Book Review on An Appel to Save Life on Earth


Bridget Illian Book Review Wilson, E.O. The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life on Earth. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc, 2006. Edward O. Wilson has written in this slim, yet powerful book an appeal to Christian leaders to help save the diversity of life on earth. One of the most novel features of The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life on Earth (or perhaps its most ancient feature) is its literary conceit that it is an open letter, specifically a letter from Mr. Wilson to an unnamed Southern Baptist minister. While writing books in the form of letters is older than the New Testament epistles, this form of literature, with the acute awareness it brings of who the intended audience and the implied author are, has become rare in recent times. Fortunately, Mr. Wilson has chosen to make his conversational partners quite explicit, avoiding the general mistake in many religious and scientific circles of painting (or tarring) all of religion, or all the scientific community, with the same brush. And he is indeed specific about which audience he addresses in this open letter: of religious people, he wants to address Christians; of Christians, American Southern Baptist ministers (1); and of these, particularly he addresses those who insist on a literalist interpretation of the creation stories to the exclusion of evolution (3), and of these, he has particular concern for those who subscribe to “rapture” theology (6). Nevertheless, or perhaps because of his clear focus on one skeptical conversation partner, Wilson’s book has a great deal to say to all of us. He makes ethical appeals designed to bridge the concerns of scientists and literalists alike, and in the process includes most people in between. He also puts forth clear explanations of key topics in modern biology that he considers fundamental to preserving biodiversity. One thing that any reader of The Creation will gain from this book is a clearer understanding of what biodiversity is, how biodiversity is currently being depleted, and why we all should care about this problem. Wilson makes an incisive and balanced argument for nature as something truly distinct from artificial environments, defining nature as “that part of the original environment and its life forms that remains after the human impact. Nature is all on planet Earth that has no need of us and can stand alone.” (15) He insists that, despite the humanization of much of our world, the distinction between nature and “humanized ecosystems” is still relevant, and in many cases quite clear-cut (23). He delineates in no uncertain terms the importance of biodiversity for simple human existence, noting that complex natural ecosystems provide us with all sorts of necessary services gratis: “Wild species enrich the soil, cleanse the water, pollinate most of the flowering plants. They create the very air we breathe . . . All together the other species, mostly bugs and weeds, run the world exactly as we should want it run, because during prehistory humanity evolved to depend on their combined actions and the insurance that biodiversity provides world stability.” (31-32) Wilson describes in many places the seriousness of our current predicament, repeatedly (and accurately) comparing the present extinction rate to the asteroid that ended the age of the dinosaurs (73, 81, 117). He gives a succinct set of reasons (and a mnemonic) for the sharp decline in biodiversity in recent times: HIPPO, for habitat loss, invasive species, pollution, human overpopulation, and overharvesting (75). He also devotes an entire chapter to explaining the profound but rarely publicized threat posed by invasive alien species: plants and animals removed from their normal ecology into a new environment where they thrive at the expense of the native life forms. Other important points that he raises include the opportunity costs of depleted biodiversity: “Gone forever will be undiscovered medicines, crops, timber, fibers, soil-restoring vegetation, petroleum substitutes, and other products and amenities.” (30) The author devotes a chapter to discussing the fascinating subject of environmental psychology, a developing field that demonstrates how finely attuned our minds are to the natural environment in which we developed. Some interesting examples he cites include our most common phobias, of snakes, spiders, heights, and enclosed spaces, which correspond well to the survival needs of a creature living outdoors – fears that do not extend in an equal way to modern dangers such as knives, guns, and electrical outlets (65). He also brings in the surprising find of researchers who discovered that people around the world from many different cultures all prefer the same kind of landscape, a savanna-like setting of open grasslands and occasional spreading trees, near water, viewed from a high retreat (66). All this he takes to strongly imply that, even if we could somehow do without nature – say, on a space station, or in a purely urbanized world – we would not do well emotionally and spiritually. Our human wellbeing is not the only measure by which Mr. Wilson evaluates the natural world, though. He makes a passionate appeal on the basis of what we might call aesthetics, on the sheer wonder and magnificence of the creatures and landscapes that we suddenly have so much power over. He discusses the case of two particular animals to make his point: the wolverine, and the pitchfork ant, two of the least-observed land animals in their respective classes. He lovingly describes what makes each of them exceptional and unique, but holds them up also for what they represent. Each animal needs real wilderness to thrive and survive, and more: “They proclaim the mystery of the world . . . Just to know they are out there alive and well is important to the spirit, to the wholeness of our lives. If they live, then Nature lives.” (58) He includes very small creatures in all his discussions, never forgetting the “bugs and weeds” of the world, arguing that they are every bit as wonderful as more visible creatures, and hoping that one day, they may be as cherished as the tigers and grizzly bears of the world (58, 59). His own wonder at the world of the very small is hard to miss. He makes an impassioned plea for greater funding and other resources for systematics, pointing out that if the Mars rover brought back even a tiny sample of life from that planet, we would happily sink billions upon billions of dollars into exhaustively searching for more – while the full count of species on our own planet remains largely undiscovered (116-119). This book is, if nothing else, a celebration of biodiversity in both its breadth and its particularity. In keeping with the nature of this book as an appeal to a skeptical, yet critically important audience, Wilson takes time to deal with various forms of denial that tend to crop up around issues of biodiversity. He exposes and rebuts two forms of what