace could reign throughout the land. But there is no way to tell this now. The birds of the past didn’t know they would evolve into hawks and eagles, nature’s ultimate predator from the sky.

Society today is a product of our behaviors and thoughts and as we are still evolving, society is as well. Looking at history, we can see a distinct change to the nature of social behavior and governments and religion as well. Yes, there have been some bad spots, like wars and the concept of social stigma. Evolution is not a hundred percent accurate all of the time. We have an example of that in our very bodies. The appendix is a useless thing on our intestines. All is does is make us sick, and then only if it gets infected, just like all tissue in our bodies. Over the millennia, the appendix evolved from something we needed, but now do not, if that’s even the case at all. We do not know if there was a use to the appendix. If it had once been malign, then evolution took away its mistake and made it a dormant thing in our bodies. Eventually, the mistake will be erased forever as humans evolve all the more. The same will happen to our thought processes, how we think, and the way we think. Our behavior now is just evolution testing to see what it can do to help us survive even better in the world today.

Given the vastness of the Universe and the huge span of time for which it has existed and will continue to exist, and given the functionally infinite number of possible combinations of cosmic strings into quantum particles, into quarks, into electrons, protons, and neutrons, into atoms, into molecules, into self-replicating macromolecules, it is inevitable that there are at least a trillion suns like our own, and at least billions of small rocky planets like our own, millions of which are able to support water and retain an atmosphere like our own, thousands of which experience a sequence of events that creates organic compounds that leverage gases vented from the core as fuel with which to replicate themselves into more complex sets of compounds, and at least one on which those compounds, rather than be destroyed by a random tidal wave or volcanic event, flourished and spread around the planet, becoming more sophisticated, more efficient, and more functional, until such time that a creature arises that has the ability to walk, to have an industry of tools, and to possess language. The development of any particular species is thus statistically impossible to rule out, and the existence of ours is empically proven.

You argue that all the peculiarities of human life and culture cannot possibly arise from such a sequence of events because they have nothing to do with adapting to an environment. You forget that evolution is not a directed process, that traits can arise and persist even when they are not directly beneficial to the survival of the species. Genetic mutation is random- the only direction applied to it happens when it either increases or decreases the survival of individuals possessing the mutated trait. In humans, the psychological process produces many behaviors, such as love and art and hate and war and literature and all the rest of our “train of disasters and triumphs” that you celebrate as being so unique. I have explained already how it is possible, or even inevitable, that this particular sequence of events occurs. It is inevitable that humanity as we know it will cease to exist in the future; either we will replace ourselves with something different, or our tendencies towards violence that we have so long attempted to manage with society and governance will lead to our self-destruction. And across the entire Universe, it’s inevitable that both of these will happen at some point in space and time.

If scientist A were to reply to scientist B's question, he would say something like: "Very well. You are entitled to your own beliefs, but you are missing the obvious existence of the proof evolutionary theory in many of the circumstances you listed. Some others, I will agree, are out of the ordinary and do not reinforce the idea that all functions of the human body formed in response to a changing environment, thus making him fitter for survival. For example, can you argue that ability to engage in technological warfare, experience a limitless range of emotions, compose masterpieces, and develop ways to improve quality of life do not instantly place humans above all other mammals in terms of fitness? Obviously, our brains have evolved in such a way to help us improve the likelihood of reproducing as the world keeps changing around us. Child abuse, though cruel and horrifying to humans, happens in the animal kingdom quite frequently. A mother's detection of weakness in her young sometimes leads to not only abuse, but infanticide. Perhaps a primitive instinct in the human brain is an explanation for this atrocity. Suicide can be simply explained as a subconscious response of an individual to his or her own lack of fitness for survival, thus resulting in self extermination so that the more adaptable members of society will continue to multiply without the hindrance of these weak individuals. In addition to this, the fact that humans provide loving care for the genetically malformed only reinforces how evolved our thinking is in comparison to every other organism that inhabits the earth. Other mammals do not possess the ability to reason and place themselves hypothetically in another's shoes. Our ability to do this enables other, more inferior (as far as survival is concerned) individuals to be cared for and kept alive by the rest of the group for their own sake only. Few other animals do this, if any. As far as experimental and florid sexual behavior that does not contribute to reproduction, I disagree that it is completely unimportant to the fitness of the species. A heightened sense of self, pleasure, and physical strength may result from these behaviors. Can you argue that a confident and perhaps more sexually desirable person would not fare better than a timid and sexually inhibited one? Perhaps you can, but that is your opinion. (Rabbi enters)

