Production team
Life and Death explores the impact of Darwin’s ideas on our understanding of the meaning of extinction and the interconnections between all life on earth and the environment.
Darwin learned many lessons from the giant fossils of extinct animals he found in Argentina and Chile. He eventually revealed to us the unpalatable truth that the logical conclusion to evolution is not perfection but extinction. The extinction of one species creates an environmental niche for new species to fill.
Darwin’s theory also gives us vital knowledge we can use to help prolong the existence of our species by respecting the interconnections between all elements of the natural world and the environment. It’s a story in which Darwin’s ideas are taken up with great enthusiasm by his followers throughout the 20th century.
But humanity misses one opportunity after another to acknowledge and reduce its destructive impact on the planet. As a result we have set in motion the sixth mass extinction of life on earth.
And we are running out of time to do something about it by preserving ecological "hotspots" like certain rainforests which are some of the most productive cradles of evolution.
This programme is a warning, but also a celebration, of the knowledge Charles Darwin gave us in his theory of evolution. It confirms that Darwin’s theory continues to inform our understanding of ourselves, our planet and the intricate interconnections between all life on earth.
Darwin's Dangerous Idea in more depth:
OU on the BBC: Darwin's Dangerous Idea - About the series
Production team
Andrew Marr follows the journey and thoughts of Darwin - find out more about the series. Read more : OU on the BBC: Darwin's Dangerous Idea - About the series
OU on the BBC: Darwin's Dangerous Idea - Body and soul
Production team
Andrew Marr explores how Darwin's challenge to religion raised questions of body and soul. Read more : OU on the BBC: Darwin's Dangerous Idea - Body and soul
OU on the BBC: Darwin's Dangerous Idea - Born Equal?
Production team
Despite being hijacked during some of the darkest years of the last century, Darwin's work proved we're all born equal. Read more : OU on the BBC: Darwin's Dangerous Idea - Born Equal?
Is Darwinism distinct from Darwin?
photos.com
Would Darwin have considered himself a disciple of the tradition that bears his name? Caroline Ogilvie investigates. Read more : Is Darwinism distinct from Darwin?
Darwin: The Expert View
Production team
Dr Paul Underhill considers the emotional turmoil Charles Darwin underwent as he faced the prospect of exposing his research on evolution to the Victorian public. Read more : Darwin: The Expert View
OU on the BBC: Life - Sorry, our Tree Of Life Poster is no longer available
OU
We're sorry, but due to overwhelming demand, our poster is no longer available. You can still explore the tree online. Read more : OU on the BBC: Life - Sorry, our Tree Of Life Poster is no longer available
Devolve Me
Open University
Ready to journey back in time? Use our fun tool to see yourself as you would have looked as an early human Read more : Devolve Me
Login or Register to post comments
Comments on: "Life and death"
Simon dmw has started a thread discussing Life and death.
Hi Paul, Thanks for your reply. I will absolutely visit the Forum you mentioned.
Not that I am overly religious, but as noted, I do like some filosofy every now and then.
Hi Paul, I think we just don't agree here.
If you would use your way of reasoning, you would even be able to include robots as an intelligent creature... Program the thing in such a way that it would become (near to) an autonomous creature and be able to communicate (share data) with other robots and give the thing a mission.
The result would be much similar to (lower) life forms..Robots on mars could be just like that.
Let me try to explain on what I think is the major treshold between the simple life forms and the intelligent creatures.
There are animals that have the ability to deal with unexpected situations (problem solving) on the spot.
I think I am safe to say that this group of animals has one thing in common.
They all have "awareness" of their being.
I am convinced that this "awareness" makes the difference between a creature that only has a pre-programmed set of capabilities that makes it possible to exisist within certain limited boundaries
and the creatures with self-awareness that can deal with complex situations
So, that should be enough meandering thoughts for me today.
BTW, great excercise here to improve my English a bit....it's not that easy to express myself here.
Take care.
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
Hi Jacobus
''If you would use your way of reasoning, you would even be able to include robots as an intelligent creature.''
That would depend upon your definitions. Don't you think there is artificial intelligence ?
''There are animals that have the ability to deal with unexpected situations (problem solving) on the spot.''
Again, this is a difference of degree, and even humans have some pre-programmed responses.
''I think I am safe to say that this group of animals has one thing in common.
''They all have "awareness" of their being.''
What is awareness ?
1. having knowledge; conscious; cognizant: aware of danger.
2. informed; alert; knowledgeable; sophisticated: She is one of the most politically aware young women around.
You are heading off into Philosophy here regarding consciousness. True awareness of self as an entity may actually be very rare. Humans and chimpanzees have it, but simple experiments with mirrors show that dogs and cats [for examples] do not.
You may find the discussion on the Darwin Thread very interesting. Its title would suggest otherwise, but it is about consciousness at the moment .
You will find it under 'Can you be religious and accept the Theory of Evolution''
Paul
Dear Guest.....
What is it that makes you so upset that you need to shout?
I just put my meandering thoughts in writing here...
Reply if you want to, but do not shout.
If you think I do mis the point here, then please enligten me by telling me exactly why you think I do.
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
Hi Jacobus
''I don't see this as difference of degree...
It just incomparable.... ''
As the context and use of the word incomparable within the above sentence means that the two cannot be compared, one with the other to elict the degree of difference then you are wrong. It is exactly comparable, because we can do so.
Compare human brain-power with a beaver's brain power. It is larger yes, but finitely so. Therefore it is comparable.
