Formed in 1974 by Kent State art students Gerald Casale and Mark Mothersbaugh, Devo took its name from their concept of "de-evolution" - the idea that instead of evolving, mankind has actually regressed. Their music echoed this view of society as rigid, repressive, and mechanical, with appropriate touches -- jerky, robotic rhythms; an obsession with technology and electronics often atonal melodies and chord progressions - all of which were filtered through the perspectives of conceptual misfits. Devo became a cult sensation, helped in part by their concurrent emphasis on highly stylized visuals and groundbreaking music videos directed by Gerald Casale.
Devolved and devoted, Devo is posed for retro greatness, returning to their most conceptual roots as a virtual agency hatching ideas and projects from the ground up.Devo is releasing their first new studio album in 19 years via their Devo Song Study, a musical experiment on the internet.
Devo's contribution to Typing In Public:
If this contribution has piqued your interest, feel free to build on it: Post your own version of the story's continuation here in comments, on Twitter, on Flickr, or text us at (805) 628-2283. You can also wait for the May 15th SLO event and type it all on a real live typewriter.
De-Evolution is so real it's scary. Our people are becoming lazy and uninterested in the future of our world. Instead of thinking that world-wide problems such as global warming won't harm them in their lifetime, they should be thinking about what they can do to save the future of the earth.
ReplyDeleteI can understand where the artist's are coming from. With each year society gains so much in technological advances and we as humans learn more and more about the world that we live in. However, with this knowledge we tend to become arrogant. It doesn't matter to us what cultures that are obscure are doing in the world, we only care about the capitalist societies that can only help out the individuals.
ReplyDeleteI feel that in not learning about the world as a whole but the little pieces that make up the societies of Earth we are as Devo puts it, in a state of de-evolution. Compare the ideologies of Hitler to the the subtext. In his mind people who weren't Aryan were the reason that human existence was falling to disarray with genetic/ incurable diseases etc. Many people followed him and still follow his words today and in my mind that is a lack of the human brain.
From an anthropological standpoint, in using the Hitler standpoint we are regressing in our own evolution and becoming as savage as our relatives the Chimpanzee family, who are among the most hostile and violent creatures in the Animal Kingdom. I feel that we are regressing in that we have become a society that doesn't necessarily always use it's mind and think things through. It is always said that as a species humans are unique because we are the only being in the world that can consciously think about our actions and the consequences of such before we commit them. Yet we find ourselves in a world where breathing for a day in the city of Mumbai is the equivalent of smoking 2.5 packs of cigarettes. Where most of the woman who live in the Democratic Republic of the Congo have been raped and finally, a world where most Americans cannot pick out the Middle East on a map. Therefore in some respects I agree with the comment Devo has made, we should fear the lack of the human mind because look where it is leading us a a collective society.
Edwin Montemayor
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this quote and giving it some thought, I must agree with Gerald Casale to some extent. It is true that weapons do not work by themselves, instead, people have to "use" them in order for these weapons to work. If humankind wasn't so obssessed with war, people would not have to use these weapons.
I believe that there is a way humanity can live in a more peaceful way, just like the bonobos (one of our closest primate relatives) do in their community.
However, I am not sure if I agree with the term "de-evolution". I mean, humans, in general, have always been violent and have always been obssesed with war (Romans for example)just like chimps (another close primate relative) are obssesed with hunting other primates in look for territory.
So the way I see it, yes we could be living in a more peaceful society without having to worry about any kinds of weapons and violence, but it is in our nature to be this way too, so I don't think it's an issue about evolving or "de-evolving".
Thank you, Jeanie, Brie and Edwin. This is a fascinating conversation!
ReplyDeleteThe human brain is capable of providing our weak and feeble bodies with a means of survival within the natural world. Through the use of universal technologies societies have the ability to provide themselves with an excessive amounts of resources. Our hedonism, spawned by popular consumer culture, devours these extra resources and demands more. By not learning to live in respect our minimal needs for survival we have allowed our bodies to slowly conform to this easy lifestyle that we have today. The modern person can live a "normal" lifestyle by simply walking to and from their car. Exercise is becoming obsolete. Our science isn't only de-evolving us by eliminating physical work output to achieve our pleasures, but through genetics it is also de-evolving many other plants and animals that we tamper with for food sources. From genetically engineered salmon to corn the food we are producing through genetic alteration has inferior nutritional value and has degrading qualities when introduced to native populations. De-evolution is real. The new image for American genetics is some over dressed, self-indulged, fat-ass simultaneously stuffing its face with a big-mac and talking on a cell phone.
ReplyDeleteBrendan Dwyer
Anthro 250
Hannah Panno
ReplyDeleteI agree to some extent with the comment made. I believe that the human race has perhaps lost some grasp of what it means to live on this earth. Perhaps we have become so involved in being number one, or the best, or the smartest that yes, it is scary to think about what we are capable of when it comes to war. However, I do not think in any way we are in a process of de-evolution or that we are committing any type of it based on negative decisions.