he names “exceptionalism,” belief systems that treat humans as separate from and somehow “above the laws of Nature.” (83) He takes on his own secular background, in which denial takes the form of “don’t change course now, human genius will provide,” (82, 83) as well as the religious community, where denial says, “don’t change course now, we are in the hands of God,” (83) and he shoots down successively the ideas that extinction such as we are now witnessing is routine (84); that we don’t really need so many species, anyway (84-85); that the matter isn’t urgent enough to be a priority (85); that we can just save all the creatures in parks, zoos, and on ice (86-89). I particularly appreciate his unwavering insistence that zoos are not a long-term solution, because I so often hear people fliply suggest that we can “just” save some animals in a zoo until everything “gets better,” “someday.” He warns that, even if we could somehow preserve the seeds of life completely, “Biologists haven’t the slightest idea of how to build a complex autonomous ecosystem from scratch,” (92) and it’s the ecosystems, not just the species, that we need. Wilson includes a few more subjects-in-a-nutshell that are worthy of note, inasmuch as they represent fairly complete and independent essays useful under many circumstances. He regards the study of modern biology as a necessity for understanding and preserving the biodiversity of our world – in my opinion, quite rightly. So he presents the fundamentals of modern biology in just a few pages! I must admit, this is a feat that any high school teacher must envy and seek to borrow. To put it even more briefly than Wilson: modern biology rests on the understanding that: “all the known properties of life are obedient to the laws of chemistry and physics,” (110) and that “all biological process . . . have evolved by natural selection.” (113) The author is true to his secular humanist, scientific viewpoint throughout; in the first chapter he fleshes out his humanistic standpoint, but later he gives a clear description of his methodological and philosophical commitments as a biologist, too, in the third section of the book, “What Science Has Learned.” He also deals briefly with intelligent design, gently but firmly placing it outside the bounds of science (166). A particularly enjoyable and practical chapter is aptly entitled, “How to Raise a Naturalist,” and in it he addresses the important question of how to foster curiosity and affection for the natural world in children and young people. The author appeals to his audience in the understanding that, despite all their “metaphysical” disagreements, they are not separated in all things (4). He understands the care of biodiversity as a “universal value” that “serves without discrimination the interests of all humanity.” (4) He argues several points which he thinks he and any fundamentalist Christian should be able to agree upon: that the costs to humanity of reduced biodiversity will be great, (5) and that “each species . . . is a masterpiece of biology, and well worth saving.” (5) Wilson puts forward a certain narrative framework for his worldview that he rather ingeniously compares with the fundamentalist Christian creation story. He says that in his view, there was an “ Eden,” nature before people, and he goes as far as to say his audience must agree with him; after all, even in Genesis, there was a time on earth when there were plants, even animals, but no people (9). He goes on to say that, for him, the “fall” was not an act of original sin, but the invention of agriculture and the “illusion of freedom” that a surplus harvest gave people (10). While the content of these stories is seriously different, I respect his ability to put them together and find points of substantial agreement or at least compatibility – after all, even if Adam and Eve were created from mud, that doesn’t mean agriculture didn’t add fuel to the fire. Wilson does also use a remarkable amount of subtle but noticeable religious vocabulary throughout this book, especially when he is attempting to make a persuasive or creative point. He refers to the earth as our “wellspring” and “sustenance,” images that Christian scripture often use for Jesus (7); he calls the theoretical artifactual biodiversity “desecration, corruption, abomination” (92); he reaches for the image of humans as “stewards,” (92) a word never used in Genesis but mentioned often enough in the Gospels; Christians may proclaim “the mystery of faith,” but for Wilson, animals “proclaim the mystery of the world.” (58) All this would give the impression that he has great reverence for nature and great familiarity with biblical stories and language. And I think many Christians can plead right along with Wilson that “rapture” theology is not only bad for environmental responsibility, but that “[t]his and other similar doctrines are not gospels of hope and compassion. They are gospels of cruelty and despair. Pastor, tell me I am wrong!” (6) It is probably a mark of his respect for himself and for his audience that Wilson does not mince words about his understanding of evolution (as opposed to creationism/intelligent design), and I appreciate his attempts to find common ethical ground with his Southern Baptist audience, I also detect a certain unmovable opposition in his arguments that betray his low opinion of his alleged audience. It’s hard to miss his distaste for the priorities of much American religion: “Do they believe that human-centered ethics and preparing for the afterlife are the only things that matter?” (6) He contrasts the doctrine of the incarnation with “Promethean fire seized to make men free” (6) as his own philosophy . . . and we are left wondering what we’re supposed to be freed from – the ignorance of religion, perhaps? He points out that the reduction of biodiversity was at times promoted “in the name of the gods, too, lest we forget,” (11) and we should seriously wonder why he would let a lower-case, plural reference to deity appear in a tract addressed to people who believe in one decidedly capitalized God, if not to irritate them. I suspect that when he gives the example of Charles Darwin as an example of wonder before nature as his prize example of agreement between science and religion (7), Wilson is most likely shooting himself in the foot – after all, who would want to “raise a naturalist” if it results in apostasy? But perhaps I am being too hard on the Southern Baptists, and they would take all this with a grain of salt and good humor. On the whole, I would characterize this book as a friendly introduction to the problem of biodiversity, especially for Christians who wonder why they should care about poster animals like polar bears and spotted owls. Wilson does a good job of introducing, without shortcuts, the scientific viewpoint – and the simple fact that he does appeal to religious leaders for help in preserving the diversity of life on earth should go a long way towards creating goodwill between both parties.