Compare human communication ability with a beaver's communication ability. It is greater, but finitely so. Therefore it is comparable.
I agree, the degree difference is large, but that does not mean it is impossible, just hard to calculate.
Paul
I would not last in a desert for a day...spoiled by luxury as I am. But Touaregs are surviving desert conditions for centuries already. Give me a month or so with the locals there, and I am sure I would be able to survive. So thanks to the ability to share knowledge, I would be able to gain almost instant knowledge to survive the desert too...
I don't see this as difference of degree...
It just incomparable....
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
YOU'RE MISSING THE POINT. It's less important than football according to Don ...and maybe a few others as well?
Hmmm, Just thinking out loud....
What makes the big difference between animals and humans....
Planning...what does that relate to in the animal world....
And what in the human world...
We have a collective mind.
We can go to school and learn in any direction or on any level we choose.
Animals just have either the limited knowledge transered by theire parents or there (collective) instincts....
So, we humans are able to plan things on a much broader scale than animals.
A beaver in the dessert would be lost.
The base conditions to survive are not present.
On the other hand, humans.....what would be the limitations for us right now...
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
''A beaver in the dessert would be lost.''
Ok Jacobus
how long would you last in the desert ?
Sure other animals have less ability, but it is a difference of degree
Paul
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
Altering their own environment, huh?
Referred to by Dawkins as "The extende phenotype" - and exeplified by a photo of a Beaver swimming in it's own dam-pool.
Or were we talking about something else?
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
''You mean animals do not have the ability to plan to change their environment''
Other animals do change their environment to suit their requirements, and they have to plan it as well.
A beaver will dam a stream in a particular place, a badger will dig its sett in a specific environment. These examples just differ in scale to the changes mankind can make to its environment.
Paul
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
Post #8: these abilities do not imply planning.
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
Plan- to arrange a method or scheme beforehand for (any work, enterprise, or proceeding).
Hi Nicholas
re posts 7 and 8.
Here is a dictionary definition of the verb to plan.
In both instances I quoted there was some planning beforehand- choose correct locationand and choose correct materials. Admittedly there is no drawing of blueprints and collection of various estimates, but the animal in question has a plan.
Why do you think there was no planning, or is your definition different ?
Paul
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
I define 'plan' as a symbolic program for achieving a goal which is also represented symbolically. Recently, in a Mediterranean city, I was struck by the sight of a cat proceeding up a street with the appearance of intent focused on some distant goal. I would err towards saying it had a 'plan' by my definition. I do not think however, that a beaver needs a symbolic plan to build a dam, but is performing behaviour which includes moving towards more optimal conditions, of water, vegetation, wood supply etc, to enable it to build a dam. In this it can exercise intelligent perception, skill, judgment and memory of a static kind (eg the route to where it last found the best twigs), but I think it likely that most of its actions can be represented adequately by a Markovian program - in which what it does next is determined essentially by its present environment and various instincts.
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
Hi Nicholas
As our definitions differ I thought it would be useful to again be specific. Can you define what you mean by symbolic programme ?
As we are comparing human behaviour with other animals, perhaps you could give a specific example ?
As I understand the Markov Process, you are suggesting that the beaver does not use memory to build the dam. I took the following from Wiki-
''A beaver shapes a dam according to the strength of the water's current. Relatively still water encourages dams that are almost straight; while dams in stronger currents are curved, bowed toward upstream''
To me that indicates a planning process, where the strength of water is judged before starting to build a dam of a particular shape, and in a particular direction. I also understand that they choose an optimum location, rather than just build anywhere.
Paul
Nice example, ants and beavers do make adaptations to their surroundings to create the conditions that enable them to thrive. But the scale of those adaptations are so small that it would end up in a word game wether or not you can call it a change of enviroment.
The only example I can think of, where animals do have an impact on the enviroment, is where humans have been so bold to introduce foreign species into a particular region. A good (bad) example is the bullfrog in Australia. This frog has spread across all of Australia and destroyed a part of the Native wild life there.
But it would be a nice example of Darwinism to see when and how a new balance would emerge. Right now we desperatly try to correct our mistake there.
Dear Nicholas,
Animals do not have the ability to change or influence the enviroment they live in.
Animals just lack the awareness that is required to do so.
We are the only ones with the ability to shape our habitat (on a global scale) to our perticular needs.... Now that we start to reach a state of awareness that we also do depend on certain conditions too, we better do start to cosider how to proceed from here.
In order to survive as a species, we better start to be different than animals right now.
Not to act, is not an option any longer. It's just a question of how to move from here....
To just go on like we do now, means there will be only animals roaming this world in a couple of 100 years...
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
You mean animals do not have the ability to plan to change their environment. However, as you imply, in the long term the plans of men might turn out to be no more perceptive than those of mice. I was hoping Simon dmw, who started the thread, would answer my original question.
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
Beavers.
They change their environment to suit them. Ants and Termites create an environment, which they also regulate, to suit them.
There are lots of examples out there of organisms that change or adapt their environment to favour themselves.
No other organism has human kinds ability to make such large scale changes to their environment and also effect the environment of everything else at the same time. Its is more a matter of scale than ability. I would hazard a guess that only humans pontificate about the implications of the changes they enact.
Re: Comments on: "Life and death"
Are you hoping to discuss the content of Andrew Marr's programme, or the topic more generally? Starting from AM's warning, remember that no animal has ever considered its impact on the environment. Should humans be any different?