“A work conceived radically is a movement of the Same toward the Other which never returns to the Same.”

-Emmanuel Levinas, From Useless Suffering

Introduction​

Across chapters 6-10 of his book The Evolution-Creation Struggle, Professor of Philosophy at Florida State University Michael Ruse exposits on his argument that “evolutionists today use the supposed progressiveness of evolutionary theory to promote social and ethical programs.” (Ruse 2005:212) In this way, evolutionism, for Ruse, differs little from religious sentiment.   As evidence, Ruse notes that through the years, evolutionists have appealed to social Darwinism to support policies of Laissez-faire (107), war and peace (112), and feminism.  For more evidence, Ruse turns to adherents of Christianity, liberal and fundamentalist alike, as having appropriated the progressiveness of evolutionary theory to promote natural theology (133) as well as Christian revitalization efforts that, Ruse notes, culminated in an “an evolutionized Christianity” (142).  Finally, he states that popular science has appropriated aspects of evolutionism to support rigid views of the centrality of natural selection to the theory of evolution (173), to champion scientific progress (177), and ultimately to propose a new, synthetic theory of evolution that incorporates genetics, along with a broad array of other fields in science such as paleontology (166), known today as the modern evolutionary synthesis, that bears some hallmarks of religion. 

While compelling, Ruse’s contention is not without detractors. “No ordinary man could be such a fool,” writes noted evolutionary geneticist Jerry Coyne (204).  In this position paper, I will examine modern biomimetics in the context of evolutionary theory and demonstrate that evolutionism objectively promotes ethical solutions to social problems in modern science today – that it is no longer an ideology that lacks pragmatism, but, in fact, offers critical, real-world insights into the future of the human species

Evolvabots

​The autonomous, aquatic Evolvabot was invented by zoologist John Long.  It “looks like a tadpole with a rotund body [and] swims with a long, narrow, undulating tail.” (Fish 2012:1) But this robot is no toy.  It is a biomimetic, autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV), “they behave…[they] can sense gradients, forage, maneuver, evade predators, and attack prey.” (1) And in a twist, Long designed the Evolvabot as with the skeletal apparatus of prehistoric fish only.  Immersed in murky water, and subject to selection pressures such as variable lighting for finding food and proximity detectors for avoiding predators (other Evolvabots), data is gathered and progeny are produced that feature the effects of kin selection changes that either cause the offspring to be discarded or to be re-engaged with the experiment, depending on performance. (1) Long’s intention is specifically to study the evolution of vertebrae in prehistoric fish, and, remarkably, the Evolvabots did evolve vertebrae as expected, helping his team to understand “the relationship between swimming and the evolution of the backbone.” (Long 2012:35)

Long published his work in a book of popular science called DARWIN’S DEVICES: What EVOLVING ROBOTS Can Teach Us About the History of Life and the Future of Technology.  And it is the latter half, the Future of Technology, that underpins the shift in evolutionism from an anachronistic, caustic social movement to a rational, reasoned lens through which important insights about human nature and, indeed, the future of humanity can be gleaned. 

​Militarized Robots

​ Long notes that his research is funded by the United States Department of Defense, and that while a tiny fish-like Evolvabot is obviously not a weapon of war, the weaponization of biomimetic robots will one day replace some human soldiers on the battlefield or elsewhere. (154) Reflecting on Isaac Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics, Long proposes “limits and controls on the use of military Evolvabots.” (2) His proposed limits and controls are worth reprinting here:

​

1. Limit initial production prior to battle.

2. Limit reproduction on the battlefield.

3. Limit repair on the battlefield.

4. Evolve predatory robots.

5. Make complicated robots. (155)

Referencing climate pressures, population growth, militarism, and other challenges of the 21st century Long has demonstrated the capacity for evolutionists to work as objective observers in the physical sciences and at the same time develop rational positions and even substantiated theories about the future of humankind and its ethical obligations.  All without even a whiff of polemics or other associated and, oftentimes, anachronistic mischaracterizations regarding evolutionist thinking.  Stephen Hawking has elucidated on the future implications of biomimetic robots and humanity, stating “all of us should ask ourselves what we can do now to improve the chances of reaping the benefits and avoiding the risks” of a future for humankind dominated by robotics and the artificial intelligence that wills them.

​Conclusion

​ For these reasons and others, evolutionism, and the scientists that have adopted the modern evolutionary synthesis as a framework for their research and other intellectual pursuits, do not represent the caustic, absolutist ideologues of social Darwinists or ‘progressivist’ opportunists such as the likes of Herbert Spencer. Indeed, as Hawking noted, keeping an eye on the future is a duty that everyone owes to his or her fellow human beings.

Therefore, excoriating the enthusiastic, professional, peer-reviewed scientist for his or her purposeful leveraging of evolutionism may very well be an abrogation of the very base meaning of philosophy – the love and pursuit of knowledge.  Or worse, generate unnecessary doubt and division at time when purposiveness and unity might otherwise head off disaster.

References

​Fish, Frank E. "Book Review: Darwin’s Devices: What Evolving Robots Can Teach Us about the History of Life and the Future of Technology." Integrative and Comparative Biology. 1. 2012. Oxford Journals. Oxford University Press, Society for Integrated and Comparative Biology. July 2012.

​

Hawking, Stephen. "Transcendence Looks at the Implications of Artificial Intelligence - but Are We Taking AI Seriously Enough?" The Independent. Independent Digital News and Media. 2014.

​

Long, John. Darwin's Devices: What Evolving Robots Can Teach Us about the History of Life and the Future of Technology. New York. Basic. 2012.

Ruse, Michael. The Evolution-creation Struggle. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Harvard University Press. 2005.