Bridget Illian

Book Review

Wilson, E.O. The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life on Earth.
New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc, 2006.

Edward O. Wilson has written in this slim, yet powerful book an appeal to Christian leaders to help save the diversity of life on earth. One of the most novel features of The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life on Earth (or perhaps its most ancient feature) is its literary conceit that it is an open letter, specifically a letter from Mr. Wilson to an unnamed Southern Baptist minister. While writing books in the form of letters is older than the New Testament epistles, this form of literature, with the acute awareness it brings of who the intended audience and the implied author are, has become rare in recent times. Fortunately, Mr. Wilson has chosen to make his conversational partners quite explicit, avoiding the general mistake in many religious and scientific circles of painting (or tarring) all of religion, or all the scientific community, with the same brush. And he is indeed specific about which audience he addresses in this open letter: of religious people, he wants to address Christians; of Christians, American Southern Baptist ministers (1); and of these, particularly he addresses those who insist on a literalist interpretation of the creation stories to the exclusion of evolution (3), and of these, he has particular concern for those who subscribe to “rapture” theology (6). Nevertheless, or perhaps because of his clear focus on one skeptical conversation partner, Wilson’s book has a great deal to say to all of us. He makes ethical appeals designed to bridge the concerns of scientists and literalists alike, and in the process includes most people in between. He also puts forth clear explanations of key topics in modern biology that he considers fundamental to preserving biodiversity.

One thing that any reader of The Creation will gain from this book is a clearer understanding of what biodiversity is, how biodiversity is currently being depleted, and why we all should care about this problem. Wilson makes an incisive and balanced argument for nature as something truly distinct from artificial environments, defining nature as “that part of the original environment and its life forms that remains after the human impact. Nature is all on planet Earth that has no need of us and can stand alone.” (15) He insists that, despite the humanization of much of our world, the distinction between nature and “humanized ecosystems” is still relevant, and in many cases quite clear-cut (23). He delineates in no uncertain terms the importance of biodiversity for simple human existence, noting that complex natural ecosystems provide us with all sorts of necessary services gratis: “Wild species enrich the soil, cleanse the water, pollinate most of the flowering plants. They create the very air we breathe . . . All together the other species, mostly bugs and weeds, run the world exactly as we should want it run, because during prehistory humanity evolved to depend on their combined actions and the insurance that biodiversity provides world stability.” (31-32)

