CROSSING THE PLAIN WITH A COVERED WAGON TRAIN IN 1860 - James P. Locke [Submitted by Marilyn A. Walker Vollmer]

 [quote] I had been sick with inflammation of the lungs and rheumatism, and the doctor told my uncle that a trip across the Plains to California would be good for me – that it would either kill or cure me,

I heard of a company that was to start shortly from Beloit, a town about 12 miles from Janesville, Wis., where I then lived with my uncle and family. My aunt wrote to the head of the company, whose name was Cutts, and who replied that they were going to start on the 15th of April and that he would take me for 60 dollars, at that time considered quite a sum of money. But I was anxious to go, so my trip was paid for, and I was taken to Beloit in a buggy by a man named Martin. We arrived there about 4 o’clock in the afternoon and found Tom Cutts fighting drunk, swearing that he would not leave the town till he had licked the best man in it.

That frightened me so that I wanted Martin to take me back with him to Janesville. I did not want to go with a man like that, but Martin told me not to mind – that Cutts would be all right the next morning. So he started back to Janesville, leaving me very dejected. Some friends of his took me to Tom Cutts’ home where I was treated well. And the next morning he was all right.

There were three white canvas covered wagons, one owned by a man named Carroll, a two-seated light spring wagon into which I climbed and took my seat on the back seat. Carroll had two small horses, and as he jumped to his seat with his reins in the hand, his team gave one spring into the air causing such a jerk that it landed me head-over-heels in the street with the seat on top of me.

Thus was the inglorious start of my trip west.

It was half an hour before I came to and found myself in a drug store with a big crowd in front. But when I got up from the lounge, the only ill effects I felt was a pain in the back which left me after a few days.
So, without further delay, we traveled on, and the first night we slept in a hay loft. And, although I was doubled up with one of the other passengers, I was cold and my teeth chattered. After a while I fell asleep, but before daylight I was awakened by my bedfellow who I saw in the dim light standing with a dagger in his hand. I thought right away that he was going to kill me, you can bet that I was scared. But it turned out that he had lain down with his belt and weapons on, and was only trying to make himself more comfortable by removing them.

Nothing unusual happened in the next few days as we traveled westward. The weather was fine and the early spring blossoms dotted the fields. Toward evening we would begin looking for a good camping place with wood and water the principal items to watch for. The pain in my back left me. And although we had not tents, I did not seem to suffer from the exposure. If it rained, the men would sleep in the covered wagons and I would shift for myself. There was not room for all in the wagons, and we would crawl underneath or into any other place for shelter.

One evening about camping time a storm came up and some of us ran for a deserted old house some distance away. All night we lay on the floor while the rain came down in torrents and the wind blew a hurricane, taking off part of the roof.

In the morning it was calm and beautiful. But our horses, covered wagons and contents, including men, had suffered worse than we had.

We were now passing through Iowa, and at noon, while crossing a creek, we came upon lots of big frogs. We caught a large bucketful of them and fried the hind parts, which to me tasted better than any other kind of meat I had ever eaten.

Our Mr. Cutts (we called him “Captain”) was an expert in preparing a meal of that kind. He had but one failing – the love for whiskey. And to get that, he would trade anything in the outfit.

That part of Iowa through which we were passing was very bare of woods and there were no railroads, so we saw very few settlers…

After a few days we arrived at Council Bluffs, which was the outfitting point at that time for westbound emigrants, for, after crossing the Missouri River, there was no other place. So Captain Cutts bought our tent, bacon, flour and other provisions and things supposed to be enough to last us four months.
One night, while we were there it rained, and not far from the camp was a vacant house which the people said was haunted. It was open, so about eight of us braced up enough courage to try it for the one night. We were all stretched out on the floor when one of the inside doors blew open with such force that it scared me so much that I pulled my blanket up over my head. There must have been a cellar underneath, for very soon an unearthly sound came from below. But being with a crowd I soon recovered enough to fall asleep. I slept till the first peep of day, when I saw that I was all alone; the others had all left. So you can bet I soon left, too.

We were camped at the foot of the bluff. I remember that it was quite a distance from the Missouri, which we had to cross by ferrying the old-fashioned way. After crossing we proceeded up the road towards the little town of Omaha and drove right through it without stopping, camping quite a distance out and near a lot of Pawnee Indians. They were certainly not a very clean-looking tribe.

They were the first Indians we had seen in any great numbers. The next morning I lagged behind to buy a pair of mocassins. After I bought them, the Pawnees held me up and pulled the strings out of them, but I was glad to get away from them for by now my company was nearly out of sight.

One morning, as we were breaking out of camp, eight men on horses rode up and demanded a man who had been passing counterfeit bank bills on the few settlers that we had passed. But he must have seen them coming from a distance, for he was gone when they rode up, hiding among the brush. The captain paid the horsemen 50 dollars and they rode away. Shortly thereafter, the culprit came sneaking back into camp, and we proceeded on our way.

One bright, sunny morning we saw off in the distance quite a body of Indians riding toward us. They proved to be a band of Sioux warriors on the warpath against the Pawnees. When they rode up to our camp they merely grunted a salute, then passed on. Seeing them at first at the distance with the sun shining on their strings of silver breastplates was a grand and inspiring sight.

We soon came to the Platte River, which we followed for several weeks without much change. The valley is quite wide and then in the month of May, the river was very wide but shallow. Years later, going East in September on a trip, the great Platte River had all but disappeared. A little stream was pointed out to me, but seeing things from a railroad car window, and travelling by horse and covered wagons at the rate of 24 or 25 miles a day is quite different. Also, the season was different.

One night we had a heavy wind and thunder storm. Four men had to hold down the four corners of the tent. A horse staked outside was knocked down, and a man was blinded.

The rain came down in torrents and sifted right through our canvas tents. The flat lowland on which we were camped had all of six inches of water on it.

But the next morning the storm had passed and quite a lot of wild ducks were flying around. The water soon subsided and we proceeded on our way.

We were on the north side of the river. The valley is quite wide and the hills seemed quite a distance away, beyond which I suppose were the homes of the Indians. We did not see many – only an occasional one or two, riding across the prairie on horseback without saddle or bridle, but with different kinds of straps around them and Buffalo meat in strips tied on to dry and cure as they rode along.

At night we had to stake out our horses. The least thing would stampede them, for they seemed to be more easily scared than ourselves. The wagons would form a circle, creating a corral, inside of which the tents would be pitched and the “house-work” done. A guard was stationed near the horses, sometimes a little distance from the camp and where the best feed could be found. I had to take my turn on watch with the men. One would be on until midnight, then he would call another who would stand guard until morning.

Despite the guard, once in a while, on a very dark night, there would be a stampeded. And when they started, there was no stopping them. The horses would jerk up the stakes and disappear into the darkness. And the next morning it might be 10 o’clock before we got started. It might have been the scent of some animal or possibly some Indian some distance away that would startle them.

In the distance along the Platte Valley we would see lots of antelope and sometimes large herds of buffalo. The buffalo were sometimes stampeded by the Indians, who would ride wildly down from the hills making loud noises. The buffalo would then lower their heads and start running. And when they came to the river, they would go right over a six-foot embankment. In fact, nothing could stop them or even turn them once they had started on their mad flight.

I suppose the Indians expected some of them to be killed or crippled, and it was one of their ways of getting food.

The coyote was a sly, sneaky animal. Just as it was getting dark, he would make an appearance on the distant hills and howl. Sometimes he would muster up courage enough to sneak into camp and grab anything it could to eat without being noticed. One night the coyotes made off with a man’s boot and he was in a bad fix, for he had no other.

We came within sight of Chimney Rock on the south side of the river, and it remained within sight for some days. Also on the south side we saw Ash Hollow where, we learned, there had been an Indian massacre some years before. And we soon came within sight of Pike’s Peak and remained within sight of it for all of two weeks.

About that time the Pike’s Peak gold excitement had started, for we saw one covered wagon with a sign painted on it reading: “Pike’s Peak of Bust.” Two of our men got the fever, and when we came to the nearest point opposite the Peak, Captain Cutts outfitted them with a pony and provision. The Lord knows where they got more, for from where we were, their destination seemed a long distance away and they had the river to cross. But we bid them God-speed, and never heard from them thereafter.

There was no wood along the Platte River, so the only thing we had to use as fuel for cooking was buffalo chips. Our captain would often recite: “There’s not a log to make a seat along the river Platte, sir. So when you eat, you’ve to stand, or sit down square and flat, sir.”

We soon came within sight of Fort Laramie (not to be confused with the town Laramie, although both are in Wyoming) and the Loop Fork of the Platte River which we had to cross. There was an old-fashioned ferryboat there which lowered an apron down, after drawing as close to the shore as possible. Then the teams would climb up the apron, which had cleats nailed across it. It was watching one particular team which started upon the apron and, when they got near the top, the boat was pushed right out from under them and the horses were dropped into deep water. They had quite a time getting on, but finally crossed the river safely except for being badly soaked.

Captain Cutts, more to save money than for any other reason, decided to ford the river. There were stakes driven into the river which the teams were to follow. The water was muddy, and the bottom of quicksand you could feel drifting away under your feet. One of our teams broke a double-tree, and as I was wading along beside them, they sent me back ashore for another set. But before starting back, one of the men gave me a drink of whiskey. I got back with my load all right, and then started for shore again, but got off the track and soon I was in deep water. I could see ripples ahead where I knew the water was shallow, and by jumping and keeping my footing, I soon reached the shallow place. Then I saw a man coming on horseback for me. He had a job getting me out of the water onto the horses, but finally succeeded. And I often thought it was the whiskey which put me off the track.

We used to watch for the Pony Express to pass along. We would see them coming for a long distance. And, if the wagon road was crooked, the riders would cut across when they could in order to save distance. When they came into a station, a pony would be standing by, saddled and ready to receive the mailbag so the rider could be off again at once.

After leaving Fort Laramie, Pike’s Peak passed out of sight. We soon got into the Black Hills. (More likely the Laramie Range or what amounts to southern foothills of the Black Hills.) We often came to Indian villages, and we often saw some nice looking little ones playing around, and maidens combing and braiding each other’s hair. They were friendly, and I think the name of that tribe was Blackfoot.

A little ways back from the road at intervals were the prairie dog villages.

These little animals would sit on the mounds by their holes and give out little yelping barks. But at the least sign of danger they would dodge into their holes, then soon bob up, seeming to peek around.

Along the trail we had no vegetables and some of the men began to develop scurvy. So we cooked some kind of greens we found, and which seemed to produce the desired effect.

