Brother Dog and Sister Cat

In certain Republican circles, when Rick Perry says he believes in capital punishment you hear wild applause, but when Jon Huntsman says he believes in evolution you hear … crickets. Well, I’m clapping with the crickets on this one, although this was not always the case.

Growing up in my home, if you ever needed to create a diversion (or if you were just plain bored), there were two sure-fire truth claims at your disposal, two proclamations, each guaranteed to create an explosion of discussion: (i) a tree falling in a forest makes no sound if there is no one there to hear it, and (ii) one simple word: evolution.   Humans did not descend from apes at my house, nor were they necessary receptors for sound waves.

It was not until I attended BYU and took “Intro to Biology” that I realized science in general, and the “e” word in particular, were not incompatible with religious belief. I was fortunate to have science and religion professors who understood what Harvard Professor Stephen Jay Gould defined as “NOMA,” the “non-overlapping magisteria” of science and religion. According to Gould, science and religion each comprise a separate magisterium (that is, teaching authority) of human understanding, science defining the natural world and its functions, religion defining the moral world and its functions. Gould’s ideas are wonderfully rendered in his book Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life.

I was introduced, in fact, to Gould’s writings, as a BYU undergrad shortly after my mission. The bookstore carried several eye-catching collections of his Natural History magazine essays, often with beguiling titles, and I did partake:

– Ever Since Darwin

– The Panda’s Thumb

– Hen’s Teeth and Horse’s Toes

– The Flamingo’s Smile

– Bully for Brontosaurus

– Dinosaur in a Haystack

;

;

I loved Gould’s vivid writing style, his wit, grace and intelligence, his effortless persuasiveness. And his output was as prodigious as his talent, a Lou Gherig-esque production of essays for 300 consecutive issues of Natural History under the column title “This View of Life.” At 10 volumes a year, that’s 30 years at bat for evolutionary theory, a herculean literary production. If you’ve never read Gould, I recommend The Richness of Life: The Essential Stephen Jay Gould.

An early by-product of appreciating evolution was my realization that all humans on our planet are related, that prejudice against one is prejudice against all.   In more recent years it has helped me further understand that all life–not just humanity–is interrelated, helping me embrace the totality of life in all its varieties: the elephant, the lion, the tiger, the bear, the horse, and all other kinds of animals, fowls in the air in all their varieties, fishes of all kinds in the waters, and insects and all manner of animal life upon the earth. Not only am I my brother’s/sister’s keeper, but I am also my fellow living organisms’ keeper.

While I am not a vegan or vegetarian, nor am I an animal rights activist per se, I developed through the writings of Joseph Campbell, another BYU “bookstore mentor,” a pronounced sensibility toward life and my part in the consumption of other life that approached certain forms of Native American spirituality. I learned to feel a tangible and sacred connection to the animals and plants that sustain my existence. As articulated by Campbell (from The Power of Myth, Chapter 3):

“Man lives by killing, and there is a sense of guilt connected with that… The basic hunting myth is … a covenant between the animal world and the human world. The animal gives its life willingly, with the understanding that its life transcends its physical entity and will be returned to the soil or to the mother through some kind of ritual restoration…. The Indian relationship to animals is in contrast to our relationship to animals, where we see animals as a lower form of life…. For hunting people … the animal is in many ways superior…. The Indians addressed all of life as a ‘thou’ [rather than an it]-the trees, the stones, everything. You can address anything as a ‘thou,’ and if you do it, you can feel the change in your own psychology. The ego that sees a ‘thou’ is not the same ego that sees an ‘it.'”

In connection with the hunter’s mythology, aka the “Way of the Animal Powers,” Campbell loved to discuss the art painted in the primitive cave “cathedrals” of France, such as the Grotto of Lascaux. How old these cavern sanctuaries might be, no one knows, perhaps 15,000, perhaps 30,000, years old. Crawling through a rock-hewn tunnel entrance, as if being born again, we suspect that initiates emerged from this “birth canal” in total darkness, presumably to learn these great myths springing to life in vivid colors on the rock walls, illuminated by torchlight. Entering as children, with infantile preoccupations, they left as adults endowed with outward, communal focus.  

According to last weekend’s Wall Street Journal  article “From the Cave to the Kennel,” in the nearby Chauvet  Cave, one of the most intriguing depictions on this cave’s wall is the handprint  (think kindergarten art project on your fridge) of an 8-10 year old torchbearing child, in close proximity to a paw print of a wolf or a dog on the floor, perhaps a pet dog.    According to this WSJ article, these cave impressions are symbolic of the new genetic and fossil discoveries suggesting that humans and dogs evolved … together. Sure, humans chose, domesticated and bred dogs over time from wolves, but this new, emerging hypothesis tells us that canines chose us along the way as well. According to the author, Mark Derr:

“Dogs and humans are social beings who depend on cooperation for their survival and have an uncanny ability to understand each other in order to work together…. The tableau in the mud of Chauvet Cave is a stark reminder that dogs and humans have travelled together for tens of thousands of years, from ancient hunting camps to farms, ranches, cities and suburbs-from the tropics to the poles…. [Dogs] and humans brought unique, complementary talents to a relationship that was based not on subservience and intimidation but on mutual respect.”

I’m convinced 100 years from now we will be judged by our descendants based on whether we continued to develop mutual respect in our relationships with all creatures great and small.   Perhaps even those animals known in our bestiary as Republicans and Democrats can evolve together as well and learn to cooperate for our survival, better understand each other  and work together. One thing they can learn from humankind’s best friend: dogs have no apparent need for political parties.

;