Part VIII: The Two Species of Homo
The Ubiquity of Mindedness
one of the outstanding physiologists of a former generation,
in his autobiography wrote: (21) "I remember that once I spent 20 hours continuously
at the microscope watching the movements of a sluggish leukocyte
in its laborious efforts to escape from a blood capillary."
It would seem absurd to suppose that a single-celled leukocyte
consciously wanted to be free, and yet as Sir Charles Sherrington
(22) said, when
referring to this statement, there are not a few competent research
workers who are persuaded that even such lowly forms of life
do have some kind of mindedness.
The researches of H. S. Jennings,
(23) which were
published under the title Behaviour of the Lower Organisms
in 1906, certainly provided some justification for believing
that single celled animals have minds of their own. This is a
remarkable circumstance in view of the fact that by reason of
their very uni-cellularity they have no organ of mind such as
constitutes brain in the higher forms of life. Indeed, Jennings
drew the conclusion that if an amoeba were as large as a dog
we would undoubtedly ascribe to it all the mental states which
we ascribe to dogs, such as fear, anger, and courage.
Numerous investigators have reported
similar findings for the humble little amoeba. Thus Wilhelm Seifriz
believed that the amoeba is capable of making decisions. (24) When it is prodded by
a needle it may retreat as fast as it can or contract into a
ball. In one experiment he held down the edge of an amoeba with
a needle. The amoeba pinched off
21. Ramon-y-Cajal, Santiago, Recuerdos
de mi Vida, 3rd edition., translated by E. H. Caigie, Toronto,
1 of 12
22. Sherrington, Sir Charles, Man on His Nature, Cambridge,
23. Jennings, H. S., Behaviour of the Lower Organisms, Columbia
University Biology, Series10, Columbia University Press, 1906,
24. Seifriz, Wilhelm, Protoplasm, McGraw-Hill, New York,
this portion of flesh
and escaped, just as a fox might bite off a leg caught in a trap
in order to get free.
So pervasive does mindedness seem
to be in living organisms even of the simplest kind that biologists
have coined the term "protoplasmic consciousness."
A little higher up the scale of life, neurophysiologists think
they can speak meaningfully of "spinal consciousness."
With ourselves we locate consciousness in the brain, but there
is substantial evidence of consciousness of a more diffuse nature
somewhere else within ourselves than in the brain, for the brain
itself can be operatively mutilated to an extraordinary degree
without the patient apparently having any awareness of change
in over-all consciousness. The kind of evidence that I am thinking
of has resulted from drastic measures taken to help those who
have received very serious head wounds. For example, Penfield
and Rasmussen wrote in this connection: (25)
Popular tradition, which seems
to be largely shared by scientific men has taken it for granted
that the cortex is a sort of essential organ for the purposes
of thinking and consciousness, and that final integration of
neural mechanisms takes place in it. Perhaps this is only natural
since there has been an extraordinary enlargement of the cortex
in the human brain, and, at the same time, man seems to be endowed
with intellectual functions of a new order..
[However] the whole anterior frontal
area, on one or both sides, may be removed without loss of consciousness.
During the amputation the individual may continue to talk, unaware
of the fact that he is being deprived of that area which most
distinguishes his brain from that of the chimpanzee.
with animals have shown that extraordinary segments of the brain
can be destroyed without apparently reducing their consciousness
of what is taking place around them. Some of this evidence is
discussed in another Doorway Paper. (26) In fact, Ralph Gerard said a few years ago that for
all the difference it seems to make, our skulls could be stuffed
with cotton batten. (27)
This is an exaggeration, of course, but as we shall see, some
kind of consciousness seems to inhere in other organs and tissues
of the body besides the brain.
A very low form of life, the fresh-water
planarian, has been a favourite subject of experimentation in
this connection, because it can be chopped up into pieces in
innumerable ways and each piece (except under a few clearly specifiable
conditions) will regenerate itself into a whole animal complete
with a brain. In his Lectures on Developmental
25. Penfield, W. and T. Rasmussen, The
Cerebral Cortex in Man, Macmillan, New York, 1950, p.226.
26. See "The Subconscious and the Forgiveness of Sins",
Part VI in Man in Adam and in Christ, vol.3 in The
Doorway Papers Series.
27. Gerard, Ralph, "What is Memory," Scientific
American, Sept., 1953, p.118.