We soon came to Fort Bridger, and there we learned a soldier had been sent out after a horse thief. Our road led right through the fort, through which we passed into the hills. The next day we met the soldier on his way back to the fort with the stolen horse. He told us he had shot the man and buried him near the road. Later we passed by the very shallow grave in which the body of the unknown man lay, and which we expect was soon taken by wild animals.

We soon began to ascend the Rocky Mountains (the Central Rockies, or Northern Wasatch Mountains), which did not seem to be very steep. But in the distance we could see high snow-capped peaks, and in a gully by the road we passed a deep bed of snow. On reaching the summit and looking back, I could see what looked like a great valley, and, nearby, two streams of water, one running east, the other west. (Probably the Green River, which runs east there but later joins the Colorado River in the south, and the Opal Fork.)

From then on the descent was rugged and rocky. And in a few days we arrived at the entrance of Echo Canyon, at night and I remember lying down on one end of my blanket and rolling in it till I got to the other end

One side of the canyon is very precipitous, and along the edge on the top, a wall of stones had been built, running for some distance; and on the other side, rifle pits had been dug. A trench ran from one side to the other, but it had been filled in at the road crossing. Those preparations were made by the Mormons to combat Johnston’s army which was sent to Salt Lake City by Uncle Sam two years prior to our trip – 1858. But the army found another way of getting in, and escaped the trap which had been set for them.

After going through the canyon we passed through some fine scenery, past some hot springs and then cold springs within a short distance of each other, and then over big and little mountains. We soon came within sight of the Great Salt Lake Valley, and in the distance we could see the city and still further away the Great Salt Lake.

We descended into the valley and camped near the city. We had not been there long when women came out from their nearby homes, trying to sell vegetables from their gardens which were very acceptable to us because we had been so long without that kind of food. The women seemed intelligent, but poorly dressed in blue denim or the cloth that men’s overalls were made of. We were camped there nearly two weeks, and some of our men went on a Sunday to hear Brigham Young preach. I walked past his residences – two adjoining mansions. The main entrance to the grounds was through large and high gates, one mounted by a figure of a lion, the other by an American eagle. An armed guard marched back and forth on the walk in front.

After leaving the city and traveling about 10 miles west we passed over a bridge that spanned what was then called by the Mormons the River Jordan, and soon we came to the Dead Sea (Great Salt Lake). Our road was about 200 yards from the lake. Some of our men went down to the beach which looked white from the distance, I suppose because of the salt.

From there on we kept joining other wagon trains until there were nearly 100 wagons in line, since the Indians were reported to be “bad” between Salt Lake City and Carson Valley.

The Pony Express stations were all enclosed by stone walls about seven feet high with square holes for the occupants to see through and shoot through if necessary. At one station we passed, three dead Indians were lying outside, and the defender lay dead inside. It was supposed that many Indians were wounded before the station keeper (or keepers) was killed.

Near one station where we camped one night were two small lakes fed by hot springs. They were about 30 feet wide and about 50 feet long, narrowing to about three feet in width where the water escaped. The deepest part of the little lakes was between three and four feet. And the bottoms of coarse sand and the pleasantly warm water made for ideal bathing.

At the station that night we had dancing the music being furnished by a fiddler from the station.

At about 2 o’clock in the morning there was quite a lot of excitement. Everyone was awakened by the sound of horses’ feet coming toward the camp. In the still hours of the night the sound carried clearly. All the men had their guns ready, supposing an attack from Indians was impending. But very soon the Pony Express rider dashed up to the camp, taking it to be the station, and as he saw his mistake, he hastily hollered out: “Hold on, boys! Pony Express!”

He was leading an extra horse which had caused the excitement.

The next day we reached Deep Creek, a very narrow stream but quite deep. Major Egan, an officer of some degree, came on the same road with us in a light covered wagon, accompanied by the fiddler of the night before. On coming through Egan Canyon, the fiddler was shot dead. And his body was brought into Deep Creek Station by the major.

After leaving Deep Creek Station, we soon came onto the desert where grass and water were very scarce. The poor horses soon began to suffer for the want of those life savers.
Once we came to a waterhole – that is a hole dug into the sand about six feet deep, from the bottom of which we could dip up a cupful of water, then wait for another cupful to seep in. We would carry water in cans or buckets, and give the horses a little at a time.

One day a storm struck – it was a regular cloudburst. The rain fell in torrents, and the whole valley was knee-deep in water in half an hour. And in another half hour it was clear and hot, and you could hardly tell that it had rained at all. The water had sunk into the sand and the surface of the soil seemed bone dry again.

Fortunately, the Pony Express stations had wells.

We could only make 10 or 15 miles a day, for it was very hard pulling through the sand. And sometimes we would travel nights. The sand was so deep and the horses so weak that they would have to stop every little while. We would then walk on ahead and when we got a few miles ahead of the teams, we would lie down and sleep until they caught up.

One night we were camped near a station and there were several Indians around who performed an Indian war dance. They were all painted and decorated up with their feathers and had their war implements. They formed a large circle and began dancing around, shouting their war whoops and getting more and more excited until they were completely tired out.

It was a good exhibition of a regular Indian war dance, but, lucky for us, they were peaceful.

To me this side of Salt Lake seemed one range of hills after another with valley between. Looking from one range across to the other, they appeared to be only two or three miles apart, but it would take us all day to cross the valleys which were nearly 30 miles in width.

We were now near what was called the Mountain Meadows were in 1858 more than 200 emigrants, journeying peacefully toward their destination in California, were attacked and brutally murdered by Indians and Mormons disguised as Indians, led by a Mormon named, I think, Lee. He was arrested several years afterwards and tried for the terrible crime by the U. S. government, then taken out to where the atrocity was committed and shot.

Brigham Young, head of the Mormon church, whom some also thought guilty, died before his trial came off.

There were a great many little children in the company of murdered emigrants.

One night while we were camped in a canyon, I crossed a gulch to gather wood. I heard a terrible roar and looking up, saw a high wall of water coming at me. I scrambled up high enough to be clear of it, but had to wait till it passed before I could get back to camp on the other side. It was the result of a cloudburst op the canyon.

We soon arrived at the sink of the Carson River where there was plenty of good feed for the horses, and better food for ourselves, being near Virginia City. There our company disbanded and each individual was left to shift for himself, as all had concluded that they could do better there at the new silver mines than in California. [unquote]

(Editor’s note [by Marilyn Walker Vollmer]: This concludes James P. Locke’s story of his journey west as a boy of 16 with a wagon train in 1860. This was written in 1925 when he was 81and his niece typed the story from his notes, James P. Locke went on to San Francisco to make his home with his Uncle Guy Buckingham owner of Buckingham & Hecht Shoe Co., where he lived for some time. He married Bessie Bridget Regan July 17th 1867 in San Francisco. Around 1900 they moved to Marin (across the bay from San Francisco). He died in 1982 at the age of 89 in Oakland, California, at the home of one of his daughters.)

Some Books on Christianity From A Jewish Perspective

I list here some books on Christianity from a Jewish perspective.  Listed also are some reviews that I found on the internet.  My interest in doing so is historical rather than theological and is not intended to indicate either agreement or disagreement with the various conclusions of the respective authors.

Rabbi Samuel Sandmel:  “A Jewish Understanding of the New Testament” (1956)

Geza Vermes:  “Jesus the Jew:  A Historian’s Reading of the Gospels” (1973)

Dr. Hugh J. Schonfield:  “The Passover Plot:  New Light on the History of Jesus” (1965)

Dr. Hugh J. Schonfield:  “Those Incredible Christians” (1968)

Dr. Hugh J. Schonfield:  “The Jesus Party” (1974)

Robert Eisenman:  “James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls” (1996)

Hyam Maccoby:  “The Mythmaker:  Paul and the Invention of Christianity” (1986)

Daniel Boyarin:  “A Radical Jew:  Paul and the Politics of Identity” (1994)

1.  Rabbi Samuel Sandmel:  “A Jewish Understanding of the New Testament” (1956)

Ad related to Rabbi Samuel Sandmel: “A Jewish Understanding ...

  A Jewish Understanding - of the New Testament‎

www.questia.com/Online_Library‎: Read the full text of this book now

http://www.amazon.com/A-Jewish-Understanding-New-Testament/dp/1594730482

[quote]

Amazon Customer Reviews

I can't put it down!

By Crystal on February 21, 2006

Format: Paperback

I am in the process of converting to Judaism from Christianity. This means that I have lots of questions and confusion about who Jesus was if he was not the messiah. When I bought this book, I expected it to be dry and difficult to get through. Indeed, the introduction is, but it's largely unnecessary for the enjoyment of the remainder of the book.

I was pleasantly surprised to find that the book is both easy to read and engaging. It is well-researched and written, but also written for the casual reading. In other words, you don't need to be a Bible scholar in order to understand it.

Even more surprising, the book is written in a very respectful and non-controversial way. Although it does not apologize for Jewish beliefs, it also does not pass judgment on Christian ones. Instead, it states Christian beliefs (such as the resurrection) as neither fact nor fiction, but rather as what various people believed.

The book is structured in several parts, covering the cultural and historic contexts, Paul and his writings, Jesus and the Gospels, the other writings (Acts, Revelation, etc.), and the significance of the New Testament.

This book is great for both Christians and Jews, and probably my favorite on Jewish-Christian relations and/or studies.

[unquote]

2.  Geza Vermes:  “Jesus the Jew:  A Historian’s Reading of the Gospels” (1973)

http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Jew-Geza-Vermes/dp/0800614437

[quote]

UNDERSTANDING JESUS IN TERMS OF HIS RACIAL HERITAGE

By Terry B. Cullom on January 13, 2000

Format: Paperback

Modern Christological study and the quest for the historical Jesus owe a debt of gratitude to both Albert Schweitzer and Geza Vermes. Schweitzer showed us that Jesus' thinking was characterized by apocalyptic (eschatology), and Vermes taught us that if we would know Jesus we must understand him within his historical Jewish culture. It is to Vermes' credit, and an indication of the impact of his book, that in current Third Quest Jesus study we take his Jewishness and his Jewish background as basic to any legitimate interpretation of his nature, teaching, or mission. 3) Vermes, as the history of religions school before him, tends to credit so-called "higher" Christological forulations to a later Hellenist stage, not properly considering Jesus' own claims, stories, beliefs, and praxis that contribute to them, nor giving due weight to the fact that Paul, the first Christians, and most Christian groups were composed of Jews.

