The Darkest Truth

How is it possible that the highest authorities know so little about Homo sapiens? And by “knowing little” I mean that they can’t even recognize one of the most outstanding basic characteristics of our species.

Refer to any dictionary for the definition of Homo sapiens. OneLook on the net lists 29 dictionaries to click on and see what they have to say about the species in question. The highest authorities, the lexicographers who compile the prestigious dictionaries—Oxford; American Heritage; Merriam-Webster; Cambridge; Macmillan; Collins; etc—are summarized in OneLook’s quick (and typical) definition: the only surviving hominid; species to which modern man belongs; bipedal primate having language and ability to make and use complex tools; brain 1400 cc.

These definitions, which are equivalent to describing Albert Einstein as someone who was good at math, fail to mention Homo sapiens society-building character. Sapiens extraordinary dynamic sociality, the ability to form and dissolve groups of any size for varied functions at any time, cannot be witnessed with any other species or organism anywhere in the history of life. The Sapiens get together, form and dissolve social configurations daily for different tasks, cultural activities and political enterprises. A handful can meet to eat together, move furniture or play games. Thousands can gather at sports events, concerts or demonstrations. Millions can coordinate their efforts in national endeavors and dozens can mingle at pubs, parties and funerals. Not even the advanced social ability of ants come anywhere near the diversity, proficiency and complexity of Homo sapiens’ sociality. Yet when looking up a definition of an ant, we are informed: “social insect living in organized colonies” (OneLook/WordNet)

Either Homo sapiens unique and highly characteristic social ability is not worth mentioning, or the highest authorities expose themselves to be astonishingly ignorant. Am I wrong in assuming that basic, significant characteristics should be mentioned when describing Homo sapiens. Why is our species not given the same consideration and dignity as when describing ants?

If the “authoritative” lexicographers are ignorant about Homo sapiens, what other words, expressions and concepts are they ignorant about? Quite a bit, but I’m not going to deal with these here. If the highest authorities are ignorant about a basic, essential and obvious aspect of their own species, they must be ignorant of many other basics as well. And they are. But listing them doesn’t change the initial question which applies to their ignorance in general. How is it possible that the highest authorities know so little about Homo sapiens?

Because the prevailing money-oriented order is dominated by the winners of the possession-accumulation contest driving the system of society, nothing other than money matters, not people, truth, knowledge, health, peace, beauty or life. Money. And money has no interest in the quality of Homo sapiens who are regard as commodities and viewed as statistics.

We are living in dark times where money talks and tells us, through ignorant authorities, what there is to see. When we realize this dark truth, we win the ability to see everything.

***

“Where the rulers worship profit

ain’t nothin’ worth nothin’

if you can’t sell it.”

Dartwill Aquila

*