What if human consciousness isn’t the end-all and be-all of Darwinism? What if we are all just pawns in corn’s clever strategy game, the ultimate prize of which is world domination? Author Michael Pollan asks us to see things from a plant’s-eye view — to consider the possibility that nature isn’t opposed to culture, that biochemistry rivals intellect as a survival tool. By merely shifting our perspective, he argues, we can heal the Earth. Who’s the more sophisticated species now?

Comments

  1. #1 Lorax
    February 15, 2008

    I would argue there are a plethora of bacterial species that are more sophisticated than a lot of relatively inconsequential multi-cellular mammals.

  2. #2 R N B
    February 16, 2008

    I am not sure that any single prokaryote should be considered more “sophisticated” than the complex amalgamations of complex cells that pass for most people’s common perception of “animals”. But in terms of numbers they have definitely done better than us. After all, in simple numbers, then the modern factory-fed chicken is probably the most successful bird in history. It’s just a more sophisticated argument than Douglas Adams’ suggestion that it’s the lab mice who really control human development.

  3. #3 Badger3k
    February 16, 2008

    What do you mean by “What if human consciousness isn’t the end-all and be-all of Darwinism? ” Evolutionary theory has no end-all or be-all, although that is a popular misconception. Is that what you are addressing – the misconception (or as I have not yet viewed this talk, is that what the speaker is getting at) ?

Current ye@r *