Physiology, Alfred Kuhn (28) diagrammed some of these planarian mutilations and
showed how extraordinary is this little animal's regenerative
power. It is not necessary that some part of the brain itself
be allotted to each fragment in order to provide the nucleus
of a regenerated and complete new brain. Apparently the animal
can build an effective brain for itself out of other parts of
its own body.
Even more extraordinary is the
finding that these newly regenerated parts are not merely reacting
things with some kind of nervous system that is electro-chemically
responsive to stimuli applied externally. The fact is that once
these fragments have reconstituted themselves into whole animals
they are capable of showing all kinds of reactions which, if
they were witnessed in larger animals, or when they are witnessed
under a microscope with sufficient magnification, could only
be interpreted by the viewer as expressions of quite refined
consciousness. Jay B. Best found that these exceedingly simple
little bits of protoplasm seemed to be experiencing "boredom,
interest, conflict, decision, frustration, rebellion, anxiety,
learning and cognitive awareness." (29) In short, they demonstrate not merely consciousness
but mindedness. He concluded: (30)
If the major psychological patterns
are not unique to the vertebrate brain but can be produced even
by such primitive animals as planarians, two possibilities suggest
themselves. Such patterns may stem from some primordial properties
of living matter, arising from some cellular or sub-cellular
level of organization rather than nerve circuitry...
An alternative possibility is that
the behavioural programs may have arisen independently in various
species by a kind of convergent evolution.
One has to allow
this alternative, of course, as a possibility. But one still
has to explain what kind of forces are at work that can cause
matter, supposedly devoid of consciousness, to evolve a high
level of consciousness out of itself no matter how many times
you cut it up.
There are many exceedingly primitive
forms of animal life which have been observed behaving in a very
purposeful manner when faced with some situation that must be
considered exceptional to its normal way of life. Years ago Romanes
reported watching a small rotifer attach itself to a much larger
one with the forceps which form at one end of its tiny body.
(31) Although rotifers
are many-celled animals, certain species
28. Kuhn, Alfred, Lectures on Developmental
Physiology, translated by Roger Milkman, Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, 1971, pp.419, 420.
29. Best, Jay B., "Protopsychology," Scientific
American, Feb., 1963, p.62.
31. George J. Romanes: quoted by A. T. Schofield, "The
Scope of the Mind," Transactions of the Victoria Institute,
vol.32, 1898, p.238, from his Animal Intelligence,
are far smaller
than any single-celled amoeba; (32) they are microscopic in size. The larger rotifer
at once became very active, moving rapidly this way and that
in the water until it became attached to a piece of weed, the
small rotifer still hanging on grimly. Here, Romanes tells us,
it took firm hold of the weed with its own forceps and began
a most extraordinary series of movements to rid itself of the
encumbrance. It dashed itself from side to side, but for a remarkable
length of time the little rotifer refused to let go. However,
after several minutes it was thrown violently away. Then it returned,
seeking to re-attach itself for some reason. But the movement
of the larger animal was now so violent as to prevent it from
doing so. Romanes says that it was impossible to watch this little
performance without attributing mindedness to both animals. It
is clear, therefore, that there are no size limits imposed upon
the possession of mindedness (just as there are no structural
complexity limits, judging by amoeba behaviour), at least to
the extent that this tiny creature with its sub-microscopic brain
was engaged in a conscious struggle with one of its own species
even smaller than itself.
One little unicellular creature
which is a favourite among those who experiment with learning
in animals is the paramecium. The interest in this microscopic
animal lies not only in the fact that it is unicellular and therefore
has no brain which could be the seat of its mindedness, but that
it can be shown to be quite capable of learning. What interests
biochemists is that the learning process is associated with a
change in the animal's chemical constitution -- or at least it
appears to be. In fact, if the animal is chopped up and fed in
the form of a kind of mincemeat to other paramecia, they seem
to have acquired from this diet a certain head start in the learning
process when subjected to the same regimen of training. (33) There is some debate about
the reality of this "memory diet," but there is no
question that these little creatures do learn without a brain.
