Pharyngula

Pharyngula has moved to http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/

Sunday, April 10, 2005

The proper reverence due those who have gone before

Some people might think I'm a rather morbid fellow. Years ago, when I was an undergraduate lackey at the University of Washington and working at the med school, there, I made a wonderful discovery one lunch hour: a bone room. Tucked away in an odd corner of the building was a room full of shelves stacked with cardboard boxes, each one containing the bones of some individual who'd left their remains to science. They'd been thoroughly cleaned and disarticulated, and many had parts sawed apart so you could peer into the sinuses or the hollow spaces for marrow or poke around in the caverns of the cranium. It became my favorite quiet, private place. I could putter about reassembling someone, or just contemplate some scrap of bone for a Yorick moment.

Look at a humerus, for instance. It's elegant. You can see the traces of the muscle insertions that worked it in life, and its entire form is a product of the combination of a general genetic specification and a detailed, day-to-day remodeling response to the forces the individual applied to it. A pelvis or vertebra are sculptures, intricate and odd. And a skull is a personal relic, a last vestige of a face someone knew well and loved without knowing all the wonderful knobs and seams and hollows buried under the flesh.

That's another thing; a bone isn't just beautiful operational engineering, it's a trace of a person. It's a melancholy memento of all that's been lost…here is this human being who struggled and loved and dreamed and hurt for sixty years, and all that I had of her was a few exquisitely patterned swirls of hydroxyapatite. So much was gone, so much lost, and that's the fate of all of us—all it takes is a few generations for all personal memory to fade away, and all that's left is abstractions. For most of us, there won't even be bits of dry bone in a box in a forgotten room, we'll be ash and slime, our existence unremembered.

Maybe, though, while we are personally unacknowledged, there will be some trace left in the genes of several times great grandchildren, or in a few words preserved in a library, or in some tiny nudge we've given history. That's all I aim for, that I can sow a seed that will in turn sow a seed that will sow a seed that…and so it goes. That's enough.

I am not a religious person by any means (that is a bit of an understatement), but I can feel something of the same reverence for the Bible that I do for a piece of bone. It's a record, spotty and incomplete and flawed, of human lives, that leaves out far more than it includes. It's not as pretty as a bone, but then it is representative of some of the ugliness of human history, as well as of some of the poetry. I can appreciate it as a slice of a few thousand years of the events and beliefs of one fairly influential tribe of people. There are a lot of lives and time, mostly unmentioned, bound up in that book.

I want to try something, though, with the intent of getting a point about the history of humanity across. Let me reduce the Bible to an icon, a few pixels to stand for the whole thing, here:

Imagine that is a Bible sitting on a shelf. My tiny black bar of pixels is a placeholder to represent everything in it, not to minimize it; if you have a grand view of the Bible's contents, that's fine, those few pixels should then conjure up your memory of historic events and aspirations and people who loved and raised families and created art and fought for what they believed in. And for those of us with less romantic visions of the Bible, it represents thousands of years of war and folly and pain and loss. No matter what, it's a big thing, a huge thing, and I've reduced it to a cartoon of the spine of a black-bound book for convenience. Just for now, keep in mind that it stands for 2000 years and the lives of hundreds of thousands or millions of people.

ancient relic

Here's another representation. That picture to the left is one of the Laetoli footprints. Once upon a time in East Africa, there was a volcanic eruption that deposited a coat of fine-grained ash on the landscape, which was then wetted by rain to form a vast sheet like firm cement over everything in the region. Two, maybe three, people walked across the sheet, leaving their footprints behind in a material that would then harden in the sun, preserving their trail. We don't know anything about who they were, where they were coming from, or where they were going. We can imagine; they were walking together, one person larger than the other (a man and a woman? A woman and a child?), in a barren landscape wrecked by the volcano. This was certainly a life-changing tragedy, a catastrophe that upset everything they hoped for. They were living through a disaster of Biblical proportions, and all we have left is a few lonely footprints, no other record of their life or their struggles remains.