I well remember when I first read this book a few years ago. For the first time I saw Jesus come alive--a real historical person who fully shared in his racial heritage. I also remember how it was precisely because he thus became real that God became real to me as well. I think the major fault of Vermes is that he does not see that, for Jesus, YHWH is judging the nations, returning to Israel, and becoming King, in and through his own work. Rather, for Vermes, Jesus is made to fit the, howbeit peculiar, mold of the Jewish Hasidic charismatic. In spite of what I consider to be his weaknesses, I shall remain endebted to Vermes for making Jesus real to me, and setting the course of current Jesus study.

[unquote]

3.   Dr. Hugh J. Schonfield:  “The Passover Plot:  New Light on the History of Jesus” (1965)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Passover_Plot    

[quote]

Schonfield's conclusions

Based on scholarly research into the social and religious culture in which Jesus was born, lived and died, into the source documents of the Gospels, and into other literature, Schonfield reached the following conclusions:

• That Jesus was a deeply religious Jewish man, probably well-versed in the teachings of the local northern sects such as the Nazarenes and Essenes.
• That growing up in biblical Galilee he had a skeptical and somewhat rebellious relationship to the hierarchy and teachings mandated by the authorities (the Pharisees) of the Temple in Jerusalem.
• That Jewish Messianic expectation was extremely high in those times, matched to the despair caused by the Roman occupation of the land, and by their subjugation of the Jews.
• That he was in many ways both typical of his times, and yet extraordinary in his religious convictions and beliefs, in his scholarship of the biblical literature, and in the fervency in which he lived his religion out in his daily life.
• That he was convinced of his role as the expected Messiah based on the authority of his having been descendant from King David (the royal bloodline of David), and that he consciously and methodically, to the point of being calculating, attempted to fulfill that role, being eminently well-versed in the details of what that role entailed.
• That he was convinced of the importance of his fulfilling the role perfectly (after all prophesy and expectation), and that he could not allow himself to fail, as that would undoubtedly lead to his being declared a false Messiah.
• That he was perfectly aware of the consequences of his actions all along the way, and that he directed his closest supporters, the original twelve Apostles, unknowingly to aid him in his plans.
• That he involved the least possible number of supporters in his plans ("need to know" basis), therefore very few knew of the details of his final plan, and even then only the least amount of information necessary.^[3]

The culmination of his plan was to be his death (the crucifixion), his resurrection and his reign as the true kingly and priestly messiah, not in heaven but on earth— the realized king of the Jews.

[unquote]

4.  Dr. Hugh J. Schonfield:  “Those Incredible Christians” (1968)

http://www.amazon.com/Those-Incredible-Christians-Joseph-Schonfield/dp/B0006BUN2I

[quote]

THE SEQUEL TO "THE PASSOVER PLOT"

By Steven H. Propp TOP 500 REVIEWER on July 22, 2013

Format: Hardcover

Hugh Joseph Schonfield (1901-1988; AKA "Schonfeld") was a British Bible scholar of Jewish heritage, who was once a "Messianic Jew"; his earlier books reflect this: e.g., The History of Jewish Christianity. In 1937 he was expelled from the International Hebrew Christian Alliance, which left him disillusioned. His famous and controversial book The Passover Plot was even made into a movie [Passover Plot [VHS]].

He wrote in the Introduction to this 1968 book, "I have been able to assess the situation much more acutely since the publication of my previous book ... The reactions, both favourable and unfavourable, were impressive and highly illuminating. Letters... flooded in... I was interviewed by many sections of the Press... The upshot was that the writing of the present volume became essential." (Pg. xiii) He adds, "It is possible that 'Those Incredible Christians' will administer a greater shock since it utilizes the same kind of resources in dealing with the formation of the Christian Faith and discloses by what circumstances and devious means it was accomplished... Christianity as we know it is far removed from the original terms of its expression, and this would have been much clearer and more convincing were it not for the loss and suppression of material testimony..." (Pg. xviii)

He argues, "From Paul's writings it can be deduced... that as a young man he devoted himself to a particular branch of Jewish occultism with all its attendant risks, physical and mental, and a strong case can be made out that his violent and berserk antagonism to the followers of Jesus arose in no small part from his secret belief that he himself was the Messiah destined to be 'a light to the nations.' ... Paul's psychic experience... [was] perhaps due to an epileptic seizure..." (Pg. 61)

He states, "With the death of James, and in face of the signs, the moderate Nazoreans took the decision to leave Jerusalem... Events, as we have seen, now went from bad to worse in Judea until... the Jewish people spurred on by the Zealots rose in [unsuccessful] revolt... The first phase of Christianity was ended by this tragic yet heroic chapter in Jewish history... The voices of controversy were temporarily stilled." (Pg. 106-107)

By later centuries, "Evidently it was felt that only a stable and energetic authority able to pronounce firmly on matters of faith and doctrine could cope successfully with the crisis situation. The church at Rome considered that it had been raised up at this time to discharge these responsibilities... the use of fraud and forgery was apparently not regarded as immoral or unethical. But thereby, to the deception of future generations, Christianity was converted from a Jewish movement centered on Jesus as Messiah into a new religion worshipping him as the Divine Son of God." (Pg. 142) He summarizes, "Within one hundred and fifty years of the death of Jesus ... the Church could begin to make much greater conquests in converting to its teaching whole tribes and peoples: it could move from the defensive to the offensive." (Pg. 216)

He concludes, "We have looked very sharply and without blinkers at Those Incredible Christians in hope that the ecclesiastical mind may be capable of making a positive response. If it cannot the Christian laity may be able to take over. It is at least a pointer in the right direction that the burden of Christian thought now is the Church in the World... This book must therefore close on an invitation... for Christians to turn with new insight to the consideration of what our story has revealed... Christians must go back to the beginning and search out anew in the context of the Jewish vision, which the Church forsook, the mysteries of the Kingdom of God." (Pg. 224-225)

This book will interest those looking for alternative/speculative theories of the rise of Christianity.

[unquote]

5.  Dr. Hugh J. Schonfield:  “The Jesus Party” (1974)

https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/hugh-j-schonfield-2/the-jesus-party/

[quote]

KIRKUS REVIEW

Adopting a more scholarly tone and to some degree deemphasizing the cloak-and-spearpoint intrigue of The Passover Plot and Those Incredible Christians, Schonfield continues to popularize and politicize the work of such biblical scholars as Robert Eisler. Anyone familiar with Schonfield's belief that the historical Jesus was an activist Jewish nationalist won't be surprised to learn that the ""Jesus Party"" was not a Christian organization at all. According to the detailed scenario here Pentecost marked the rallying of rebellious Jewish sects around the Nazarean party, which flourished under the leadership of Jacob the Just, the brother of Jesus; however the true anti-Roman nature of Jesus' following was obscured by Luke and other writers after Paul and Peter began preaching to the gentiles. Schonfield's thesis is far from idle and his investigations into chronology are particularly impressive, but he stubbornly refuses to consider any evidence that the teachings of Jesus might somehow account for the religion that bears his name and he doesn't hesitate to fill the empty spaces in his outline with pure conjecture. Having rejected the ""Miracle Hay"" message of the Gospels, Schonfield proposes that we must ""almost bludgeon our way towards the reality with which they are so little concerned."" The predictable result is a daring if ham-handed hypothesis, to be debated by a smaller, more sophisticated audience than this maw crick academician has sometimes reached in the past. Provocative.

[unquote]

6.   Robert Eisenman:  “James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls” (1996)

http://www.amazon.com/James-Brother-Jesus-Unlocking-Christianity/dp/1842930265

[quote]

Jesus is really my brother

By Jacques COULARDEAU on July 25, 2005

Format: Paperback

Robert Eisenman was the leading figure in the movement to free the Dead Sea Scrolls and make them all public, which was essential to start understanding what happened twenty centuries ago around Jesus. The present book is the result of his lifelong research in Middle East religious history. First the method. He brings together all documents available from the end of the 1st century BC to the beginning of the 3rd century CE. He considers all that is common but that does not give him the truth. For him the truth may come, and any interpretation can only come, from the differences in overlapping documents. He considers all documents are ideological interpretations of facts and stylistic rewriting of these same facts. The New Testament is a complete rewriting in Greek (he uses the concept of overwrites) of previous documents (he does not specify what they were : probably oral tradition in local semitic languages). He tries to decipher the rewriting and discover the buried version, using the method invented and devised by Kenneth Burke in his logology and his approach of Augustine. And it is the different elements he can find in other documents that lead him along the way to a reasonable and effective interpretation. Second the style. His extremely detailed work leads him to many repetitions of documents and facts in the whole book. It is circular, but each document or fact that is used several times, is used every single time in different conditions and thus helps build a different interpretation and thus gets a different meaning. We have to be patient and very humble in our search for truth, because one fact can have a great number of values and interpretations. That is the style at book level. If we go down at chapter and subchapter levels we have the same circularity but this time because the author threads up facts one after the other in a continuous flow of data from which he eventually gets his interpretation. The discourse is syncretic and thus may give you a vertigo. But it is the only way to proceeed : lines of data from which you draw a conclusion or rather a hypothesis from which you are going to work on. Now the general ideas. Jesus had three brothers, James the Just (minorized in James the Less, and there was only one James), Simon the Zealot, Judas the Zealot (but also Thomas and many other names among which Jude), and one sister, Mary Salome or Salome. The author concentrates on the brothers. First he denounces the multiplication of some names like James, Mary, Judas, Simon, etc. This is done to erase Jesus' family and to lessen and minorize the brothers who were invested by Jesus himself with the responsibility to further his work, James first, in no way with the intention to create a new religion but to create a new balance of power in the East to impose some freedom for the « Jews » to the Romans, and in no way with the intention of being God, or anything like that though he presented himself as the Son of Man, i.e. the Son of Adam, hence the Second Adam, hence the one announcing the end of this unjust world and the coming of divine judgment. The best case is Judas Iscariot who probably did not exist and was a complete invention drawn from various elements in the Old Testament and historical events of the period. This leads to a very clear interpretation of this family as a Zealot or Nazirite family fighting for a strict observance of the Law of Moses (righteousness, love of God, circumcision, separation : no fornication, no consumption of wine and eventually meat, no riches). The book then follows the historical Saulus and his transformation into Paul and his vision/invention of the Christian religion : no circumcision, no food code, spiritual communion with God and Jesus Christ, and communion in the body and blood of Christ (bread and wine) in a ritual sacrifice for everyone. He attacks James in the early 40s but fails to kill him. He lets the Priests and Herodians attack him in 62 which leads to his being stoned. Paul seems to be the inventor of the Christian religion though Mary's perpetual virginity is contained in Nag Hammadi apocryphal documents attributed to James himself. Obviously a new religion was being born. The nazirite of James' party would have led to strong tensions with the Roman empire. His death led to an all-out confrontation and the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. But James was spreading his influence fast and far beyond the Jews. Paul highjacked this movement and produced a religion that was universal and acceptable by the Roman Empire, which was to happen with Constantine : the Christian religion became the unifying element of the Empire. With this book we are at the center of such questions, though I do not accept the conclusion that Jesus was on the same line as James. I think Jesus was trying to bring together the two lines : confrontation and collaboration with the Roman Empire into some independent project that would have guaranteed independence for the Eastern part of the Empire, or maybe even more : a federal conception of the Empire.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