Some extraordinary experiments
have been conducted in recent years with single cells. These
experimental cells were not whole animals in the accepted sense,
like the paramecia, but rather free moving fragments of a whole
animal. Evidence is accumulating from such experiments that in
some mysterious way such cells recognize one another and know
what to do in order to organize or re-organize themselves into
larger aggregates both of organs and whole organisms. Graham
Chedd has recently drawn attention to what he quite justifiably
32. Rotifers: see Ralph Buschbaum, Animals
Without Backbones, University Press of Chicago, 1938, p.30,
33. Paramecium: Sten R. Bergstrom, University of Uppsala, Scandinavian
Journal of Psychology, vol,9, 1970, p.220; vol.10, 1970,
terms "good samaritanism"
among cells, (34)
noting that two reports of metabolic cooperation between human
cells of recent date reveal that, where for some reason or other
cells have become incompetent to perform their functions properly,
competent cells will actually cooperate with them and help them
That cells do co-operate with each
other in some way has been demonstrated time and again. More
than half a century ago in 1894 the distinguished experimental
biologist Wilhelm Roux (35) shook apart the cells of a frog's egg during the
early stages of its development, placed the separated cells some
distance apart in water, and watched to see what would happen.
The separated cells slowly approached each other until they established
contact. Whether these cells actually reconstituted themselves
into tissue is not clear, but numerous experiments since that
time have shown that they are quite able to do so.
It was reported recently by Nicholas
Seeds (36) that
mouse brain cells derived from an embryo animal could be gently
teased apart and if immersed in a suitable fluid medium would
reconstitute themselves into true brain tissue, tissue which
contained the all important synapses through which nerve cells
communicate with each other and with nerve fibers formed complete
with "insulating" myelin sheath. Lapham and Markesbury
have demonstrated that human brain cells possess the same capabilities
for re-organization. (37) Such single cells, teased apart from embryo brains
of various gestational ages (10�19 weeks) which were available
because of surgical removal for the purpose of terminating pregnancy,
can be cultivated in vitro and will develop into normal
brain tissue. These single cells develop the same character as
brain cells in the embryo that comes to full term in vivo,
and within what seems to be very nearly the same time period.
It has been known for many years
that a heart will continue to pulsate after being removed from
the body, provided it is appropriately nourished. (38) What has been recently
discovered, however, is that heart cells have an in-built individual
rhythmic pulse of their own. If a number of these cells cultivated
in vitro are allowed to associate, though
34. Chedd, Graham, "Cellular Samaritans,"
New Scientist, Oct. 31, 1968, p.256.
35. Roux, Wilhelm: quoted by Ashley Montagu, in On Being Human,
Schuman, New York, 1951, p.34.
36. Seeds, Nicholas and Albert E. Vetter, Proceedings of the
National Academy of Science, vol. 68, p.3219. Also, New
Scientist, Apr. 6, 1972, pp.12-14, "ReAssembling the
37. Lapham, L. W. and W. R. Markesbury, "Human Foetal Cerebellar
Cortex: Organization and Maturation of Cells in Vitro,"
Science, vol.173, 1971, p.829-832.
38. Heart cells: Isaac Harary, "Heart Cells in Vitro,"
Scientific American, May, 1962, pp.141-152.
each of them has its
own established rhythm, they will unite and coordinate their
pulsing so that they beat in unison.
What is true of heart cells is
found to be true of kidney cells. So strong is the power to re-organize,
that kidney tissue can be minced up and yet, under appropriate
conditions, reconstitute itself into true kidney tissue. (39) In fact, it has been proved
experimentally possible to produce normal embryonic kidneys by
mincing, pooling, and scrambling kidney tissue from several different
There is a growing feeling that
consciousness in some way inheres in every cell, although there
are some areas of the organism in which the organization of the
cells somehow concentrates consciousness, and mindedness finds
expression. Certainly cells appear to be quite capable of organizing
themselves into larger wholes that somehow contribute to higher
levels of consciousness. Sir Charles Sherrington had some notable
passages in his famous essay "Man on His Nature," in
which he speaks of the apparent purposefulness of cells in the
growing organism: (40)
We seem to watch battalions
of specific catalysts, lined up each waiting with stop watch
in hand, for its moment to play the part assigned to it, a step
in one or another great thousand linked chain process. . . .
The total system is organized.
. . In this great company along with stop watches, run
dials telling how confreres and substrates are getting on so
that at zero time each takes its turn.
