Darwin’s theory of the evolution of species by natural selection – which rejected the idea that species are immutable, and created by a divine being (Descartes, Paley), and located on a great chain of being (Locke) according to their degree of perfection – served to undermine what many philosophers and theologians saw as the unbridgeable gap that separates humans from animals. On the Darwinian view, humans no longer occupy a privileged and unique position in the world. The higher cognitive functions considered by many to be definitive of human nature – abstract thought, language, rationality, morality, self-consciousness – are entirely natural phenomena that have an evolutionary explanation; and they are no longer the sole preserve of our species, but are found in incipient form in other primate species, and even in cetaceans and dolphins. Ever since Darwin, philosophers, theologians, and scientists have tended to either support or reject the gap, arguing either for cognitive discontinuity between humans and animals, or for cognitive continuity. What side of this debate – if any – do you line up on, and why? Explain and defend your position, and situate it in light of the views of two of the philosophers or scientists we have read in this course.