[unquote]

7.  Hyam Maccoby:  “The Mythmaker:  Paul and the Invention of Christianity” (1986)

http://www.amazon.com/The-Mythmaker-Paul-Invention-Christianity/dp/0060155825

[quote]

From Library Journal

Maccoby's book, written for the intelligent general reader, presents in clear and persuasive but controversial form his thesis that Paul synthesized Judaism, Gnosticism, and mystery religion to create Christianity as a cosmic savior religion. According to Maccoby, Paul's Pharisaism was his own invention, though actually he was probably associated with the Sadducees. Maccoby attributes the origins of Christian anti-Semitism to Paul and claims that Paul's view of women, though inconsistent, reflects his Gnosticism in its antifeminist aspects. A Talmudic scholar, Maccoby believes that Paul's wide variance from the Jerusalem Church (Nazarenes, under James and Peter) led to the separation of Christianity from Judaism. Recommended for theological and larger public libraries. Carolyn M. Craft, English, Philosophy & Modern Languages Dept., Longwood Coll., Farmville, Va.
Copyright 1986 Reed Business Information, Inc.

[unquote]

8.  Daniel Boyarin:  “A Radical Jew:  Paul and the Politics of Identity” (1994)

http://www.amazon.com/Radical-Jew-Politics-Contraversions-Literature/dp/0520212142

[quote]

Penetrating reading of Paul's gospel January 14, 2001

By Christopher W. Coffman VINE VOICE

Format:Paperback

I hesitate to contradict the highly qualified reader who considers this book a masterpiece. Indeed, the book should be read widely, as it is a penetrating and sensitive reading of the Apostle Paul's work, and it surfaces and analyses some key issues, such as the likelihood that what led to Paul's Damascus experience was his search for an answer to the question of how the One God of Israel could deliver salvation to all the world, not just Jews but also Gentiles. Boyarin's work is thoughtful and generous (although there is more bite in his footnotes than in the text itself). Boyarin considers himself a post-modern Talmudic scholar, and it is the influence of Derrida and de Man, however attenuated, that lumbers his otherwise brilliant analysis. Boyarin himself privileges, to use his own post-modern jargon, the theme of "difference" over all the other themes he surfaces. This struck this reader as a passing (post-modern) fad, and these sections will date in a way that the rest of this extremely interesting book will not.

 [unquote]

“Social Darwinism” vs.Obama (Marxist) “Social Darrow-ism”

Obama calls the philosophy of free market Capitalism “Social Darwinism” (after the  evolutionary scientist Charles Darwin).   Does this not imply that his own Marxist ideology might be termed “Social Darrow-ism” (after the anti-Darwinian Democrat politician Clarence Darrow)?

All of this reflects the fact that, in terms of intellectual development, Obama is stuck at (b) the adolescent (a-priori, utopian) stage represented by Marxism and state coercive control of society,  and has not yet reached (c) the mature (empirical, scientific) stage, represented by Social Evolution and free market (profit-risk) experimentation with products and services competing for consumer demand.

There are multiple errors in the Obama’s (immature and ignorant) attempt to besmirch his philosophical opposition as “Social Darwinists.”

1.      

      

      Although  “Social Darwinism” is viewed as the application of a biological theory to sociology, its origin suggests that aspects of it were borrowed from social science  (including economics, linguistics, etc.) and transplanted to biology.  Thus, it might have been called “Biological Smith-ism” (after Adam Smith’s  spontaneous order, i.e., “the invisible hand” of natural selection);

“It has often been remarked that the theory of evolution, according to which life on earth evolves without the guidance of a designer, is remarkably similar to the way a free-enterprise economy develops, with each enterprise doing its best to prosper, yet without the “benefit” of a centralized planner.”   

(http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2008/12/16/adam-smiths-invisible-hand-and-charles-darwins-natural-selection  )

  

(Cf.  As to Smith’s influence on Darwin, see Friedrich Hayek, “The Fatal Conceit” (1988), p. 24; and  App. A, p. 146)

2.       Charles Darwin himself was influenced by his grandfather Erasmus Darwin, and the Scottish Enlightenment, esp. Adam Smith (the founder of economics as a discipline). 

a.       Darwin’s Mentors (Scottish Enlightenment, etc.) include:

Adam Smith,  “The Wealth of Nations”

Adam Smith, “The Theory of Moral Sentiments”

Adam Ferguson, “An Essay on the History of Civil Society”

Adam Ferguson,  founder of sociology, believed that the growth of a commercial society through the pursuit of individual self-interest could promote a self-sustaining progress.

James Burnett, Lord Monboddo (baptised 25 October 1714; died 26 May 1799) was a Scottish judge, scholar of linguistic evolution, philosopher and deist, anticipated evolutionary theory and natural selection.. 

Thomas Malthus

Erasmus Darwin

“Sometimes included among Enlightenment figures are Erasmus Darwin (Charles’ grandfather) and Benjamin Franklin, because of their close association (through visits and correspondence) with Scottish university scholars. Erasmus Darwin did, moreover, attend Edinburgh medical school, and he had a significant influence on the thinking of his famous grandson.”  ( http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2008/12/16/adam-smiths-invisible-hand-and-charles-darwins-natural-selection/ )

3.       “Social Smith-ism” (including Capitalism) has both aspects of spontaneous order (i.e., “the invisible hand” of natural selection);  competition (rival entrepreneurs) and cooperation (supply and demand), all of which are present in biological evolution.:

a.        Self–Interest and Laissez Faire Competition: 

Adam Smith:  “Wealth of Nations”

b.       Empathy:   

Adam Smith, “Theory of Moral Sentiments” (aspect of empathy – e.g., a successful Entrepreneur must have empathy for the needs of the consumer).

“Before Darwin, the supreme example of an undesigned system was Adam Smith’s economy, spontaneously self-ordered through the actions of individuals, rather than ordained by a monarch or a parliament.”  (Matt Ridley)

5   Social “Spencerism,”   -- 

 The term “Darwinism” fails to recognize the contributions of other evolutionists allied with Darwin, e.g., Herbert Spencer (whose theory of biological evolution actually preceded that of Darwin and influenced Wallace), and Ernst Haeckel. 

  

a.       It was Spencer who first used the term evolution, using it with reference to the progress of life from lower to higher forms.  In this sense, Spencer arrived at the following definition:  “Evolution is an integration of matter and concomitant dissipation of motion; during which the matter passes from an indefinite, incoherent homogeneity to a definite, coherent heterogeneity; and during which the retained motion undergoes a parallel transformation." (Spencer, H., 1945, "First Principles," [1862], Watts & Co: London, Sixth edition, Revised, 1945, p.358).  Spencer applied this definition to all levels of nature:  matter-energy, life, mind, and society.  With respect to society, the spontaneous interaction of unique individuals evolves into a coherent, heterogeneous, (super-organic) whole.

b.      Nevertheless, Spencer’s view of progress was not unilinear:  “Like other kinds of progress, social progress is not linear but divergent and re-divergent.  Each differentiated product gives origin to a new set of differentiated products.  While spreading over the earth mankind have found environments of various characters, and in each case the social life fallen into, partly determined by the social life previously led, has been partly determined by the influences of the new environment; so that the multiplying groups have tended ever to acquire differences, now major and now minor: there have arisen genera and species of societies.”

c.        As society develops, its parts assume increasingly separate functions.  Broadly, there is the sustaining system  (i.e., industries starting with agriculture, advancing sequentially into manufacturing, commercial, transportation, communication, etc.) and the regulating system (i.e., the state and its subdivisions, with its governing bodies, whose function is protection of society from aggression by other states and internal criminals, as well as generally maintaining order).  The sustaining system is based on voluntary cooperation.  The regulating system is based on compulsory cooperation. 

d.      As the sustaining system becomes more complex and differentiated (diverse), it becomes more dependent upon its specialized industrial parts.  Such specialization in turn leads to further advances and complexity. Where the industrial system predominates, characterizing the “industrial form of society” , there comes mitigations in coercive restraints and weakening of its structure.  Such societies are characterized by increasing self-determination of their institutional parts, with the non-coercive sectors (e,g,, clerical [“the church”], business, philanthropic, educational, health, communication, transportation, etc.) becoming increasingly autonomous and separated from control by the coercive sector [the ”state”].  In addition there is increasing decentralization and localization of power, functional separation and control of national power, rule of law (i.e., general principles rather than arbitrary, bureaucratic edict) as well as constitutional limitation of political control over personal conduct.

e.      Conversely, states predominately involved in conflict with other states or in suppressing internal revolt tend to become predominately militant.  This places greater emphasis on control by the coercive sector,  the resultant “militant form of society” tends to make society more rigid and hierarchical in form, subordinating its parts so as to slow down and even halt change. 

f.        Other social and cultural evolutionists (e.g., Haeckel, Tylor) focused on “stages” of social development (e.g., savage, barbarian, civilized).  In contrast, Spencer was more focused on social processes (e.g., employing loose analogies of super-organic to organic systems) more than on sequential social stages (except as to simple, compound societies, etc.) and social forms influenced by environing conditions (industrial vs. militant).  An approach today that is similar to Spencer’s is that of the Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek (whose discussion of “spontaneous orders” reminds one of Spencer’s “spontaneous development”).

g.       “Social Spencerians” (process expositors of spontaneous development and resultant spontaneous orders) include, inter alia, John Fiske, , Robert MacIver,. Friedrich Hayek, and perhaps less directly Jane Jacobs (expositor of the natural development of cities)

                                                               i.      John Fiske, “Outlines of Cosmic Philosophy, Based on the Doctrine of Evolution” (1923)

                                                             ii.      Robert MacIver, “On  Community, Society and Power”  (1970)

(see chapter 8 on “The Meaning of Social Evolution,” observing that evolution means an opening-out or unfolding, the realization of a nature by an internal process)

                                                            iii.      Friedrich Hayek, “The Fatal Conceit:  The Errors of Socialism” (1988)

                                                           iv.      Cf. Jane Jacobs, “The Nature of Economies” (2000); cf. also, inter alia, her “Cities and the Wealth of Nations” (1984)

 

6.       Social Darwinism, per se.:  

 Turning to that form of “Social Evolution” theory properly called “Social Darwinism,” it is best exemplified by William Graham Sumner and Albert Galloway Keller in their magnum opus, “The Science of Society.”

