Usually, when I hear someone talk about the Garden of Eden story, they mistakenly refer to the forbidden tree that Adam and Eve ate from as "The Tree of Knowledge." Actually, the full name is "The Tree of the Knowledge of Good & Evil." The distinction here is a crucial one. The story isn't so much an indictment of knowledge, as it is a tale of how mankind acquired a conscience and all the burdens, responsibilities and curses that went with it.
The distinguishing characteristic of human beings is not only our intelligence, but also our conscience. All the other creatures on this planet are driven by instincts. Instincts which they can neither control or deny. They form an essential part of their nature and define their every action. They even seem to be born with the knowledge necessary to follow these instincts. A bird seems to inexplicably know how to build a nest. The information seems to be innate and pre-installed. I don't pretend to know all the scientific intricacies of how this works, but it's the fact that it does work that I'm interested in here. Human beings don't seem to possess this kind of innate knowledge. It's true that we have certain predispositions and biological forces that drive us, and these are often referred to as "instincts." But these don't appear to be the same kind of instincts that make it possible for a bird to just know how to build a nest or a beaver how to build a dam. Even the most basic and necessary human behavior requires learning.
So it would seem at first glance that the birds have an advantage over us. They know how to build their nests without being taught. However, this innate knowledge come with a price. Birds can only build their nests according to this pre-installed design. Over thousands and thousands of years, birds have built their nests in exactly the same way. They can not rethink or relearn the process, because there was no thinking or learning involved in the first place. They are incapable of true creativity. But since human beings have to learn how to do everything from scratch, since we have to consciously process new information, we are capable of coming up with different ways of doing things. We are free to act in a way that the birds are not. Conscience is the responsibility we bear for this freedom.
The matter of good & evil only becomes relevant when dealing with a being who is free to choose their behaviors and course of action. Innate instincts serve in the place of conscience for animals and other creatures. There's no consideration of good & evil when it comes to the nest-building of birds. They're simply following a natural design. Human actions come with no such guarantee. We are free to do anything that we're physically capable of. We're free to create something new. But since we are capable of making these choices, the possibility of making the wrong choices comes into the picture. By being released from the restraints of instinct our eyes were opened to infinite possibilities of creativity. Conscience is our awareness that we might make mistakes. It's an expression of our uncertainty when faced with the responsibility of making choices. It's the sense of the weight of our own potential. The Garden of Eden story is a brilliant exploration of this problem. It captures the very essence of the human dilemma.
The Serpent in the story told Eve that they would become like gods if they ate the fruit. In a certain sense he was telling the truth. He was being disingenuous, to be sure, but it wasn't altogether a lie. The acquisition of a conscience came with the power to create, and for the first time the artificial was introduced into the natural world. Adam & Eve clothing themselves with fig leaves was an act of guilt and shame, but it also represents the first act of genuine human creativity. With this detail, the story demonstrates how these things go hand in hand, as two sides of the same coin. All the accomplishments of human civilization owe themselves to the fact that we were able to rise above natural instincts. Unfortunately, all the atrocities of human history owe themselves to this fact as well. Jean Paul Sartre said that we experience anguish over the recognition of our freedom. He said we are doomed to be free. We are free to create and free to destroy. The choices are limitless. Our conscience reminds us that they are our choices, and that in the end we're going to have to live and die with the consequences.
Taking the base story at face value, I don't think it would have been long before Gawd Himself said "Oh go ahead and eat the thing! You are boring Me to death! I need some followers for my Facebook page, anyway!!"
ReplyDeleteTaking the story at face value, one would have to wonder why he even put the tree there to begin with. It's like he was planting the garden and went, "Hmmm, I'll just put a couple of forbidden trees over here for no reason. What could go wrong?"
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to come across this essay a year after it was written (hot off the press in conventional publishing terms, a long age in the speedier blogosphere).
ReplyDeleteFor me, your essay comes at the right moment. It allows me to relate it to other ideas, in particular David Abram’s Becoming Animal and our discussions on this over at my place.
I now see in the old Biblical story a treatment of the essential flaw in the human design. We weren’t made complete like the other animals. A bird knows how to build its nest. An average young person in England today doesn’t know how to negotiate the various coming-of-age rituals like acquiring a house to live. Five years ago it was almost criminally easy to obtain a mortgage. This caused the financial crash. Now it has swung the other way, and you might find yourself waiting for the death of both parents before you could successfully “climb the property ladder” as they put it here. The replacement of university grants (like the one I enjoyed fifty years ago) by student loans doesn’t help. Not only have you no idea how to build your nest, you enter the adult world burdened with a huge debt.
These are just examples, not all of which can be put at the door of the Lord God of Israel & fellow-travelling good Christian folk like us.
Taking the story as teaching “original flaw” and not “original sin” is a subtle difference but it shifts the blame a little, helps us realize we can’t help it, but are merely stuck with the dilemma, and would do better to admit it.
I could take it a step further and say that here is a point too where the rationalist humanist may have it a little wrong if he claims that reason & conscious choice of good & not evil can help us create a perfect world, and are within our reach as choices.
The difference between an atheist and a believer comes down to this. The believer is supplied with a life-guarantee:
“Follow these rules and if you have any problems with your life, just ask your manufacturer and He will provide you with the help you need.” Whether it is worth the paper it’s printed on is debatable but it’s one of the most popular placebos the world has known.
Whereas the rationalist/humanist/socialist, or other atheistical -ist, thinks we can fix it ourselves, with our own special human intelligence, one that uses hubris in place of instinct.
“Hubris?” Yes, to apply the kind of intelligence which can land on the moon and construct computerised slave robots, to try and fix the big flaws in human design which make it so hard to live in our own bodies.
Wow! This was excellent. You are indeed a great thinker and good match for Vincent's philosophy. It is a shame that you did finish the book collaboration, a real shame.
ReplyDeleteAnd this:
Over thousands and thousands of years, birds have built their nests in exactly the same way. They can not rethink or relearn the process, because there was no thinking or learning involved in the first place.
Obviously when you say it, but completely mysterious before you say it.
@John: Thanks. As for the book, I'm sure you've seen by now if you've been looking over the archives there that the combination was a little too combustible...at least on that issue. I'd like to think that Vincent and I could successfully put our heads together over something we agreed on...if only we could figured out what that is ;)
ReplyDeleteThis is an excellent analysis of an original myth.
ReplyDeleteThis mythology of knowledge of good and evil takes a terrible twist of plot when murder is committed by the offspring of Adam and Eve. Now we humans with a conscience must dwell among those who have none. The serpent’s work continues with success, and his temptations abound today.
Thank you for the tip on this post, John.
That's a good point, another turn of the screw.
ReplyDelete