These people were our very distant ancestors, small-brained and lightly boned, but with a human posture. They were probably Australopithecus afarensis, and this earthshaking event occurred 3.6 million years ago. It may be presumptuous to call them "people", "man", or "woman", since they aren't classified as human, but still…from what we know of our closest living relatives, the chimpanzees, they certainly cared and felt and thought, and are somewhere closer still to us in our family tree, and I'll recognize that they at least had something close to human feelings.

ancient relic

Here's another icon, a few bits of bone from another australopithecine, Lucy. Like the relics in those cardboard boxes from the bone room, we know little about Lucy the thinking, acting, living being. She was a small female, less than four feet tall, living in old Africa. We can imagine that she had family, she lived in a group or tribe, she foraged, she had hungry days and full days, she courted or was courted, she had moments of happiness and moments of grief. All of the things she thought most important are gone and lost to knowledge, and all we have now are these few bones. When I hold the femur of a man dead 50 years, I can feel the sorrow of a life lost to me; how much more reverence should we feel for these bones of a person from a world gone 3.2 million years?

And look at how much is lost. Between the time of the couple fleeing across a field of volcanic ash and poor dead Lucy lies 400,000 years. If a Bible is a record of the struggle of a people for 2,000 years, we'd need 200 Bibles to tell us the tale of just this one obscure, remote branch of our lineage.

Two hundred Bibles that were never written, books that even had they existed would be gone now. There was a vast history of events reduced now to nothing but a few footprints and a scattering of bones.

ancient relic

Here's one more tragedy (what's left to us is a record of the dead, and it's hard to avoid the sense that human history is one long tragedy. Joy is rarely preserved). The picture to the left is the bones of Nariokotome boy, another skeleton from Africa, this time of a pre-teen Homo erectus. We can refer to these as human now, with no worry of picky quibbles that these are mere animal remains. These bones also disturb my imagination even more. I'm a father; these are the bones of a young man, maybe 12 years old, and he's tall and strong. In those dangerous days, I can picture the parents of such a robust boy feeling relief; he's well past those risky years of high mortality, when one would have been reluctant to become attached to an infant likely to be carried away by some disease or brief famine. Here instead is a vigorous young fellow on the edge of adulthood, someone to carry on the line, someone to help on the hunt, someone to be proud of, and suddenly, he's dead.

You wonder—did his mother weep over him?

Nariokotome boy died 1.6 million years ago. Between Lucy and this lost son, how many Eves weeping over dead Abels where there? Enough to fill 800 Bibles.

Now here's the shocking thing; Nariokotome boy only takes us halfway from Lucy to the modern day. We need 800 more books in this hypothetical lost library of humankind.

Remember, each black bar is an icon representing a long, elaborate book on the scale of the Bible, which in turn is only a small representative subset of the human experience over a span of time. So much has been lost to us, and those few scraps we do have must stand in proxy for such a burden of history.

And, you know, there are people now who claim that one book is sufficient, that it is complete, that it is enough to explain who we are and where we came from.

Strangely enough, these are the same people who claim to be "spiritual". To me, though, they are the ahistorical, unthinking ones who fail to offer the proper reverence due those who have gone before.


(crossposted to the American Street)


Trackback url: http://pharyngula.org/index/trackback/2149/1OU1KH5T/

Comments:
#21522: — 04/11  at  12:44 AM
Eeensy-weensy, teensy-tiny quibble: unless you're counting the New Testament only (and I don't see why you would), you should probably date the Bible back to the Old Testament, which is closer to 6,000-7,000 years old.

Still a miniscule drop in the bucket in the range of time we're talking about, of course. I have a very entertaining book on my shelf called Every Goy's Guide to Common Jewish Expressions where the author explains that the word for unkosher/unclean foods, treyf, literally means, "torn from the flesh of a living animal."

The author, Arthur Naiman, says, "Imagine a society where you had to tell people to kill animals before eating them and you get some idea of how old Judaism is."

And yet even that time is almost close enough to touch, in terms of relative time.



#21523: — 04/11  at  12:53 AM
unless you're counting the New Testament only (and I don't see why you would), you should probably date the Bible back to the Old Testament, which is closer to 6,000-7,000 years old.

No, the Old Testament was written between about 1,000 B.C. and about 200 A.D.



#21525: — 04/11  at  01:01 AM
Thanks, Alon -- I was going by the date of the Jewish calendar, which currently says it's the year 5765. So they, at least, claim 6,000 years, even if not for the actual book.