Wilson describes in many places the seriousness of our current predicament, repeatedly (and accurately) comparing the present extinction rate to the asteroid that ended the age of the dinosaurs (73, 81, 117). He gives a succinct set of reasons (and a mnemonic) for the sharp decline in biodiversity in recent times: HIPPO, for habitat loss, invasive species, pollution, human overpopulation, and overharvesting (75). He also devotes an entire chapter to explaining the profound but rarely publicized threat posed by invasive alien species: plants and animals removed from their normal ecology into a new environment where they thrive at the expense of the native life forms. Other important points that he raises include the opportunity costs of depleted biodiversity: “Gone forever will be undiscovered medicines, crops, timber, fibers, soil-restoring vegetation, petroleum substitutes, and other products and amenities.” (30)

The author devotes a chapter to discussing the fascinating subject of environmental psychology, a developing field that demonstrates how finely attuned our minds are to the natural environment in which we developed. Some interesting examples he cites include our most common phobias, of snakes, spiders, heights, and enclosed spaces, which correspond well to the survival needs of a creature living outdoors – fears that do not extend in an equal way to modern dangers such as knives, guns, and electrical outlets (65). He also brings in the surprising find of researchers who discovered that people around the world from many different cultures all prefer the same kind of landscape, a savanna-like setting of open grasslands and occasional spreading trees, near water, viewed from a high retreat (66). All this he takes to strongly imply that, even if we could somehow do without nature – say, on a space station, or in a purely urbanized world – we would not do well emotionally and spiritually.

Our human wellbeing is not the only measure by which Mr. Wilson evaluates the natural world, though. He makes a passionate appeal on the basis of what we might call aesthetics, on the sheer wonder and magnificence of the creatures and landscapes that we suddenly have so much power over. He discusses the case of two particular animals to make his point: the wolverine, and the pitchfork ant, two of the least-observed land animals in their respective classes. He lovingly describes what makes each of them exceptional and unique, but holds them up also for what they represent. Each animal needs real wilderness to thrive and survive, and more: “They proclaim the mystery of the world . . . Just to know they are out there alive and well is important to the spirit, to the wholeness of our lives. If they live, then Nature lives.” (58) He includes very small creatures in all his discussions, never forgetting the “bugs and weeds” of the world, arguing that they are every bit as wonderful as more visible creatures, and hoping that one day, they may be as cherished as the tigers and grizzly bears of the world (58, 59). His own wonder at the world of the very small is hard to miss. He makes an impassioned plea for greater funding and other resources for systematics, pointing out that if the Mars rover brought back even a tiny sample of life from that planet, we would happily sink billions upon billions of dollars into exhaustively searching for more – while the full count of species on our own planet remains largely undiscovered (116-119). This book is, if nothing else, a celebration of biodiversity in both its breadth and its particularity.

In keeping with the nature of this book as an appeal to a skeptical, yet critically important audience, Wilson takes time to deal with various forms of denial that tend to crop up around issues of biodiversity. He exposes and rebuts two forms of what he names “exceptionalism,” belief systems that treat humans as separate from and somehow “above the laws of Nature.” (83) He takes on his own secular background, in which denial takes the form of “don’t change course now, human genius will provide,” (82, 83) as well as the religious community, where denial says, “don’t change course now, we are in the hands of God,” (83) and he shoots down successively the ideas that extinction such as we are now witnessing is routine (84); that we don’t really need so many species, anyway (84-85); that the matter isn’t urgent enough to be a priority (85); that we can just save all the creatures in parks, zoos, and on ice (86-89). I particularly appreciate his unwavering insistence that zoos are not a long-term solution, because I so often hear people fliply suggest that we can “just” save some animals in a zoo until everything “gets better,” “someday.” He warns that, even if we could somehow preserve the seeds of life completely, “Biologists haven’t the slightest idea of how to build a complex autonomous ecosystem from scratch,” (92) and it’s the ecosystems, not just the species, that we need.

