Odd, how we feel when a long term goal is accomplished. For me, that was watching 2001: A Space Odyssey.
I first discovered this film back in school. After the exams, you gotta kill time somehow. Well, for me that meant the library. I discovered this coffee table sorta book, full of visions of how the future might be. Flying cars, giant laser beams, and all that jazz. That's where I first read about 2001: A Space Odyssey. I was hooked.
But when I finally saw the film a few days ago, I was intrigued instead by something else. This film asks obtuse questions about the essence of humanity and consciousness. But I was struck by what shapes our outlook of the world in the first place, and how fluid and dynamic that really is.
Case in point: Scientific concepts trickling down into the public domain and reshaping how we see ourselves and the world. Take for example the descent of man from apes. A concept now so rooted in the public imagination. Hardly the case even 50 years back.
So much has changed. Spiderman is now the result of genetic manipulation, not radiation. ditto with the Hulk. Genetics is the new unknown frontier. Everybody now knows what DNA is. You can have a scene like the Terminatrix performing real-time Genomic sequencing of John Connor's DNA, and everybody can understand what just happened. 20 years ago, could an average audience understand such a scene? 30 years ago? Hardly. It's not like sequencing is a new concept, it just wasn't a part of the public imagination.
Perhaps what I find most disconcerting is how half baked scientific ideas are being paraded in the public. I'll provide an example. As you may or may not know, I am currently working in the population genetics of North Indians, for which I've been analysing the DNA of North Indian men, looking for evidence of migration patterns. I discovered that I carry a genetic marker called M17, which is predominant in Central Asia, Iran, Russia, and Eastern Europe. It is sometimes ubiquitously called the Indo-Aryan marker due to its distribution. Based on its genetic signature, it is believed M17 probably appeared somewhere in the Ukraine region, and spread outwards. M17 is widespread in Iran and North Indian upper castes as well. Curious, I decided to look around for any mention of this marker in the lay media. Well, I was shocked, to say the least. It seems for quite some time now; this and other serious genetic work has been tossed around in the media. People with no understanding of genetics are grossly misinterpreting such work to push forward their own narrow minded agendas. Several articles quote M17 to show an Indo-centric view of the world, the Hindu right-wing notion that the Aryans came from India, and spread outwards. They quote bits from serious research work, and it all looks real convincing.
For that matter, I’ve seen many scientists with a very wrong notion of the basics of Genetics. Especially in a sensitive area such as population genetics, that can be explosive. Take for example the politics of Tamil Nadu. The Dravidian movement seeks to brand Brahmins as outsiders, alien exploiters plundering the innocent Dravidians. Half understood genetic evidence would only serve such bigots. But it’s happening. Even among my classmates, who represent the cream of Tamil Nadu society in terms of education, caste is a dirty secret. Everybody expects caste to come around and bite them on the ass. Caste politics is BIG here. So it’s best not to reveal your own caste affiliations, especially if you’re a Brahmin. I know this because as part of my work, I have to collect details about the person’s ancestry, including nativity, and sub castes. These details are things many people are not comfortable disclosing, even to me.
Funny, isn’t it? In just a few generations, we’ve gone from being proud of our ancestry, to being embarrassed by it. Just goes to show our notions of identity aren't as deep as we like to think.
6 comments:
Great blog. You should visit the U.S. The South in particular. Evolution isn't even taught in some schools. People have been quoted as saying "I don't believe in Evolution." No joke.
Haha... a Senior Manager in my firm (implying a highly educated, experienced professional who travels enough), in a conversation with me said boldly and with undeniable conviction - "I don't believe in Global Warming". I thought he was joking around - he wasn't. He was dead serious. I didn't even know where to begin.
As for identity -well your observations sounds like a cross between biology, sociology and anthropology. Being from Delhi, I'm sure you've noticed the feeling of superiority amongst individuals with money. (Genes don't even matter here). Then there are certain families of distinct backgrounds - who believe they are superior.
Ultimately, more than a superiority complex -its an inferiority complex. Some people do all in their power in an attempt to put themselves out on top. Others, succumb to its power and take the self-pity route. Nobody is content with who they are - and thats rather unfortunate. And it all boils down to what you said - rather than being proud... we find ourselves embarassed. THAT.. (if you read my lastest blog on Mann).. is a true tradgedy.
Oddly enough, just last week a classmate and I were discussing the Dover case, the first case brought against the teaching of Creationism.