 

a.       Darwin’s great theoretical contribution to biological evolutionary theory was that of “natural selection.”  This principle is what Spencer characterized as “survival of the fittest” (i.e., the fittest form to thrive and/or last in a particular environment)  It is this process which is applied to society in Sumner and Keller’s work.

b.      Sumner and Keller’s application of natural selection to sociology (and to cultural anthropology) begins with Sumner’s discussion of the evolution of social mores in his book “Folkways.”  Later, after Sumner’s death, his pupil and co-author Albert Galloway Keller gathered Sumner’s notes and his own and organized them into a four volume masterpiece titled “the Science of Society.” 

                                                               i.      “Adjustment of the mores to society’s existing life conditions is the fact of observation to be explained.  It is accounted for by the combined action of variation in the mores, selection among the mores, and transmission of the mores.”  (Science of Society, vol. I, p. 35.)

c.       Variation involves individual initiative and difference;  Selection implies competition for consumer preference, resulting in a place in the "division of labor."  Transmission is incorporation over time into the life-style of the general public, i.e., tradition..

.

7.       Social Evolution:  There are three  aspects of human evolutionary science (including Darwinian natural selection, etc.) which are erroneously grouped together as “Social Darwinism”:  a. General (Genetic, Biochemical  Individuality, Spontaneous Interaction); b.  Integrative (Social Evolution, i.e., Sociology);  c. Differential (Subspecies and Cultural Evolution, i.e., Anthropology, Physical and Cultural)

a.        General Aspects

                                                

                                                                   i.      The Genetic Aspect

 

Richard Dawkins:  “The Selfish Gene”

“Individuals are not stable things, they are fleeting. Chromosomes too are shuffled into oblivion, like hands of cards soon after they are dealt. But the cards themselves survive the shuffling. The cards are the genes. The genes are not destroyed by crossing-over, they merely change partners and march on. Of course they march on. That is their business. They are the replicators and we are their survival machines. When we have served our purpose we are cast aside. But genes are denizens of geological time: genes are forever.”  (Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene)

 

                                                

                                                            ii.      The Biochemical/Human Aspect --  Individual Basis of Spontaneous Evolution: 

From the biochemical level to the human, no two individuals are exactly alike (e.g., in DNA, fingerprints, internal organs and especially the most complex organ of all, i.e., the brain) so as to be competent to determine or regulate the future of other humans.  Hence all state control (and collectivist Marxist ideology) is unscientific.

Roger J. Williams, “Biochemical Individuality,” 

“Biochemical Individuality was first published by Dr. Roger J. Williams in 1956. It has just been reissued with a new introduction by Jeffrey S. Bland, Ph.D. Dr. Bland explains that Dr. Williams was the first to recognize all humans differ biochemically from others. He says that Dr. Williams was also the first to recognize that ‘nutritional status can influence the expression of genetic characteristics.’"

Roger J. Williams, “You Are Extraordinary,”

“In sum, according to Williams, the basic answer to the question ‘Why are you an individual?’ is that your body in every detail, including your entire nervous system and your brain (thinking apparatus) is highly distinctive. You are not built like anyone else. You owe some of your individuality to the fact that you have been influenced uniquely by your environment, which is not like anyone else's. But from all that may be known about basic inborn individuality … it seems clear that the amount of individuality we would possess if we were all born with exactly the same detailed equipment would be puny, indeed, compared with the individuality we actually possess.”  (Jeff Riggenbach, “Roger J. Williams and the Science of Individuality”)

Roger J. Williams, “Free and Unequal: The Biological Basis of Individual Liberty.”

“Environmental effects are not discounted, but ‘Every newborn baby has a distinctive and complex pattern of inborn mental capacities. Each item in this pattern is derived from his human forebears, but the pattern with its interactions is unique’. This is the basic assumption, but the volume deals not with the processes of heredity but with attitudes toward the products of heredity. . . . [P]  Finally, and this is the main thesis of the book, freedom without differences is meaningless.  If we all had the same capacities and interests, and all were equally adaptable, one dietary, one curriculum, one environment and one culture would be the desideratum, with neither the opportunity nor the desire to deviate from an established pattern. From such premises the philosophy of communism flows naturally and more or less inevitably. Almost all of us are in some measure infected by it; but it is precisely because the premises are not sound that we need to save ourselves from their insidious effects by promoting the kind of freedom that will permit each individual to develop according to his own special capacities and realize the potentialities that are peculiarly his in an environment that is conducive to the progress of our western civilization. On such freedom will depend our future happiness and our success in understanding each other and in comprehending and controlling the environmental factors on which we are dependent.”  (Review by C. H. DANFORTH, Stanford, California)

 

                                                            iii.      The Interactive Aspect:  Spontaneous Evolution (e.g., balance of nature; markets, networking; contracting)

Richard Dawkins (1996). “Climbing Mount Improbable”

“While an enzyme molecule or an eye might seem supremely improbable in their complexity, they are not accidental, nor need we assume that they are the designed handiwork of a Creator, asserts Oxford biologist Dawkins (The Selfish Gene). This foremost neo-Darwinian exponent explains the dazzling array of living things as the result of natural selection:   the slow, cumulative, one-step-at-a-time, non-random survival of chance variants.  Both a frontal assault on creationism and an enthralling tour of the natural world, this beautifully illustrated study is based on a set of BBC lectures, imparting a tone at once conversational and magisterial.  Dawkins explores how ordered complexity arose by discussing spiders' web-building techniques, the gradual evolution of elephant trunks and of wings (birds, he concludes, evolved from two-legged dinosaurs, not from tree gliders) and the symbiotic relationship between the 900 species of figs and their sole genetic companions, the miniature wasps that pollinate specific fig species. Using "computer biomorphs" (simulated creatures "bred" from a common ancestor), Dawkins demonstrates how varieties of the same plant or animal species can vary in shape because of differences in just a few genes.” (Publisher’s Weekly review.)

Robert Ardrey:  “The Social Contract:  A Personal  Inquiry into the Evolutionary Sources of Order and Disorder”

“The just society, as I see it, is one in which sufficient order protects members, whatever their diverse endowments, and sufficient disorder provides every individual with full opportunity to develop his genetic endowment, whatever that may be. It is this balance of order and disorder, varying in rigor according to environmental hazard, that I think of as the social contract. And that it is a biological command will become evident, I believe, as we inquire among the species.”    (from first chapter.)

b.      Integrative Evolution, 

                                                                i.      Sociology (and Sociobiology)

“Social Darwinism” in sociology today mainly takes the form of Sociobiology (E. O. Wilson, Konrad Lorenz, Robert Ardrey, Garrett Hardin, et al), in which animal instincts common to humans and lower animals (zoology) influences social behavior (sociology). This includes the instincts of territoriality (i.e., property), exploration, and competition, affecting the social order in the animal kingdom (e.g., the herd instinct and crowd behavior).  Thus, the study of animal societies (and differences from insect societies) provides enlightenment as to related human behavior.  This is “Social Darwinism” to an even greater extent than ever before. 

E. O. (Edward Osborne) Wilson:   “Sociobiology: The New Synthesis”

“When this classic work was first published in 1975, it created a new discipline and started a tumultuous round in the age-old nature versus nurture debate. Although voted by officers and fellows of the international Animal Behavior Society the most important book on animal behavior of all time, Sociobiology is probably more widely known as the object of bitter attacks by social scientists and other scholars who opposed its claim that human social behavior, indeed human nature, has a biological foundation. The controversy surrounding the publication of the book reverberates to the present day.

 “In the introduction to this Twenty-Fifth Anniversary Edition, Edward O. Wilson shows how research in human genetics and neuroscience has strengthened the case for a biological understanding of human nature. Human sociobiology, now often called evolutionary psychology, has in the last quarter of a century emerged as its own field of study, drawing on theory and data from both biology and the social sciences.”  (Amazon book description.)

E. O. (Edward Osborne) Wilson: “On Human Nature,”

“On Human Nature is a 1979 Pulitzer Prize-winning book,[1] published in 1978 by Harvard biologist E. O. Wilson. The book tries to explain how different characteristics of humans and society can be explained from the point of view of evolution. He explains how evolution has left its traces on the characteristics which are the specialty of human species like generosity, self-sacrifice, worship and the use of sex for pleasure. The book is considered an effort to complete the Darwinian revolution by bringing biological thought into social sciences and humanities.[1] “  (Wikipedia article on book).

Konrad Lorenz:   “On Aggression”

“This work has had significant impact on the social and biological sciences and is now a classic point of reference for investigations of behavioral patterns. Lorenz presents his findings on the mechanism of aggression and how animals control destructive drives in the interest of the species.”  (“Goodreads” summary of book.)

According to Lorenz,  the three functions of aggression are 1) balancing the distribution of the species, 2) selection of the strongest, and 3) defense of the young.  Male aggression associated with territoriality appeals to the females seeking a secure location in which to breed their young. (Summary by: Sebastian Molnar)

Garrett Hardin:  “Nature and Man’s Fate”

“Nature and Man's Fate draws attention to the important fact that progress in science is in large part a process of error and detection of error. The book focuses on the inescapability of competition-driven selection - the foundation of the modern evolutionary synthesis and of Hardin's analysis of evolution and its implications for human beings.

“Essays such as ‘In Praise of Waste,’ ‘Liberalism and the Spectre of Competition,’ and ‘Eugenics: Is Man Part of Nature?’ carefully address numerous taboo subjects within the framework of the impotence principles of evolutionary science; that is, the psychological need, or wish, for the world to be unbounded is challenged by:

-the impotence of Lamarckian beliefs in the face of Mendelian genetics;
-the impotence of Liberal beliefs in egalitarian results in the face of the inescapableness of biological competition in a world with limited resources and mates;
-the impotence of those who seek to eliminate all waste in the face of the success of Darwinian selection operating on genetic/cultural waste what is usually called variation (pp. 306-310).” 