In a similar
vein Paul W. Weiss of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research
At the moment of its creation
or very soon after, each of the million cells that make up a
living organism seems to know its destiny. It knows whether it
will become part of an eye or a leg or a chicken feather. It
knows also how to find and group itself in the proper arrangement
with other like cells to make up the living fabric of eyes, legs,
feathers, skin, and so forth.
If my thesis
is correct and the basis of reality is spiritual, a spiritual
reality in which mindedness is the fundamental element, it ought
not to surprise us to find that in whatever form such a reality
expresses itself, whether as pure spirit or through materialization,
mindedness should always characterize that expression. It is
not unreasonable to assume that some forms of materialization
will lend themselves only to a very
39. Kidney cells: Paul Weiss and A. C. Taylor,
"Reconstruction of Complex Organs from Single Cell Suspensions
of Chick Embryos in Advanced Stages of Differentiation,"
Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, vol.46,
no.9, Sept., 1960, p.177-185.
40. Sherrington, Sir Charles, ref.22, p.70.
41. Weiss, Paul W., "Cracking Life's Code," Science
News Letter, May 5, 1956, p.275.
low order of mindedness,
while other forms of materialization will lend themselves to
very high orders.
Everything around us, as an expression
of God's creative handiwork, may be in some way capable of reflecting
and responding to the heart of God, not just to His will. In
Western culture we have bifurcated Nature, divorcing the spiritual
from the material, separating between the physical world and
the spiritual world in a way that other cultures have not done.
To us this seems the realistic thing to do, except that in more
recent years we have begun to bring them together again, into
a unity, but only by reducing the spiritual to a non-spiritual
reality, making it merely an aspect of matter. Because our way
of thinking about and dealing with matter has proved so successful
in our acquisition of power for practical purposes, we have come
to suppose that this view of the material world is the only valid
one. However, some of our success is beginning to take on the
colour of failure, and it may be time for us to give serious
thought to the possibility that the non-Western view of the world,
a view which is by far the older view, might after all be the
Native people from the simpler
cultures have treated Nature with a kind of personal respect
and as a consequence have not despoiled it as we have done, but
have learned to live more in harmony with it. They have respect
not merely for the feelings of animals, a respect which we share
in part by supporting legislation to protect such creatures,
but also for the feelings of plant life � at least certain
kinds of plants, chiefly those which contribute in one way or
another to their survival or to their culture. The Indians of
North America, in carving a face mask, carved it from a living
tree and destroyed it when the tree died, believing that with
the death of the tree the mask somehow lost its vitality also.
The purpose of the Hopi rain dance is to wake up the earth, to
prepare it to receive the rain that is about to fall.
While we look upon such beliefs
with some measure of benign condescension and feel that it must
be nice to have established this kind of rapport with Nature
on a person-to-person basis, most of us have tended to believe
it was really rather childish. But in recent years evidence has
been accumulating, which to some competent observers suggests
that perhaps, after all, these native people were not so foolish.
Where they danced and sang to encourage crop growth, we now believe
music may have a somewhat similar effect, as recent experiments
by Pearl Weinberger have shown. (42) And as for soul life in plants,
42. Weinberger, Dr. P., reported under "Science:
Agriculture," in Time, April 12, 1968, p.64. The
Russian psychologist, V. N. Pushkin, has recently reported evidence
of response in flowers to changes in emotional states of human
beings in their presence, according to the San Francisco Chronicle,
Feb. 26, 1973.
it will surprise many
people to find how large a literature of a serious nature there
already is on the subject. G. T. Fechner, (43) a pioneer among psychologists, is one of the earliest
contributors to this literature. We are on the edge, perhaps,
of discovering a whole new world just beyond, but not independent
of, the material world.
And this brings me to the last
point I wish to draw attention to in this chapter. How does it
come about that the millions of cells which comprise the human
body and each of which appears to have an individual consciousness
of its own can so organize themselves not only so that each grouping
in the form of a specific organ contributes to the continuance
and well being of all the rest of the cells in the body, but
can somehow pool their multitude of consciousness and generate
a unified mindedness? Within ourselves, we are not aware of millions
of such discrete consciousnesses but only of a single self. Edward
McCrady put it very effectively: (44)
I, for instance, certainly have
a stream of consciousness which I, as a whole, experience; and
yet I include within myself millions of white blood cells which
give impressive evidence of experiencing their individual streams
of consciousness of which I am not directly aware.