When I first came to the university, I was surprised to discover many people didn’t believe in evolution; specifically, human evolution. People I had known to be rational in all other aspects refused to accept human evolution. Their response? That’s not what it says in the Bible. I paraphrase. How could a person be a postgrad in biology, and not believe in evolution? I heard some really god awful theories to disprove evolution. Out of respect for their faith, I keep my mouth shut.
As for money, oh yeah. It’s everywhere. There’s a big distinction between the noveau riche and the old moneyed. Everybody wants to show they have it, just not the same way.
This sorta brings to something I’ll post about later.
The only "reasonably" sound merging of the bible's story and evolution is when this devout christian co-worker of mine argued that he views Adam and Eve to be the first two humans. His point was that it doesn't deny evolution upto that day. His point was that the day that we stood up and were classified as Homo Sapien - the first ones - were Adam and Eve. Now that still leaves room for the whole - Eve is Adam's rib (which is kinda sick isn't it?) - he marries and screws his rib... ewww...
ironically didn't Marilyn Manson have his ribs removed so he can orally pleasure himself. Think about it...
(i apologize for this blasphemy on your blog).
I shall absolve this page of me -
The power of CHRIST COMPELLS ME!
Blasphemy = good. Blaspheme away.
Good point. A lot of rational people are trying to fit their personal religious beliefs into a more modern outlook of the world. Of course, it varies widely.
Even within my own field, there is a tendency to use terms like ‘Biological Adam” and “Biological Eve”. It’s a bit technical, so I won’t get into it. But the use of such terms tend to throw people off, which is unfortunate.
Some years back, the Late Pope John Paul II said that he believed that when ‘humans’ evolved from chimps; they were endowed with a soul, while theirs counterparts were not. Given the Church’s traditional stance on such things, it was a big step.
Yes well - i personally find plenty of flaws in christianity regardless.
Adam and Eve - first dude and dudette on the planet (ooh.. that rhymed a bit)... sorry.
So yeah - God said "Do whatever you want - just don't eat from that beautiful tree you see over there" (i.e. the tree of knowledge). WHY PUT THE GODDAMM TREE THERE IF YOU DIDN'T WANT HER TO EAT FROM IT!?
So right there is your first clue. Tree of knowledge and the apple imply "learning" - they imply everything that we have achieved as humankind to this date - to be a direct result of Eve plucking that apple and eating it.
Now, firstly, how did Eve know to listen to God and obey- if she hadn't eaten from the tree yet and thus had no knowledge? She didn't.
Moreover, what "convincing" did Lucifer really have to do to get her to eat? I mean how cunning did he really have to be to trick a twit (because she had no knowledge yet) into picking an apple and eating it? And you're son is supposed to conquer all if he makes it here. Yeah ok.
And finally, how could God punish Eve with "childbirth pain" for picking and apple that she knew (but really didn't know) to pick and eat? I mean - do you get mad at a baby when it drops a glass? (Baby = knaive cute little thing).
No you don't. But God did. Not only that but several decades later - he was like - my *creation* sucks - ima flood this joint. Noah - you are the best - build a boat and set sail with an orgy of animals - you'll make it right.
IMMEDIATELY we reach the main conundrum. God created Earth and everything on it. God is infallible. God is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. Oui? Oui...
so then how can God's creation - fail? How can God's "experiment" fail? Easy explanation - God can only create something imperfect because to create something perfect would be a replication of himself - sending the universe into a tumbling duality. But thats a discussion for another time.
So if god is all powerful, all-knowing, and omnipresent - then how did he not KNOW that (a) Eve would eat the apple, and if he did why did he still punish her? (b)How did he not KNOW that humankind would F*ck up, and if he did - why did he flood the earth so we could restart?
Fact is - we weren't going in the direction he wanted - which implies he didn't have power over our direction - which implies he's not all-powerful.
So what is it that you really fear?
I feel like these people ("must not teach evolution" people) are neanderthals... afraid of science... afraid of thunder and lightning. Guess what guys - we have explanations for these things now. Evolution is a FACT. Its not a story. Global warming - FACT and so on and so forth...
man i'm tired from all this typing.
Punching holes in Christian theology… well, that’s like taking candy from a baby. Or from Michael Jackson… who was handing it to a baby… wait, what were we talking about again?
You’ve raised several points, and I’d rather these points be addressed in a post, rather than buried in the comments page. As and when time permits, I will do so.
Post a Comment