(from Carl Jay Bajerna, “Garrett James Hardin: Ecologist, Educator, Ethicist and Environmentalist

Robert Ardrey:  “The Territorial Imperative: A Personal Inquiry into the Animal Origins of Property and Nations”

 “Territorial behavior in animals, over the past few decades, has attracted the attention of hundreds of competent specialists who have recorded their observations and their reasoned conclusions in obscure professional publications. The subject is very nearly as well known to the student of animal behavior as is the relation of mother and infant to the student of human behavior. Furthermore, many of the concerned scientists, as we shall see, believe as do I that man is a territorial species, and that the behavior so widely observed in animal species is equally characteristic of our own. And yet -- it is astonishing -- there exists in all the scientific literature but one book devoted exclusively to the subject.”   (Author’s preface.)

“A territory is an area of space, whether of water or earth or air, which an animal or group of animals defends as an exclusive preserve. The word is also used to describe the inward compulsion in animate beings to possess and defend such a space. A territorial species of animals, therefore, is one in which all males, and sometimes females too, bear an inherent drive to gain and defend an exclusive property. “  (Chapter I, opening paragraph)

Strangely enough the opponents of Socio-biology (e.g., Marxist sociologists) themselves serve as confirmation of its accuracy, insofar as they obviously resent the socio-biologist invasion of what they regard as their own intellectual “territory.,”  As an undergraduate student at San Francisco State, I had an international relations professor who on ideological grounds dogmatically denied the existence of a territorial instinct.  Yet just outside the building in which he spoke, there was a tree in which a bird had built a nest.  As people would enter the building they would pass underneath the nest and the bird would swoop down menacingly just above the “trespassers’” heads.

                                                             ii.       Social Psychology (LeBon, McDougall, Trotter, et al.)

  

Gustave Le Bon, “The Crowd:  A Study of the Popular Mind”  (1895)

“As a crowd gathers together and coalesces there is a `magnetic influence given out by the crowd or from some other cause of which we are ignorant’ that transmutes every individual’s behavior until it becomes governed by the ’group mind'. This model treats 'The Crowd' as a unit in its composition and robs every individual member of their opinions, values and beliefs. As he says in one of his more pithy statements, `An individual in a crowd is a grain of sand amid other grains of sand, which the wind stirs up at will’.

“Le Bon detailed three key processes that create ‘The Crowd’: anonymity, contagion and suggestibility.  

Anonymity provides an individual a feeling of invincibility and the sense loss of responsibility. With the loss of autonomy an individual becomes primitive, unreasoning, and emotional. This lack of self-restraint allows individuals to ‘yield to instincts’ and to accept the instinctual drives of their 'racial unconscious'. For Le Bon this means that the crowd inverts Darwin’s law of evolution and becomes atavistic or regressive, proving Ernst Haeckel's embryological theory: `ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny’. 

Contagion refers to the spread in the crowd of particular behaviors (e.g. rioter's smashing windows) where individuals sacrifice their personal interest for the collective interest.  

Suggestibility is the mechanism through which the contagion is achieved. As the crowd coalesces into a singular mind suggestions made by strong voices in the crowd create a space for the ‘racial unconscious’ to come to the forefront and guide its behavior. At this stage ‘The Crowd’ becomes homogeneous and malleable to suggestions from its strongest members. 

"`The leaders we speak of,’ says Le Bon, `are usually men of action rather than of words. They are not gifted with keen foresight... They are especially recruited from the ranks of those morbidly nervous excitable half-deranged persons who are bordering on madness. [two classes of leader, the energetic whose will is intermittent, and the rarer group whose will is enduring] the world belongs to the crowd leader who possesses a persistent will-force.’" (Wikipedia article on Le Bon.)

William McDougall, “An Introduction to Social Psychology” (1908)

“William McDougall (June 22, 1871 – November 28, 1938) was a British-born, American psychologist who pioneered work in human instinctual behavior and the development of social psychology. McDougall believed human behavior to be based on three faculties—intellect, emotion, and will—which were under instinctual control.”  (from New World Enclyclopedia article on McDougall.)

“McDougall's interests and sympathies were broad. He was interested in eugenics, but departed from neo-Darwinian orthodoxy in maintaining the possibility of the inheritance of acquired characteristics, as suggested by Jean-Baptiste Lamarck; he carried out many experiments designed to demonstrate this process. Opposing behaviourism, he argued that behaviour was generally goal-oriented and purposive, an approach he called hormic psychology (from Greek ὁρμή hormḗ "impulse").

“However, in the theory of motivation, he defended the idea that individuals are motivated by a significant number of inherited instincts, whose action they may not consciously understand, so they might not always understand their own goals. His ideas on instinct strongly influenced Konrad Lorenz^{[citation needed]}, though Lorenz did not always acknowledge this^{[citation needed]}.”  (from Wikipedia article on McDougall)

William Trotter:  “The Instincts of the Herd in War and Peace” (1916)

“Trotter's basic argument is that being a social species marks us collectively and especially individually with strong psychological characteristics. We respond instinctively and readily to group suggestions and are thus easily trained to suppress the most basic instincts (survival, sex) in the service of the group. Parallels can easily be drawn to other social species, including wolves, dogs, and bees, who are enthusiastic servants of their group as well as recipients of group communication and training, even while other species such as cats, are much less social and lack many of these instincts.

“Indeed what we regard as morals are the implanted instinctive or trained promptings of group service, which necessarily conflict with selfish instincts, and thus set up the mental conflicts that are the bread and butter of psychotherapy. "Normal" people are fully adapted to this regime, submerging their selves into the larger group and thus are ready to go off to war and other group activities. Trotter is rather biting in his analysis of war (WWI was to come as he presciently wrote in 1908, and was underway as he wrote in 1915). He also identifies religion as the natural consequence of this social instinct, which progressively hypostasizes the imaginary emblem and enforcer of the social order, until it is both all-powerful and psychologically internalized

“. . .

“Trotter indulges in long mid-war and post-war analyses of German instincts and character, contrasting the militaristic wolf-like follower/leader system of the German nation with the more advanced bee-like, collegial, bottom-up integration of countries like Britain, which is virtually allergic to strong leaders and external aggression.  This section would be comically jingoistic were it not that his analysis became realized to an unimaginable degree in the "Führer prinzip" fifteen years later.”  (Amazon review by B. Braun)

8.       Differential Evolution:  

A,  Sexual Differentiation and Selection

Ann Moir (Geneticist and Neuropsychologist) and David Jessel:  “Brain Sex”

Why can't a woman be more like a man? What is this thing called "feminine intuition"? Why are men better at reading maps, and women at other people's characters? The answers lie in the basic biological differences between the male and female brain, which make it impossible for the sexes to share equal emotional or intellectual qualities.  Moir and Jessel explain how the embryonic brain is shaped as either male or female at about six weeks, when the male fetus begins producing hormones that organize its brain's neural networks into a male pattern; in their absence, the brain will be female.  Structural and organizational differences between male and female brains, cause men to be more aggressive and competitive and better at skills that require spatial ability and mathematical reasoning.  On the other hand, these differences make women more sensitive to nuances of expression and gesture, more adept at judging character.  Thus, it can be said that women are more “people-oriented” than men, who tend to be more interested in “things.” 

Steven Goldberg, “The Inevitability of Patriarchy”

“Goldberg reviews literature, gathering evidence from expert witnesses (both primary and secondary sources) to demonstrate that each of three distinct patterns of recognised human social behaviour (institutions) has been observed in every known society.^[3] He proposes that these three universal institutions, attested as they are across independent cultures, suggest a simple psychophysiological cause, since physiology remains constant, as do the institutions, even across variable cultures—a universal phenomenon suggests a universal explanation.^[4]

“The institutions Goldberg examines are patriarchy, male dominance and male attainment.^[3] The hypothetical psychophysiological phenomenon he proposes to explain them, he denotes by the expression differentiation of dominance tendency.^[4][5] He explains this refers to dominance behaviour being more easily elicited from men on average than from women on average. In other words, he theorises a biologically mediated difference in preferences.

“Goldberg next provides expert witnesses from several disciplines regarding correlations between behaviour and the hormone testosterone, which are known to be causative in several cases, including dominance preference. He concludes with the hypothesis that testosterone is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for the development of the institutions he examined.^[6] In other words, without testosterone, the institutions would not develop—it must be part (but not all) of an explanation for their universality.

“Finally, Goldberg proposes that if patriarchy is indeed biologically based, it will prove to be inevitable; unless a society is willing to intervene biologically on the male physiology.”  (Wikipedia article on book.)

[Note:  Wikipedia observes elsewhere that “Female-biased dominance occurs rarely in mammals.’  (See Wikipedia article on “Dominance Hierarchy,” at note 43, citing the three exceptions to male dominance:   hyenas, lemurs and the bonobo.)]

John Gray, “Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus”

“The book states that most of common relationship problems between men and women are a result of fundamental psychological differences between the genders, which the author exemplifies by means of its eponymous metaphor: that men and women are from distinct planets – men from Mars and women from Venus –- and that each gender is acclimated to its own planet's society and customs, but not to those of the other. One example is men's complaint that if they offer solutions to problems that women bring up in conversation, the women are not necessarily interested in solving those problems, but want mainly to talk about them. The book asserts that each gender can be understood in terms of distinct ways they respond to stress and stressful situations.” (Wikipedia article on book)

B. Subspecies Differentiation and Selection

      

          1.  Types  of Differentiation

                                    

                                                             i.      Vertical Differentiation (Haeckel, Tylor)

Savage, Barbarian, Civilized (and their subdivisions)

Average Intelligence Levels, Instincts, Talents, Abilities, etc.

                                                             ii.      Horizontal Differentiation (Darlington, Coon, Huntington, Taylor)

Regional Habitat, Climate Zone, Race, Kith, Culture

                 

2.  Physical Anthropology and Related Disciplines (Human Genetics, Ethnic Geography) :

Subspecies Darwinism (misnamed “Social Darwinism”) is best exemplified by Ernst Mayr (zoology);  Ellsworth  Huntington (geographer), C. D. Darlington (geneticist), and Carleton S. Coon (physical anthropologist). 