It is both entertaining and instructive
to watch living leukocytes crawling about within transparent
tissues of the living tadpole's tail. They give every indication
of choosing their paths, experiencing uncertainty, making decisions,
changing their minds, feeling contacts, etc., that we observe
in larger individuals. . . .
So I feel compelled to accept the
conclusion that I am a community of individuals, who have somehow
become integrated into a higher order of individuality which
coordinates and harmonizes the activities of the lesser individuals
43. Fechner, G. T., Soul Life of Plants,
1848. Also R. H. France, one of the most eminent of German
botanists, published a smaller book sometime after 1901 entitled
The Soul of the Plants in which he said: "I have
a presentiment that the study of nature and psychology will in
some future time make the most beautiful discoveries in a place
where no one had expected it -- in the field of plant life."
The same author later produced 8 immense volumes in German entitled
Das Leben der Pflanzen, a work which was completed in
1913, and which according to the author was largely inspired
by Fechner's earlier work. Sir Jagdis Chunder Bose, Prof. Emeritus
of Presidency College and Director of Bose Research Institute
in Calcutta, wrote the following important works, all bearing
on this subject: Responsiveness in the Living and Non-Living,
1902; Plant Response, 1906; and Researches in the
Irritability of Plants, in 1912. Later in 1921 he published
a four volume work entitled Life Movements in Plants.
On Plant Consciousness, see also Stanley Cobb, ref.10,
p.202. Even Darwin seems to have recognized this possibility,
as quoted by John E. Howard, "Creation and Providence, with
Special Reference to the Evolutionist Theory," Transactions
of the Victoria Institute, vol.12, 1878, p.217. See also
Walter Lowrie, "A Meditation on Scientific Authority,"
Theology Today, Oct., 1945, pp.309ff.
44. McCrady, Edward, Religious Perspectives in Teaching: in
Biology, Hazen Foundation, New Haven, 1950, pp.19, 20.
is a situation of which most of us are not aware because we have
not considered the implications of the fact that we are composed
of cells which have a life of their own. We can, however, see
some such unification taking place in Nature. A particularly
good example is to be found in the Portuguese Man-of-War in which
a very large number of previously independently living animals
of simple form unite together, modify themselves somewhat, and
form a single free living animal rather like a jelly fish. Here
we have, then, a demonstrable example of unification comparable
in some respects to what takes place in a living body. (45)
Just as a single cell with consciousness
may merge itself with a vast number of other cells equally having
consciousness to form a larger consciousness, so perhaps the
larger consciousness of the individual so formed may merge with
other individuals to constitute a still larger consciousness.
Sir Alister Hardy, (46) Emeritus Professor of
Zoology in Oxford University, is one of those who believe that
flocks of birds that wheel together at some as yet unrecognized
signal are in fact responding to a single "mind." This
is not merely communication from one mind to another mind, but
a response to a single mindedness by all the members of the flock,
without conscious individuation. What is envisioned here is not
so much that all the birds are individually thinking alike, but
that a single thought captures them all by the very fact of their
being together as a flock at the time. It is not that each bird
has its own thought which happens to agree with the thoughts
of all the other birds, it is rather that the whole flock constitutes
a group mind. Raymond Pearl (47) held that animals which are acting as herd leaders
are performing as specialized sense organs, substituting for
the sense organs of the individuals in the herd which then respond
to the signals of the sensitive leader. This is not what is intended
here. There is no recognizable leader of the flock to which the
other animals are responding. It is a kind of directive shared
instantly by all. What I am not saying is that a few birds make
a decision to turn and communicate this to the rest by some kind
of signal. What I am suggesting is that the
45. "In many cases it is a matter of
definition as to whether one calls something a colony of single-celled
individuals or a single multi-cellular organism. The bases of
such a decision may include the ability of isolated cells to
survive, the degree of organization into tissues, and the degree
of differentiation among the individual cells," Alfred Kuhn,
Lectures on Developmental Physiology, translated by Roger
Milkman, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1971, p.112.
46. Hardy, Sir Mister, The Living Stream, Collins, London
1965, p.234, referring to Edmund Selous, Thought-Transference,
or What, in Birds?, 1931.
47. Pearl, Raymond, Man the Animal, Principia Press, Bloomington,
Indiana, 1946, p.115.
individual birds are
like the cells which lose themselves in the whole in order to
form a single source of consciousness, just as the billions of
cells in the brain appear to merge themselves to become a single
mind. The consequence is that the birds act rather like a single
organism composed of a multitude of separate cells. All the birds
experience whatever thought any one of the birds experiences.
