A NEW group of primates?

The distinction between man and other sentient beings has been argued over for more than 2500 years. Genetics suggest that there’s a mere 2% difference between man and chimp and embryologists point out the similarities between the early gestation of a chicken and a developing human fetus. Than, attempting to define man seems next to impossible. It must than be very hard for the various disciplines dedicated to the pursuit of discovering man’s essence to compare him to other animals (even in using “animal”, I’m sure that a few evangelical purists shudder to liken man to the many beasts of burden). Indeed, even within the many varied Christian faiths, man’s core is hotly debated. Is he the height of [God’s] creation or nothing capable of virtue but inclined to act basely. Throw in a few biologists, mathematicians, and philosophers and the whole argument becomes a knock down dragged out brawl more about being heard than actually coming to a general and well understood categorization.

This understanding of man is of interest to all of us. Commoners alike throughout history have wondered in astonishment at their very nature and purpose. A simple reflection in the local watering hole must have provided countless opportunities to stare into the unknown while offering a glimpse into the abyss. Along come the sophisticates and Know-it-alls with pedantic degrees after their names muddling it all with ideas about the organic to concepts about the ethereal. Theses so called thinkers and purveyors of humanity mean to educate everyone else in the realms of origin and design, the alpha and omega as it were; a sinew of underlying achievement. Wait! That may imply a watchmaker. Nevertheless, when I heard that the London Zoo had put on display a new group of primates I was intrigued.

A NEW group of primates? Did Richard Kipling come back to life and gone exploring without any of us lay people knowing it? Had the ghost of Linnaeus comeback to haunt his age old classification system? Was the missing link discovered at last? No, no, no! The esteemed London Zoo finished exhibiting its latest “animals” today. I heard about it on the radio with the man’s distinction being heralded as “just another primate”. Just another primate? Even though there is little agreement among the different academic disciplines as to what constitutes man’s essence, I daresay that many men and woman would place themselves into the simple primate characterization.

The website does shed a little bit more light onto the meaning behind the exhibition. But really, are we humbled by the site of a few exhibitionists strutting about in Adam and Eve’s finest summer fashions? Do we learn more about the habits of man and his behaviors by seeing a few graduate students on special assignment? Or is it a stunt to market the environmentally friendly facilities within one of the world’s nicer prisons for animals? Whatever the reason, I heartily disagree with the idea behind the Human Zoo. Maybe if it were a performance art piece, but serious scientific intent? Please. At least the show denigrated the ideas about understanding the behaviors of man and animal. At most it threw man’s pursuit of understanding himself back to the trial of John Scopes and towards “…a conflict of social and intellectual values”.