Basic HTML Version
come to better understand how
human nature and human abi li–
ties arose. As Professor Kenneth
Bock notes in his book
Human
Nature and History:
"There is a long history of
efforts to learn about humans by
comparing them with animals,
and again today s tudents of ani–
mal social behavior urge their col–
leagues in the study of human
social behavior to join in what is
represented as a common enter–
prise."
Such an approach, of course, is
the natural outgrowth of a wide–
spread acceptance within the
scientific community of the theo–
ry of evolution. The notion is that
today's ape may in sorne ways
resemble man's forebears or "pre–
historic ancestors."
Contrary to the popular con–
ception, evolutionists do not claim
that man descended from the
apes. They contend, instead, that
man and ape are two separate
branches that evolved in different
directions from a common ances–
tor believed to have lived many
millions of years ago. Dr. Bro–
nowski, author of
The A scent of
Man,
thus refers to "our
cousins.
the monkeys and the apes. "
Modern biology declares we
have much to learn about our–
selves a nd our natures from a
study of our ape "cousins."
But this, as we shall see,
is not
where the answers lie!
This approach- rooted in the
theory of evolution- is totally
unsound! Studying nonhuman
primates will teach us about
non–
human primates- but
not about
ourselves!
In the second century A.D.,
the Greek physician Galen sought
to study the body of man by dis–
secting the bodies of Old World
monkeys. (The ancient Greeks
and Romans frowned upon the
dissection of human cadavers.) As
a result, Galen mistakenly attrib–
uted many anatomical features of
apes and monkeys to humans. His
writings were thus riddled with
error.
Later physicians were to dis–
cover that the best study of man
is man hjmself.
Studying human nature and
May 1981
culture by analyzing the lesser
creatures is fraught with similar
pitfalls!
Radical Dlfferencesl
Consider the respective capabili–
ties of ape and man.
Apes, as witnessed in the case
of Koko, are certainly not devoid
of the power of reason and of a
degree of intelligence. The feats
they are capable of,
with human
guidance,
are nothing short of
remarkable.
Even apar t from human train–
ing, apes exhibit extraordinary
abilities. Noted primate research–
er Baroness J ane Van Lawick–
Goodall , for example, has ob-
man mind is
radical/y different
from the apes, differing not only
in degree but in potential. It tow–
ers far a bove, capable of a
supremely higher leve! of perfor–
mance, immeasurably more so–
phisticated.
Man's mind is qualitatively
far
superior,
far out of proportion to
the relatively small difference in
size and weight between the
brains of humans and apes.
Man's mind is
unique
in all
creation!
In addition, man alone has the
use of a highly sophist icated ver–
bal language. "The habitual use
of articulate language is, however,
peculiar toman," Charles Darwin
admitted. He also wrote of man's
"almost infinitely /arger power
of associating together the most
diversified sounds and ideas.... "
His attempts to explain this fact
in terms of evolution are feeble at
bes
t.
Humans also have a cul tural
history, exhibiting material prog-
1
ress. And man
records
that his–
'f
tory. Apes, by contrast, are want–
!
ing in all these respects. They
!
remai n as they were fi rst
~
created.
•L•A•N•AIIÍI,•a• ,•,t•a•lk•in•g•,•. c. h.im_p.an• z•e•e•. •p•u•sh• e•s
True intellect is embodied in
keys on computer panel to torm sen-
the human species. In man's eyes
tence: "Give .
..
Lana .
..
Banana. "
is found a spark of understanding
served the art of
toolmaking
among chimpanzees in the wild!
Yet , while an ape is an
intelli–
gent
animal, it is not an
intellec–
tua/
one. Jt is not, to use the dic–
tionary definition, "chiefty guid–
ed by the intellect rather than by
emotion or experience" nor "giv–
en to study, reflection and specu–
lation."
lnstinct
is the
primary
govern–
ing principie of the ape.
Even when given an opportuni–
ty to develop its potentials, an ape
remains primitive. In its animal
state, it is severely limited. No
ape will ever become a teacher,
doctor, scientist, lawyer or philos–
opher .
It is the
human
that teaches
the
ape,
no t the ot her way
around!
Man, on the other hand, is
endowed with a mind inspired by
incredible intell igence. The hu-
encountered nowhere else in all
creation!
Brldgéless Gap
How are we to exp lain this
bridgeless gap, this immeasurable
chasm separating human mind
from animal brain? To what can
we attribute the vast difference in
output and potential?
It cannot be explained by evo–
lution! That theory-riddled with
innumerable fl aws in logic and
wide gaps in evidence-is
who//y
inadequate!
(See "Scientists in
Quandary About Darwin" in the
February, 1981,
Plain Truth,
U.S. edition.)
In fact, because evolutionists
cannot explain these vast differ–
ences in terms of evolution, they
have had to
delude
themselves
into believing those differences
do not exist!
The human mind cannot be
explained solely in physi cal
17