How did we come to be - Essay Example

Where does this power "to will" come from If we observe our own body parts and their movements as if we are looking at a Television program, the reality behind our origins can be realized to a great extent. This is clearly an experiment about which a number of scientists and critical analysts apparently never thought of doing it while entering into their voluminous research on the evolution, nature and logic of origins of man. If this experiment is opted for, only one idea is likely to follow.

This will be an objective realization of the power and force of God behind every living and non-living being and entity. This is ultimate wisdom that does not change for there is nothing beyond it. There is a well established social perspective. It is the universally accepted principle of "Change as the law of Nature". This law by itself has never changed! Why If it is true, it must also change with time. However, no one can deny living by this reality of change. What a great predicament The law is there but it cannot be there if it is to continue.

Similar situation appears to be existing about the question: How have we humans evolved in the present pulsating form of precious beings So many schools of thought and ways of argument have come up, as it were, "since the beginning of human inquiry into society." Darwinian, Big Bang, Cosmic Evolution, Stellar Evolution, Chemical Evolution, Planetary Evolution, Organic Evolution, Macro Evolution, Micro Evolution and Pragmatism theories vie with one another to solve the apparent mystery of origins of man.

1 Despite so much of variety of material and writings available on "How did we come to be" there is utter dearth of rock solid truth about this matter. Evolutionary theorists are generally modern scientists from biology, chemistry and physics. They believe and write about that phenomenon which can be verified through their own microscopes and eyes only. Pragmatists like Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and John Dewey appear to have gone even a few steps ahead of the evolutionary theorists.

They as such suggest "rejection of the transcendental approach to truth, logic and inquiry".2 For Peirce, 'pragmaticism' and 'fallibilism' were the essence of all logic. For him, 'metaphysics embraces a theory of cosmic evolution and a theory of causal laws'. There has to be a cause and effect relationship inherent and explicit in an experience. All inquiry - including the question of origins of man - must follow this causal law. William James also picked up 'pragmatist' outlook of Peirce and further popularized these ideas.

3 Quite in the similar vain, John Dewey made inquiry, rather than truth or knowledge, the essence of logic.4Critical Assessment:Indeed, these evolutionary and pragmatist analyses are having their own limitations just as any other approach to a world view may be having. One small aspect is very obvious here. Most of the noted and vibrant minds and great critics generally do not look beyond their own perception. At times, the most obvious argument is ignored for it lies just beneath their feet within their immediate reach.

If an analyst wants to be objective and scientific in approach, then one must not ignore the most obvious. When dealing with evolution, origins of man and the power behind human