We have moved
now through a series of levels of consciousness, each one depending
not so much on an increase in number of cells as it does upon
the level of organization of the individual consciousnesses which
form the aggregate. At the lowest level of life we have single
cells which seem to know what they are about. These small bits
of mind are manifestly capable of gathering themselves together
to form larger organs, and in the developing embryo of coordinating
themselves as organs and in due course into a single conscious
From this point we move on to groups
of individuals who seem capable of acting in unison in a way
which suggests the real existence of a "group mind."
Flocks of birds and schools of fishes and herds of animals seem
to bear witness to this phenomenon. On a smaller scale, though
certainly involving as many individuals, we have in such creatures
as the Portuguese Man-of-War, an example of many individuals
surrendering their autonomy to become a larger self which thereafter
acts as though but one mind was in charge. It is very possible
that the same phenomenon of unification is actually involved
within the larger community of individuals which we term a species,
and that a species is bound into a unity by something more than
merely a common genetic endowment. If it is true that the ultimate
reality is not material but spiritual, the ultimate reality of
speciation by which the members of the species recognize one
another and feel a sense of commonality with each other might
well be a spiritual one also. There is, then, not merely a psychic
unity which binds all men, but also a psychic unity which binds
every other species within its own membership. There is, as it
were, a feline psychic unity, a bovine psychic unity, a canine
psychic unity, as well as a psychic unity of Homo sapiens.
It is with some such concept as
this in mind that Sir Alister Hardy, though not by any means
sharing the views I am expressing in their larger context, suggested:
"Might it not be possible for there to be in the animal
kingdom as a whole...a sort of psychic 'blueprint,' shared
between members of a
He elaborated this thought subsequently: (49)
It is possible to imagine some
such pattern of shared unconscious experience: a kind of composite
species pattern of life. It is important to remember that in
the concept of the individual mind we are faced with a mystery
no less remarkable. The mind cannot be anchored to this or that
group of cells that make up the brain. The community of cells
making up the body has a mind beyond the individual cells. .
In the scheme I am suggesting,
a sort of psychic pool of experience would be shared subconsciously
by all members of a species, by some method akin to what we are
witnessing in telepathy. Individual lives, animals' minds, would
come and go -- but the psychic stream of a shared behaviour pattern
in the living population would flow on in time parallel to the
flow of the physical DNA material.
The point I
am making here is that not only does the evidence suggest that
the spiritual aspect of the universe is more basic to its existence
than the material, but also that the spiritual unity between
individuals, which binds them into a kind of community which
we term a species, is more basic to the existence of the species
than the material genes which we have hitherto considered the
decisive factor in speciation. With respect to man, what makes
him a true species is his fallenness. And I think C. S. Lewis
was perfectly right when he said: (50)
What man lost by the Fall was
his original [my emphasis] specific nature. . . This condition
was transmitted by heredity to all later generations, for it
was not simply what biologists call an acquired variation. It
was the emergence of a new kind of man; a new species, never
made by God, had sinned its way into existence. . . .
species, which is not God's creation but of man's own making,
no longer represents true manhood as God originally intended
man to be, but it does constitute a species. By contrast, what
makes the Body of Christ a real species, and at the same time
a different species, is its redeemedness, as Paul states
the case so succinctly (1 Corinthians 12:12): "For as the
body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that
one body, being many, are of one body: so also is Christ."
And Scripture says, by implication: "As the body is one
and hath many members, and all the members of that one body (millions
as they are) are of one body: so also is Adam." It is not
surprising that the Lord is called a Last Adam (1 Corinthians
15:45) by contrast with the First Adam. There are now therefore
in existence two species of Homo
48. Hardy, Sir Mister, The Living Stream,
Collins, London 1965, p.257.
49. Ibid., p.258.
50. Lewis, C. S., The Problem of Pain, Macmillan, New
York, 1948, p.70.
sapiens, in place of one, whose specific identities as species
are more real than the genes suggest, because the basic difference
is a spiritual one, and the spiritual is more fundamental than
Copyright © 1988 Evelyn White. All rights
Previous Chapter Next
In the final Chapter we will look
at the nature of this re-created species in the light of these