Wilson includes a few more subjects-in-a-nutshell that are worthy of note, inasmuch as they represent fairly complete and independent essays useful under many circumstances. He regards the study of modern biology as a necessity for understanding and preserving the biodiversity of our world – in my opinion, quite rightly. So he presents the fundamentals of modern biology in just a few pages! I must admit, this is a feat that any high school teacher must envy and seek to borrow. To put it even more briefly than Wilson: modern biology rests on the understanding that: “all the known properties of life are obedient to the laws of chemistry and physics,” (110) and that “all biological process . . . have evolved by natural selection.” (113) The author is true to his secular humanist, scientific viewpoint throughout; in the first chapter he fleshes out his humanistic standpoint, but later he gives a clear description of his methodological and philosophical commitments as a biologist, too, in the third section of the book, “What Science Has Learned.” He also deals briefly with intelligent design, gently but firmly placing it outside the bounds of science (166). A particularly enjoyable and practical chapter is aptly entitled, “How to Raise a Naturalist,” and in it he addresses the important question of how to foster curiosity and affection for the natural world in children and young people.

The author appeals to his audience in the understanding that, despite all their “metaphysical” disagreements, they are not separated in all things (4). He understands the care of biodiversity as a “universal value” that “serves without discrimination the interests of all humanity.” (4) He argues several points which he thinks he and any fundamentalist Christian should be able to agree upon: that the costs to humanity of reduced biodiversity will be great, (5) and that “each species . . . is a masterpiece of biology, and well worth saving.” (5) Wilson puts forward a certain narrative framework for his worldview that he rather ingeniously compares with the fundamentalist Christian creation story. He says that in his view, there was an “ Eden,” nature before people, and he goes as far as to say his audience must agree with him; after all, even in Genesis, there was a time on earth when there were plants, even animals, but no people (9). He goes on to say that, for him, the “fall” was not an act of original sin, but the invention of agriculture and the “illusion of freedom” that a surplus harvest gave people (10). While the content of these stories is seriously different, I respect his ability to put them together and find points of substantial agreement or at least compatibility – after all, even if Adam and Eve were created from mud, that doesn’t mean agriculture didn’t add fuel to the fire.

Wilson does also use a remarkable amount of subtle but noticeable religious vocabulary throughout this book, especially when he is attempting to make a persuasive or creative point. He refers to the earth as our “wellspring” and “sustenance,” images that Christian scripture often use for Jesus (7); he calls the theoretical artifactual biodiversity “desecration, corruption, abomination” (92); he reaches for the image of humans as “stewards,” (92) a word never used in Genesis but mentioned often enough in the Gospels; Christians may proclaim “the mystery of faith,” but for Wilson, animals “proclaim the mystery of the world.” (58) All this would give the impression that he has great reverence for nature and great familiarity with biblical stories and language. And I think many Christians can plead right along with Wilson that “rapture” theology is not only bad for environmental responsibility, but that “[t]his and other similar doctrines are not gospels of hope and compassion. They are gospels of cruelty and despair. Pastor, tell me I am wrong!” (6)

It is probably a mark of his respect for himself and for his audience that Wilson does not mince words about his understanding of evolution (as opposed to creationism/intelligent design), and I appreciate his attempts to find common ethical ground with his Southern Baptist audience, I also detect a certain unmovable opposition in his arguments that betray his low opinion of his alleged audience. It’s hard to miss his distaste for the priorities of much American religion: “Do they believe that human-centered ethics and preparing for the afterlife are the only things that matter?” (6) He contrasts the doctrine of the incarnation with “Promethean fire seized to make men free” (6) as his own philosophy . . . and we are left wondering what we’re supposed to be freed from – the ignorance of religion, perhaps? He points out that the reduction of biodiversity was at times promoted “in the name of the gods, too, lest we forget,” (11) and we should seriously wonder why he would let a lower-case, plural reference to deity appear in a tract addressed to people who believe in one decidedly capitalized God, if not to irritate them. I suspect that when he gives the example of Charles Darwin as an example of wonder before nature as his prize example of agreement between science and religion (7), Wilson is most likely shooting himself in the foot – after all, who would want to “raise a naturalist” if it results in apostasy? But perhaps I am being too hard on the Southern Baptists, and they would take all this with a grain of salt and good humor.

On the whole, I would characterize this book as a friendly introduction to the problem of biodiversity, especially for Christians who wonder why they should care about poster animals like polar bears and spotted owls. Wilson does a good job of introducing, without shortcuts, the scientific viewpoint – and the simple fact that he does appeal to religious leaders for help in preserving the diversity of life on earth should go a long way towards creating goodwill between both parties.