Since Scientist A believes that everything can be explained by the scientific laws that govern matter in interaction, he would say that what Scientist B stated was included in A's belief. Humans evolved farther than primates because our higher-level thinking brains can react to different stimuli in more multidimensional ways. Evolution is not so cut and dry. It is not just the jump from one form of a certain species to an altered form via genetic mutation. There are intermediate steps in the transformation which can stem from the species' sociology. For example, a society of a certain species that is exposed to widespread murder could change the way they eat, where they seek shelter, how they think, etc. Basically, the occurence of widespread murder affects the species' environment, which in turn could affect the ways that that species must genetically mutate to survive. The "train of disasters" that Scientist B is referring to is a form of social mutation on a micro level, but genetic mutation on a macro level. Scientist B says that these things do not have anything to do with reproduction or survival, but they do. Try reproducing or surviving when, for instance, a plague is sweeping the globe. Could be pretty challenging. Things like modern medicine help to combat the thinning of a population and actually make a population grow -- something that would not have happened otherwise. People would live long enough to produce babies who would also live long enough to produce. Again, this could affect evolution in the sense that people would have to evolve, perhaps genetically, to be able to survive in a crowded planet. But, when trying to explain how things like language, sense of self, and consciousness came about, it is a bit different. Those are not specifically human constructs, but they can also be abstractly translated to non-human creatures as well. Other scientists have found that whales have a language -- they even have different languages like how humans speak English, Spanish, and French. They found that whales from different bodies of water around the globe sing in different patterns. Bee dancing, in its own right, is a type of language. As for consciousness and sense of self, there is no possible way to verify that non-humans do not possess them.

Scientist A would think for a moment, bewildered by his colleague’s strong discontent for humanity, and reply in a logical, calm manner.

“I understand your point of view good sir, but I believe it is unfair to just point out the negatives and oddities in humanity. True, in the past century alone we have killed more of our own kind than the rest of our existence combined, but look at all of the wonderful advances that humanity has made. We’ve created new ways to preserve life as well as enhance it to its fullest. Yes, we have adapted to our environment, and use our surroundings daily for our benefit, whether it's the automobile, plastics, and medicine. That’s essentially what humans, as well as all organisms do. They strive for advancement and change. Evolution is a wonderful gift that we were blessed with. And somehow, we were lucky enough to be it’s poster child. Society cannot endure a constant world. That explains your recent changes in human sexuality and violence, but that isn’t to say that it just increases to a point where society is consumed by a world filled with non-reproductive sex and violence. An evolving society will yield an exploration into previously unexplored territories of life left by the previous generation.

And you don’t know for a fact that we’re all alone in these huge cosmos, and you are certainly inaccurate in saying that humans are the only ones with language, consciousness, and a mind. Animals are very capable of thought as well and can be at war with themselves, and this once again can entirely be explained by science. Like I said earlier, humanity is evolution’s poster child and we like all animals war against each our selves. Except we do it with different means.

Anything, can truly be interpreted in a scientific manner, from religion being a systemic belief to encourage order in society, to the birth of a frog. We are at an age where there is not much left to not understand. We are aware of it all, except for one sole question. Why are we truly here? What is the purpose of our existence? Perhaps science cannot answer this question, but it can answer our origins, and that's more than good enough for me.”

The conversation would have continued with scientist A responded to the other scientist’s argument which as follows. “The language, mind, self and conscious are still justifications that man as evolved from something that we consider primitive. Man didn’t evolve over night and had the ability to communicate to others immediately, but it did take place over a long period time. After reaching modern man’s evolutionary stage, you say man stopped adapting to the environment, but I bring to facts that man evolved in his intellect by making new technologies to further the evolution process. Man cannot exist in space by any means but with modern technology man is able to push boundaries that can only be achieve through the understanding of the evolution of human technology.”
“The development of human emotions is yet another sign of human evolution in a more accelerated sense of the meaning. Depression, madness, and joy are all result of humans reacting to their environments. There are chemicals inside of us that inform us when we are happy or sad in any particular situation. The murders, rapers, and the others that we consider to be evil or demoniac are unfortunately products of human beings reacting to their environments or a chemical imbalance that makes the individuals prevalent to violence or sexual deviance. Usually humans who commit acts of violence on their fellow humans have often been victimized by that very same treatment in the past. The human learned to adapt by being more violent to prevent themselves from being victimized again. It’s almost a behavioral evolution that a human would take to better themselves from experiences from the past but unfortunately the victim becomes the victimizer and continues the violence. Humans are creatures of the earth and we have evolved from it. If we are able to catagorize fellow creatures of this earth into periods, species, and scientific names, why shouldn’t we do that to ourselves? We have seen animals adapt over time to their environments whether it is created in nature or by man. Don’t birds build nests in the areas they find the most suitable whether it is a tree branch, or the ledge of a New York skyscraper? Animals continue to evolve and so do man. People behave differently all across the world based on their environments.”