Though now I think I'm getting myself all confused. I should say for the record that I'm not Jewish, though my niece and nephew are.



#21528: — 04/11  at  03:13 AM
I think that the idea is that the Old Testament was known to be first committed to parchment no earlier than 1000 BCE, but it claims to depict events in the course of the history of Israel that happened around 4000 BCE or so.

Not that I'd know myself - I haven't really paid much attention to Mesopotamian archaeology.



#21529: — 04/11  at  03:14 AM
This is a brilliant piece of writing - thanks PZ.



#21533: bitchphd — 04/11  at  05:17 AM
That's beautiful.



#21540: Alon Levy — 04/11  at  08:58 AM
Apart from the long list of begats in Genesis 5, which you can consider a Prologue, the Old Testament covers the period roughly from 1900 B.C. to 600 B.C. If memory serves, the Three Patriarchs supposedly lived in 1700 B.C.



#21544: — 04/11  at  09:26 AM
A Tear for Australopithecus

On the edge of
Lake Turkana,
where the forest
abruptly ends -

You took the
first steps-
to feel the
Open wind.

Within your world
of beauty
and instinct,
the Savannah
beckoning -

The hand of
your companion,
leads you back
to your clan.

The food and
shelter
don't matter now,
a child is forever lost -
taken from your hand.

Your pain
runs deep,
And teaches -
while night is closing
In .

GlennAllen



#21547: dtl — 04/11  at  10:22 AM
A truly wonderful post. It really needs to be seen by many more poeple.



#21571: Maureen Lycaon — 04/11  at  01:11 PM
I've been reading Pharyngula for some time, but now I have to comment. This is beautiful, and profound. Thank you.



#21581: Rana — 04/11  at  02:03 PM
Thank you. I'm moved.



#21590: Orla — 04/11  at  03:23 PM
This is a perfect example of how blogging is humanity's hope for harnessing reality! Namaste.



#21616: — 04/11  at  05:50 PM
"Unrecorded, unrenowned,
     Men from whom my ways begin,
Here I know you by your ground
     But I know you not within―
There is silence, there survives
Not a moment of your lives."

from "Forefathers", by Edmund Blunden

Thanks.



's avatar #21621: senoritafish — 04/11  at  07:04 PM
That was truly beautiful and moving. Thank you.



#21628: — 04/11  at  07:36 PM
Fantastic!



#21639: John Wilkins — 04/11  at  08:32 PM
A pixel is worth a thousand words, except when PZ writes... the bastard. Why can't I write like that?

John S. Wilkins : evolvethought.blogspot.com



#21646: Dr Zen — 04/11  at  09:31 PM
This is what I say about this essay in my Carnival of the Vanities roundup:

I'm a regular reader of Pharyngula and for me, it's up there as one of the great blogs. PZ Myers is a voice of reason in a world occasionally mad, a staunch defender of science and what it means to us. But this essay about the depth of our shared human experience is something else. Bloggetry of a level far beyond the mundane stuff that fills this carnival. A post to be proud of. A piece of compelling beauty. Read it! If this doesn't get the hairs on the back of your neck erect, you're beyond help.



#21648: — 04/11  at  09:45 PM
This one's a keeper.



#21658: — 04/12  at  06:56 AM
I hate to rock the boat here, but although that was a thoughtful essay, and expressed quite elegantly the idea that the history we know of is only a small part of human history. However, it seems to imply that this makes the Bible somehow less relevant. A secular/humanist view of the world is fine by me, but is it necessary to cast doubt on the relevance of the Bible in order to add meaning to one's own view?
For those who accept human evolution and creation at the same time (an evolving creation), these thoughts do nothing to diminish the value or truth of the Bible, which it is not necessary to interpret literally. I am sure God found other ways of communicating with humanity before the written word.



's avatar #21662: Virge — 04/12  at  08:04 AM
PZ's essay does nothing to "make the Bible less relevant" or "diminish the value or the truth of the Bible". The fact that his description of it fails to unduly elevate it and revere it as a religious person would, is no criticism of his essay.

Just being able to construct an interpretation of the Bible that harmonizes with evolution doesn't lend extra credence to the Bible.



