From: Lau Kam To <ktlau127-at-netvigator.com>

Subject: Evolution and Hegelian dialectics in nature - a reply

Annette,

My knowledge in science subjects is very limited, so I'm not in a position to comment on the points you've made, and neither do I knew much of the development of the theory of evolution in the 20th century.

But allow me to raise the question of the compatibility between Darwin and Hegel. As far as I understand Darwin (mainly based on Stephen Gould's book "Ever Since Darwin - Reflections in Natural History" ), there are two points that are relevent to Hegel and a dialectic of Nature:

1. there is no purpose in evolution. The only purpose there is but to enhance the chances of survival of the speices. The order as found in nature is a result of each individual organism seeking to maximize one's interest, somewhat like Adam Smith's liberal economy.
2. there is no direction in evolution. Variation in species is not towards some higher form of being in terms of structural complexity. Living beings strive to adapt to their environment, so it is not suitable to say some organisim is "more advanced" or "less advanced". The enivronment may so changed that an organisim needs a less complex structure to survive, but that does not constitute "devolution" or "regression". (The association of "evolution" with "progress" belongs to Herbert Spencer and not to Darwin).

Now, in Hegel's philosophy:

1. there is a purpose in the universe, the attainment of Absolute Spirit, the actualization of reason.
2. there is a hierarchy in the great chain of being: inorganic matter, organism, human, etc., a progress from lower to higher forms, one phase succeeds another. The progress in a logical order not in time order (Hegel's Philosophy of Nature is not available to me, I'm dependent on secondary literature).

Therefore, Hegel and Darwin are, at least from the above two points, are incompatible with each other. Dialectic involves a higher synthesis between opposites and in case of a dialectic of Nature, that would imply a purpose in Nature which is not acceptable to materialists.

"Change can only become development in the true sense by being viewed teleologically in relation to an end. Unless nature is moving towards an end there can be no advance, and therefore no higher or lower. To say that anything is higher can have no meaning unless it refers to some standard of perfection, some perfect end, towards which the world-process is moving." (WT Stace, The Philosophy of Hegel, pg 314)

Regards,

Alex