If the conversation between the two scientists, scientist A and scientist B, would have continued, scientist A would have responded to scientist B by saying "Yes indeedy. Your point does not negate mine, but in fact reaffirms it. Your argument still points back to the fact that all phenomena taking place in the Cosmos is explained by those laws of science that govern matter in interaction. Our interactions still affect one another and the rest of the Cosmos for that matter. Have you ever seen Butterfly Effect? If you haven't, you should because the movie is brilliant. Check it out and then you will know more of what I mean when trying to make my point.
Today, we are going further than just physical survival. We are now dealing on an emotional and psychological level of existence in which we are taking into account emotion, perception, and motivation (among other factors), along with the physical realm of adjustment and adaptation. The process of evolution is a constant progression- perhaps we have evolved to our utmost physically. The name of the game is still "survival of the fittest." Perhaps only the most technological--as you mentioned--are more outfitted for survival than the lesser technological.
What we are now seeing in society is not so much just adapting to the physical environment but instead, we are seeing social selection in which those who are not able to rise above the pains of living in society (suicide, madness, murder) cease to exist and reproduce. Chemical imbalances (let’s say for example, depression leading to suicide) have become today's failed version of the opposable thumb, where "adaptation" does not enable the species to live, but leads to his eventual death.
We are not a mere creature of science but in fact ARE science at work...science in all its glory. Chemical reactions working together and interacting with one another to weed out those who can’t take the heat. We are the best that has ever been in the evolution time line, better than all we have ever known. And every human being finds himself in this state of striving to figure out how to deal with something (life) he was never asked to live or be thrown in to.

If the two scientists were able to continue their conversation, Scientist A would have responded by again stating that all phenomena Scientist B just explained are explained by scientific laws governing manner in interaction. Language, mind, self, and consciousness, he would say, do not exist as tangible, scientific fact. These are, on the other hand, merely fictitious constructions that man has created of himself, in a feeble attempt to explain why he is here and who he is. Suicide, he would explain, stems from feelings of unworthiness or depression, which are both caused by chemical reactions firing in the brain, not the mind, of a human being. The same goes for joy, madness, or love - and the same leads to murder, heroism, and the discovery of medicine. Man has evolved, Scientist A would go on, with physical evidence to prove it. Man comes from organisms with no mind, soul, or demoniac spirit. Man DOES, however, come from organisms with brains, skin, eyes, and other physical characteristics. So what could account for one’s feelings of having language and being mindful? It’s just man, using his more highly advanced brain, to try to explain what is going on. It’s a heroic attempt, Scientist A would say, but a wrong one, because man is just as soul-less and mindless as he is primitive and ordinary. Man participates in florid sexual behavior that has nothing to do with reproduction of the species because his body tells him to do so. Man feels, man has hormones, pheromones, and other biological nuances that make him act sexual. And because man is still very primitive, as far as obeying his own signals, he satisfies himself, with no regards to a greater good or need. Human beings are still evolving and becoming more intelligent, he would go on, and because of this, mankind is able to see that we are creatures of science, and at the same time, we can manipulate this very science. Man only does what chemicals inside his body tell him to do, nothing more and nothing less. He is no more special than a deer, a bug, a star, or a red blood cell.

Scientist A: Everything you have described behaves in strict accord with the laws of science – specifically, the laws of entropy: the potential energy of any system, if left unchecked, is expended as the system decays into its lowest energy state. For example, a gas under pressure in a bottle rapidly expands and dissipates into the atmosphere when the cap is removed from the bottle. In fact, many of the things you observed to be unscientific (“organized warfare. . .suicide, joy, madness, murder, heroism, modern medicine”) are the modern man’s “ordered system” decaying to its lowest energy state, exactly the way science would predict it to occur (Percy 197). As society becomes more open to new ideas, man’s shackles are further removed. He is challenged on a daily basis to push against the barriers of the prior generation’s world. Each new generation of men is born with certain adaptations (or perhaps, mutations) that give them the freedom to find new ways to express their intellect, emotions and physical ability. Each subsequent generation improves upon the technology of the last. Each subsequent generation expands the scope of free thought, free expression and tolerance of the last. And each generation’s medical advances and improvements in understanding nutrition and physical fitness exceed the last. Sometimes this “growth” merely results in each new generation outdoing the last in modern comforts and amenities, making man’s experience in the world more enjoyable and less boring – satisfying his intellect and emotional desire. Sometimes technological advances are exploited for the darker side - weapons that tempt the creator to test his intellect and his physical superiority in war. Sometimes this “expansion” merely provides for free physiological release such as sexual behaviors and altered states of [drug-induced] consciousness. Whatever the results, the behavior of man in the free expression of his intellect in the form of invention, his violence in the form of war (usually justified in some intellectual fashion to make it acceptable to his constituents), and his sexuality in the form of purely erotic fulfillment (as opposed to serve the purpose of procreation) is the scientifically predictable outcome of an increasingly free and unrestrained society.