In Progress

I kind of hate Darwinism. I hate the fact that legions of scientists have decided that the best way to explain anything is to give it a biological drive in the mating process or survival process or mothering process, as if these are the only reasons why humans or other animals do anything. There’s an article in The Economist talking about music, and someone wants to say that music exists to describe sexual fitness much in the same way that fancy plumage does for certain birds, etc.

But what about nonsexy music, which certainly exists in vast amounts? Lullabies for babies, annoying as hell nursery rhyme chants for children, folk songs, campfire songs, etc. Death masses. Hymns. The list is endless. It seems to me that music is just another way that people make meaning for themselves, create order out of seeming chaos, give voice to emotional states that require expression. Expressive activities are clearly very important to humans, and they go far beyond natural selection.

If anything, natural selection seems to be both an observable phenomon and physical order in the world, and also a way that humans make meaning and order out of chaos. Does natural selection function as an expressive act for scientists? Something to think about.

Posted on December 21st, 2008 by DeepthiW
Filed under: Participatory Culture, Uncategorized