Ernst Mayr:   “Animal Species and Evolution”

“This is certainly the most important contribution to the study of evolution since The new systematics and Huxley's Evolution-the modern synthesis appeared more than 20 years ago. Its central theme is the species concept as the key to the understanding of the evolutionary process. The decisive species criterion is the non-interbreeding of natural populations rather than the sterility of individuals. Mayr shows that species are not arbitrary, but objective entities, isolated reproductively from other species either spatially or by isolating mechanisms. Species may evolve through either internal transformation of a single species or division of one species into two if a peripheral population becomes isolated from the main body of the species in a distinctive environment. Evolution is facilitated by the fact that wild species are not genetically uniform populations, but are characterized by a high degree of overt or concealed variability.”  (C.A.B. Review by H. Epstein.)

C.D. (Cyril Dean) Darlington:  “The Evolution of Genetic Systems”

C.D. (Cyril Dean) Darlington:  “The Evolution of Man and Society”

“The key to Darlington’s theory of evolution, first set out in his influential study The Evolution of Genetic Systems (1939), was his notion of a “breeding system”.  For Darlington it is the breeding system as a whole, rather than the individual bearers of genes, that selection operates on to produce evolution.  By this Darlington meant not only the chromosome structure of an organism, but its whole approach to breeding:

It is .. not by acting directly on a single change in a gene or chromosome or on a single cell or a single individual that selection is constructive.  …  It is by acting indirectly on combinations of changes of many kinds through their effects which are of many kinds. … A large part of [evolutionary] effects concern the genetic system whose properties have nothing to do with the survival of the individual but only of its posterity.  All adaptation of the genetic system is therefore pre-adaptation.  It has no relation to any existing environment.  Its relations are internal to the species and often … extremely unstable and subject of their own evolutionary laws. … In the evolution of the genetic system all the primary types of variation interact and the genetic system itself reacts on the external form of the individual. (pages 225, 236-7)

“In the case of man, this “genetic system” is complex, including stratification into races (breeding groups) and castes (ranked breeding groups with hereditary occupations).  These breeding groups pursue varying strategies for inbreeding and outbreeding, depending on their circumstances, because there is a continual evolutionary tension between adaptation and variation.  Inbreeding is a successful strategy for a group whose environment remains relatively static for some time, and inbred groups can achieve high levels of fertility, tending to eliminate internal genetic variation and thereby adapt to their environment.  Outbreeding is suited to groups whose environment changes, because it produces increased variation.  However, an inbred group that switches too rapidly to outbreeding reduces its fertility, whereas an outbred group that switches to inbreeding risks the combination of harmful recessive genes.  Genes select their environment, which in turn selects them.

“ . . . The Evolution of Man and Society (1969), [is] a provocative universal history of man from a genetic perspective.  This was history that took heredity seriously, perhaps the only substantial history ever successfully attempted from that perspective;

“   Darlington was perhaps the last major hereditarian to escape serious public controversy, though the academic reaction to his major work, The Evolution of Man and Society (1969), followed by The Little Universe of Man (1977), showed that he was already out of step politically with many of his colleagues.  Soon Arthur Jensen, Richard Herrnstein, John Baker and (posthumously) Cyril Burt would be drawn into a political firefight over the role of genes in human nature.”  (Gavan Tredoux, reviewing Oren Harman’s biography of Darlington.)

Carleton S. Coon:  “Origin of Races”

“Coon first modified Franz Weidenreich's Polycentric (or multiregional) theory of the origin of races. The Weidenreich Theory states that human races have evolved independently in the Old World from Homo erectus to Homo sapiens sapiens, while at the same time there was gene flow between the various populations. Coon held a similar belief that modern humans, Homo sapiens, arose separately in five different places from Homo erectus, "as each subspecies, living in its own territory, passed a critical threshold from a more brutal to a more sapient state", but unlike Weidenreich stressed gene flow far less.^[15][16]

“Coon's modified form of the Weidenreich Theory is sometimes referred to as the Candelabra Hypothesis. A misunderstanding however has led some to believe that Coon supported parallel evolution or polygenism; this is not true since Coon's evolution model still allows for gene-flow, although he did not stress it.^[17]

“In his 1962 book, The Origin of Races, Coon theorized that some races reached the Homo sapiens stage in evolution before others, resulting in the higher degree of civilization among some races.^[18] He had continued his theory of five races. He considered both what he called the Mongoloid race and the Caucasoid race had individuals who had adapted to crowding through evolution of the endocrine system, which made them more successful in the modern world of civilization. This can be found on pages 108-109 of The Origin of Races. In his book Coon contrasted a picture of an Indigenous Australian with one of a Chinese professor. His caption "The Alpha and the Omega" was used to demonstrate his research that brain size was positively correlated with intelligence.”  (from Wikipedia article on Carleton S. Coon.)

Ellsworth Huntington:   “Mainsprings of Civilization”

“This was a very influential book in my thinking. It looks at heredity, geography and climate as major factors in the rise of various civilizations. It was originally published in 1945.  (Tom’s review in “Good Reads”)

“Huntington divides the "mainsprings" into:

“1. Physical inheritance: The selective, Darwinian process. Huntington's focus, which is unique among the sociobiologists I have read, is more on the effects of migration than anything else, and he places great emphasis on how Puritans, Icelanders, and other migrant groups were winnowed by their journeys. This is partly a function of the importance, in his mind, of physical energy to the creation of civilization. But it is struggle, either in Jews facing persecution, Junkers taming the slavic east, or Arab tribesmen robbing each other of cattle, that in his mind makes kiths strong.

“2. Environment: Huntington's reputation, which although perhaps appropriate to earlier phases of his career now seems undeserved, is as a climactic determinist. Diet is also considered, but the main factors are seasons, temperatures, and storms. He claims, for instance, that mental activity is best produced in a fairly stormy environment with fairly strong seasonal variation. The influence of different temperatures on physical energy, and on religious creeds, is another worthwhile discussion. The climatic cycles and the "ozone" hypothesis are not very convincing.

“His understanding of race is far ahead, in my view, of both the racists and anti-racists of our contemporary scene. His understanding of climate's influence on history, claims David Hackett Fischer, is quite unjustly neglected.  `We are confronted by possibilities which may be of the first importance, but so slight is our knowledge that most historians have never even thought of them, and many dismiss them as not worth pursuing.’"  (Fred R.’s review in “Good Reads”)

Thomas Griffith Taylor:  “Environment, Race, and Migration”

‘`Taylor links skin pigment to temperature and collects extensive data from the period on geology, topology, meteorology, and anthropology. Taylor saw geography in a synthesizing role between explanations of the physical world and the diffusion and evolution of the human species.

"`The fittest tribes evolve and survive in the most stimulating regions; i.e., where living is not so hard as to stunt mental development, and not so easy as to encourage sloth and loss of initiative. The least fit are ultimately crowded out into the deserts, the tropical jungles, or the rugged mountains.’ pg. 6

“In regards to anthropology, Taylor looks at records of hair texture and size, nose size, ear size, cephalic indices, skin color, and height. He links sexual attraction amongst different races to evolved and diverged cultural preferences for beauty. Taylor comes up with the theory of the `tri-peninsular world’, in which the world is divided into three peninsulas descending south from a common point in the Arctic (Americas, Europe and Africa, Asia and Australia). In these peninsulas, Taylor finds climate and race similarities. In regards to racial variation within smaller regions, Taylor offers this passage about Europe's races:

"`The Eur-African peninsula is now considered. Here the racial types have been fairly well investigated. We know that the term "European" has no value as an ethnological distinction. Thus the Savoyard of eastern France is akin to the wild tribes of the Pamirs, but not to the primitive peoples of the Dordogne only two hundred miles to the west. The Corsican is much more nearly allied to the Cornishman than to the Italian peoples of the adjacent Alps. In Wales, we are told, there are small groups still essentially allied to Neanderthal man.’ pg. 9

“The most suitable parts of the world for habitation are, according to Taylor, in Europe, Western Siberia, the Americas, and Eastern China. These are the places that, if not already overcrowded, are where the world's masses must one day move into. Places least adaptable to European styles of agriculture and settlement are considered by Taylor `useless’. In the final section of the book Taylor lays out the possibilities of future expansion of the white race, which he sees as the only race which will expand. Though he voices that no Europeans would wish to extinguish or force native people from their lands, `these primitive people are doomed to extinction...’ Whites would eventually settle all `useful lands.’"  (Wikipedia article on Taylor)

h.      Cultural Anthropology

There are also Darwinian evolutionists in cultural anthropology.

Edward Burnett Tylor, “Primitive Culture.”

Edward Burnett Tylor, “Anthropology”

Tylor saw culture as universal. In his view, all societies were essentially alike and capable of being ranked by their different levels of cultural advancement. As he explains in a later essay:

the institutions of man are as distinctly stratified as the earth on which he lives. They succeed each other in series substantially uniform over the globe, independent of what seem the comparatively superficial differences of race and language, but shaped by similar human nature acting through successively changed conditions in savage, barbaric, and civilized life. (“On a Method” 269)

 (  http://www.branchcollective.org/?ps_articles=peter-logan-on-culture-edward-b-tylors-primitive-culture-1871 )

                                Marshall D. Sahlins & Elman R. Service (editors):  “Evolution and Culture”

“Marshall Sahlins, co-editor with Elman Service of Evolution and Culture (1960), divided the evolution of societies into 'general' and 'specific'.^[18] General evolution is the tendency of cultural and social systems to increase in complexity, organization and adaptiveness to environment.^[18] However, as the various cultures are not isolated, there is interaction and a diffusion of their qualities (like technological inventions).^[18] This leads cultures to develop in different ways (specific evolution), as various elements are introduced to them in different combinations and at different stages of evolution.^{[18]”  (} http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociocultural_evolution )

Elman R. Service, “A Century of Controversy:  Ethnological Issues from 1860 to 1960”

‘Elman Service defined four classifications of the stages of social evolution which are also the four levels of political organizations: band, tribe, chiefdom, and state.

‘He also developed the "managerial benefits" theory that states that chiefdom-like society developed because it was apparently beneficial, because of the centralized leadership. The leader provides benefits to the followers, which, over time, become more complex, benefiting the whole chiefdom society. This keeps the leader in power, and allows the bureaucratic organization to grow.

“He also had an integration theory. He believed that early civilizations were not stratified based on property. They were only stratified based on unequal political power, not because of unequal access to resources. He believed there were no true class conflicts, but only power struggles between the political elite in early civilizations. The integration part of this theory was that monuments were created through volunteering, not the leaders forcing it upon the populace.”  (Wikipedia article on Service.)

2.      

