Intelligence evolves to gives us an advantage over the other animals on our planet. But evolution is lazy. Once a problem is solved, the trait stops evolving.
Scientific truth is itself historical. The issue therefore is not
simply what is universal but what is evolving, and whether that
which is evolving is necessarily identifiable with progress. How
can the social sciences deal with the fact that they must describe,
formulate true statements about, an unequal world in which the
social scientists themselves are rooted? The claims of universalism have always been claims made by particular persons, and
these claimants usually have found themselves in opposition to
persons with competing claims. The fact that there are competing particularist views of what is universal forces us to take seriously questions about the neutrality of the scholar. The natural
sciences have long accepted the reality that the measurer intrudes on the measured. And yet this statement has remained
controversial in the social sciences where, if anything, it might
seem more obvious.
In fact, adaptation is not a necessary component of genetic evolution. A population is evolving whenever its gene pool changes in the course of generations whether it be gradually or suddenly. (...)
Obviously random evolution cannot explain why land animals have legs, birds have wings and fish have fins. Yet a number of mechanism are now known to be operative in evolution besides natural selection, for instance genetic drift, random gene fixation, indirect selection due to genetic linkage and differential growth of organs.
Many of these factors help to randomize the effects of natural selection and to produce structures that may well be of no use. The problem is to determine the relative weight of all these processes in evolution.
Our attention spans aren’t shrinking. They are evolving over me. While we do get flooded with attention-grabbing material throughout our day, we don’t lose attention span. Our brains simply learn what to focus on. Our brains are getting better at rapidly idenfying something that is interesting or important
Wilfred Cantwell Smith, observed: “‘Islam’ could perhaps fairly readily be understood if only it had not existed in such abundant actuality, at differing times and in differing areas, in the minds and hearts of differing persons, in the institutions and forms of differing societies, in the evolving of different stages.”