#21664: Thomas Nephew — 04/12  at  08:52 AM
I'll also add a note of discord to this. Were the Bible merely a historical volume, Mr. Myers' thoughts would be squarely on target. However, it aims to be much more, and arguably succeeds: it's a description of coming to moral self-awareness, moral laws, and to the primacy of love and mercy. It seems unduly reductionist to have the time span it covers serve as a proxy for its contents.

I think I share Mr. Myers' awe of the world and life as it is, and I hold no brief for people who insist on inflicting narrow, faith-based versions of reality on the rest of us. But I think this particular effort to quantify the Bible's share of human wisdom founders on a view of its meaning that is too narrow.



's avatar #21665: Virge — 04/12  at  09:21 AM
Thomas Nephew says:
However, it aims to be much more...

Your unquestioned assumptions are clear. Referring to a collection of writings by various writers as "it" and giving it a singular voice shows that you're attributing more to the Bible than it deserves. You're wanting PZ to inflict your faith-based version of reality on his readers.



's avatar #21669: PZ Myers — 04/12  at  10:41 AM
As I said in the essay, you are free to assume as great a magnitude as you want for the Bible; I don't share that elevated opinion of it, but it doesn't matter. All your grand estimation of the Bible means is that little rectangular icon I drew stands for something even more immense than I give it credit for, and implies that what we have lost in prehistory is even larger.

But I suspect that those who disagree are instead doing something I find objectionable: they want to diminish the importance of that vast weight of humanity that does not have and never had their one particular, narrow little icon of supremacy. And in that sense, you are correct. I am saying that the Bible is not the absolute pinnacle of history, the be-all and end-all. It's just one book. One.

PZ Myers
Division of Science and Math
University of Minnesota, Morris



#21672: Thomas Nephew — 04/12  at  12:21 PM
Virge: point taken. Substitute "its authors".

PZ: "I suspect that those who disagree ... want to diminish the importance of that vast weight of humanity that does not have and never had their one particular, narrow little icon of supremacy."

I was all set to disagree. But you also imply a proportionality that seems unlikely to me: All your grand estimation of the Bible means is that little rectangular icon I drew stands for something even more immense than I give it credit for, and implies that what we have lost in prehistory is even larger.

We'd not expect that at all of a book about the rules of say, geometry or physics. Pre-2000BC humanity, for all its intrinsic value, could not have added content proportional to its longevity (or probably even proportional to its share of the total population of humanity) to that store of knowledge, to the extent it had time to be interested.

Now, ethics is less of an exhaustible topic than geometry and it's perhaps less rigorously discussable than physics, but I would argue similar nonproportional estimates apply.

So on reflection perhaps I am indeed diminishing the importance of pre-2000BC humanity. I don't ascribe significance to humanity's numbers or longevity, I ascribe it to its achievements. The Bible, while a flawed human achievement, is one that we can see all the same. You suggest pre-biblical "hominidity", to perhaps coin a phrase, produced its own wisdom. Perhaps, but where is it? How much of it was there likely to have been? Show me. My assumptions differ from yours.

Let me be clear: I'm a skeptic (by self-definition, anyway) and definitely not a church-goer. Somewhat to my own surprise, I hold the Bible in higher esteem -- as an attempted summation of moral principles -- than this essay does, as I do the Koran and other overlapping works about religion, ethics, and morality. That's partly out of respect (perhaps superstitious respect), and partly out of my simple understanding of humanity's ability to generate and accumulate cultural capital.



#21680: — 04/12  at  01:15 PM
Love of beauty and elegance; the sense of tragedy and loss; the longing for joy: these are only a few of the emotions and thoughts that separate us from the animals from which (I believe) we evolved. Where and when did that separation occur? Was it sudden; was it gradual? Do these attributes hint that there may be truth to the iconographic phrase "In the Image of God He created them", regardless of the cosmology of the person or persons who wrote those words? Definitely a good essay to read as the days count down to Eastern Orthodox Pascha, the celebration of the triumph of Life over death and decay.



Page 2 of 3 pages  <  1 2 3 >

Next entry: You'll go to hell if you read this

Previous entry: Unitarian Jihad

<< Back to main

Info

email PZ Myers
Search
Archives
UMM—America's best public liberal arts college