           The Spiritual Implications of Evolution:

John Fiske,  “The Destiny of Man,,viewed in the light of his origin

 ” (1886)

 “Mr. Fiske, as is well known, is the leading American exponent of the evolution philosophy of Herbert Spencer.  , , ,  The aim of Mr. Fiske in his latest works is to reassert truths with which the theory of evolution seemed at first to be irreconcilable.  The main propositions of The Destiny of Man are (i) that the supreme law in natural development is that of teleology; (2) that man is the end and final outcome of the whole evolution process. Upon these premises Mr. Fiske constructs a plea for the immortality of the soul. In his last book he unfolds and defends a doctrine of theism, claiming it to be the logical outcome of the evolution philosophy.”   (The New Princeton Review, Volume 1, p. 296) 

I. Man's Place in Nature as affected by the Copernican Theory.

    II. As affected by Darwinism.

   III. On the Earth there will never be a Higher Creature than Man.

    IV. The Origin of Infancy.

     V. The Dawning of Consciousness.

    VI. Lengthening of Infancy and Concomitant Increase of Brain-Surface.

   VII. Change in the Direction of the Working of Natural Selection.

  VIII. Growing Predominance of the Psychical Life.

    IX. The Origins of Society and of Morality.

     X. Improvableness of Man.

    XI. Universal Warfare of Primeval Men.

   XII. First checked by the Beginnings of Industrial Civilisation.

  XIII. Methods of Political Development, and Elimination of Warfare.

   XIV. End of the Working of Natural Selection upon Man. Throwing off

             the Brute-Inheritance.

    XV. The Message of Christianity.

   XVI. The Question as to a Future Life.

(http://www.gutenberg.org/files/17239/17239.txt)

Samuel Alexander, “Space, Time and Deity’ (1920)

”The concept or idea of mind, the highest emergent known to us, being at our level, extends all the way down to pure dimensionality or Space-Time. In other words, time is the `mind’ of motion, materialising is the `mind’ of matter, living the `mind’ of life. Motion through pure time (or life astronomical, mind ideational) emerges as matter `materialising’ (geological time, life geological, mind existential), and this emerges as life `living’ (biological time, life biological, mind experiential), which in turn give us mind `minding’ (historical time, life historical, mind cognitional). But there is also an extension possible upwards of mind to what we call Deity.”  (Wikipedia article on “Emergent Evolution,”  section under Samuel Alexander.)

“The universe for Alexander is essentially in process, with Time as its ongoing aspect, and the ongoing process consists in the formation of changing complexes of motions. These complexes become ordered in repeatable ways displaying what he calls "qualities." There is a hierarchy of kinds of organized patterns of motions, in which each level depends on the subvening level, but also displays qualities not shown at the subvening level nor predictable from it… On this there sometimes supervenes a further level with the quality called "life"; and certain subtle syntheses which carry life are the foundation for a further level with a new quality. "mind." This is the highest level known to us, but not necessarily the highest possible level. The universe has a forward thrust, called its "nisus" (broadly to be identified with the Time aspect) in virtue of which further levels are to be expected..”   (^ Emmet, Dorothy. "Whitehead and Alexander” quoted in Wikipedia article on emergent evolution)

C. Lloyd Morgan, “Emergent Evolution”

“Abstract:  The theme of Lloyd Morgan’s text, as the title suggests, is emergent evolution. According to the author, emergent evolution works upwards from matter, through life, to consciousness which attains in humankind its highest reflective or supra-reflective level. Ultimately, the author posits: If we may acknowledge on the one hand a physical world underlying the phenomenal appearances with which we are acquainted by sense, and, on the other hand, an immaterial Source of all changes therein; if, in other words, we may acknowledge physical events as ultimately involved and God on whom all evolutionary process ultimately depends, then we may, with Kant, but on different grounds, accept both causation and Causality without shadow of contradiction. But unless we also intuitively enjoy God’s activity within us, feeling that we are in a measure one with him in substance, we can have no immediate knowledge of causality or of God as the source of our own existence and emergent evolution.”

http://www.giffordlectures.org/Browse.asp?PubID=TPEMEV&Cover=TRUE;  Cf. also C. Lloyd Morgan, “Life, Mind and Spirit”

Jan Christiaan Smuts, “Holism and Evolution” (1926)

“Smuts in retirement wrote Holism and Evolution (1926, 3d ed. 1936), in which he developed the view that evolution is a sequence of ever more comprehensive integrations, “  (Infoplease, per The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed.)

“The core principle of Smuts’ holism is that all things in the universe, from the level of the atom right up to human intellect, society and Values, has a strong tendency to form wholes. These wholes, while not containing anything specifically more than their parts, are nevertheless fundamentally more than merely the sum of those parts.

“This work draws strongly on the theory of evolution, primarily as stated by Darwin but also considering later additions. Another very influential factor is Einstein’s theory of relativity, in relation to which Einstein himself said that Smuts was `one of only eleven men in the world’ who fully understood it. Einstein also studied this book, and found it very influential.” (“Person, wandering” website.)

“As Holism in its individuating activity evolves and sets free smaller wholes, these wholes are themselves in ever-increasing measure set free from external determination and acquire an ever greater measure of self-determination and freedom in their activities and development. Holism not only means the development of the universe on holistic lines, the realisation of ever more perfect wholes, and the assimilation, transformation and absorption of non-holistic material or relations. It means also the ever-widening reign of Freedom, the realisation of the Ideal of Freedom in the gradual breaking down of all external fetters, and the gradually increasing inward self-determination of the universe through the progressive evolution of ever higher holistic entities in the universe.”  (Smuts, Holism, p.  308)

Wholes are not mere artificial constructions of thought; they actually exist; they point to something real in the universe, and Holism is a real operative factor, a vera causa. There is behind Evolution no mere vague creative impulse or Elan vital, but some-thing quite 

definite and specific in its operation, and thus productive of the real concrete character of cosmic Evolution. [P] The idea of wholes and wholeness should therefore not be confined to the biological domain ; it covers both inorganic substances and mental structures as well as the highest manifestations of the human spirit. (Smuts, Holism, p. 86.)

Le Comte du Nouy, “Human Destiny” (1947)

Written by a famous evolutionary biologist, this book takes a telefinalist view of evolution.  It depicts the evolution of mankind as proceeding thru three roughly chronological  stages:  physical, intellectual and spiritual, ultimately arriving at oneness with God.   Written from his Christian perspective, but in the terms of the physical world, Du Nouy casts a net wide enough for both science and spirituality. He treats the rift between religion and science that has simmered since Copernicus, as being non-contradictory.   Such terms as “science vs religion,” “evolution vs creation,” “fact vs faith”  are not necessarily mutually exclusionary and all exist together if you can open your mind wide enough to get past the doctrine and dogma of an opposition between religion and science.  (An amalgamation of Amazon reviews)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References:

Philosophical Evolution

John Fiske,  “The Destiny of Man” (1886)

Henri L. Bergson, “Creative Evolution”

C. Lloyd Morgan, “Life, Mind and Spirit”

Samuel Alexander, “Space, Time, and Deity”

Pierre Lecomte DuNouy, “Human Destiny”

J. C. (Jan Christiian) Smuts. “Holism and Evolution”

Herbert Spencer, “Synthetic Philosophy” (multi-volume work)

John Fiske, “Cosmic Philosophy”

E. O. Wilson “Consilience”

Biochemical Basis for Evolution (i.e. individuality and spontaneous interaction)

Roger J. Williams, “Biochemical Individuality,” 

Roger J. Williams, “You Are Extraordinary,”

Roger J. Williams, “Free and Unequal: The Biological Basis of Individual Liberty.”

Darwin’s Mentors (Scottish Enlightenment, etc.) 

Adam Smith,  “The Wealth of Nations”

Adam Smith, “The Theory of Moral Sentiments”

Adam Ferguson,  founder of sociology, who Like his friends He believed that the growth of a commercial society through the pursuit of individual self-interest could promote a self-sustaining progress.  He believed that the growth of a commercial society through the pursuit of individual self-interest could promote a self-sustaining progress.

James Burnett, Lord Monboddo (baptised 25 October 1714; died 26 May 1799) was a Scottish judge, scholar of linguistic evolution, philosopher and deist, anticipated evolutionary theory and natural selection.. 

Thomas Malthus

Erasmus Darwin

Social Evolution

Herbert Spencer, “Principles of Sociology”

[Cf. Robert Carneiro, “The Evolution of Society – Selections from Herbert Spencer’s Principles of Sociology”]

Herbert Spencer, “Social Statics”

Ernst Haeckel, “The Riddle of the Universe”

Ernst Haeckel, “The Wonders of Life”

Walter Bagehot:  “Physics and Politics”

William Graham Sumner:  “Folkways.”

Albert Galloway Keller:  “Societal Evolution.”

Albert Galloway Keller:  “Man’s Rough Road.”

Sumner and Keller:  “Science of Society” (four volumes)

Social Spencerism

John Fiske, “Outlines of Cosmic Philosophy, Based on the Doctrine of Evolution” (1923)

Robert MacIver, “On  Community, Society and Power”  (1970)j

Friedrich Hayek, “The Fatal Conceit:  The Errors of Socialism” (1988)

Jane Jacobs, “The Nature of Economies” (2000); cf. also, inter alia,

Jane Jacobs, “Cities and the Wealth of Nations” (1984)

Sociobiology

E. O. Wilson:  “Sociobiology”

Konrad Lorenz:   “On Aggression”

Richard Dawkins:  “The Selfish Gene”

Richard Dawkins (1996). “Climbing Mount Improbable”

E. O. (Edward Osborne) Wilson:  “Sociobiology: The New Synthesis”

E. O. (Edward Osborne) Wilson: “On Human Nature,”

Konrad Lorenz:  “On Aggression”

Robert Ardrey:  “The Territorial Imperative: A Personal Inquiry into the Animal Origins of Property and Nations”

Robert Ardrey:  “The Social Contract: A Personal  Inquiry into the Evolutionary Sources of Order and Disorder”

Differential Evolution:

Ernst Mayr:   “Animal Species and Evolution”

C. D. (Cyril Dean) Darlington:  “The Evolution of Man and Society”

Carleton S. Coon:  “Origin of Races”

Ellsworth Huntington:   “Mainsprings of Civilization”

Cultural Evolution:

            William Graham Sumner, “Folkways”

Edward Burnett Tylor, “Primitive Culture.”

            Edward Burnett Tylor, “Anthropology”

            Marshall D. Sahlins & Elman R. Service (editors):  “Evolution and Culture”

            Elman R. Service, “A Century of Controversy:  Ethnological Issues from 1860 to 1960”