Yes, we have made choices that are in-humane in regards to war, scientific testing, or the way we livein general, but that does not mean that the powerful sometimes negative decisions made by our kind is in any way a reason or explanation of de-evolution. These decisions just account for the negative variety in our world. With out the negative variety we may have never understood what it meant to be good or have positive variety.
Andrew Pagan
ReplyDeleteWhoops, accidentally submitted that comment, let me finish that.
Anyway, I'm just saying that the horrors of the present, while shocking, are most likely not that much greater than the horrors of the past. Belle Epoch imperialism was no better than modern day African genocide, and even pre-civilization inter-tribal warfare can compare to modern day gang conflicts. At least in terms of violence, humans, for better or worse, have remained consistent. Additionally, while modern ignorance casts doubts upon notions of human progress(especially with availability of information via new technology i.e. the internet), one must realize that education is both more accessible and more utilized today than ever before. We still have a long way to go, of course, but we have made some gains.
Additionally, to make a claim of de-evolution,
Devo must at least to some degree adopt a pessimistic perspective, and focus mostly upon the failures of modern society. Within the past few centuries, motivated individuals have made great strides in reducing poverty, compromising conflicts, and creating new and innovative forms of technology.
Furthermore, claims of de-evolution oftentimes belie a certain degree of intellectual arrogance, as those who recognize said "de-evolution" see themselves above it. To what degree do accusations of de-evolution spring from our desire to elevate ourselves above our less educated peers?
Of course, it's important to realize, that DEVO is a duo of artists, they are not biologists speaking of scientific evolution(indeed, they seem to rally against some kind of moral/motivational decline, not non-benevolent natural selection), nor are they political theorists or philosophers. We should appreciate their ideas as a complement to their art, not only as ideas in themselves.
Society is currently a product of Capitalistic mentality. In this sense, I feel like humankind is de-evolving. When you look at the spheres of influence and heroes of the past in comparison to today, it is rather startling. In the past the figures of public admiration were those with prolific mental thought and/or unbelievable artistic talent such as Aristotle, Socrates, Michaelangelo, Leonardo Di Vinci, and Raphael. Now when cycling through the channels on the tv, you see figures like "The Situation" and "Flavor Flav" glorified more than our brilliant contemporary artists, philosophers, and scientists. These characters can be marketed and the population demoralized through the bizarre fantasy thats depicted in these "reality" tv shows. This is greatly due to the fact that the corporate world embraces these kind of figures because they are so easy to capitalize off of. This corporate mentality has similarly transferred to the minds of regular citizens as well. Instead of working as a community to progress as a community, everyone is much more individualistic, with a main aim at advancement even if it means the destruction of another. We have morally de-evolved as a people, and with this is a lack of a shared social dialogue that is informed by an ethical stance. Now basically whatever sells is acceptable.
ReplyDeleteDarren Zulim.
ReplyDeleteI believe that de-evolution is happening all around us. Greed and power can take control of people and cause them to be self centered, irrelevant, and destructive. Leaders of nations are very susceptible to this, which can lead to nations looking for ways to self prosper at the expense of others. Who knows what the earth will be like one hundred, two hundred, or three hundred years from now, but just because we will not be here to see it doesn't mean that we shouldn't care about the earth's condition in the far away future. Respect yourself and the planet! YEaaaah!
Lisa Leon
ReplyDeleteI believe de-evolution is certainly happening today. With all this talk about nuclear weapons and drilling off shore it is not the governments fault its everyones. The people that are creating this stuff and promoting this is who we must fear like the quote says.We must only think of what will happen today we have to worry about what will happen in then next 50 years when some animals wont be around because we are destroying their habitats and all our rainforests. It is selfish of us to be just thinking about what will happen in our life time but next generations that will be in worse conditions if we dont make changes today. Instead of adapting to our environment and making it better for our future generations, we are making the environment adapt to us and destroying it in the process.
I believe that a form of de-evolution is happening today in the sense that some of us are trying to connect BACK to nature. Not the type of de-evolution that the artist is trying to communicate. I think the separation between earth and human kind is ending-- the damage has already been done and we are finding ways to sustainably exist on this planet.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do not necessarily think that de-evolution is going on in the world today, I will agree that humankind is on the brink of destroying itself. I do not think this comes from de-evolution, but rather from the increasingly limited amount of space and resources on the planet.
ReplyDeleteLuxuries such as oil, forests, and open land are all going to be a thing of the past 50 years from now.
It is easy to say that humans are De-evolving because of how we fight for these resources and create new and better way to kill each other.
But what if this is our version of Natural Selection?
Whatever nation makes the best decisions to preserve their way of life gets to have their values and beliefs carried on in history.
Don't get me wrong, I don't support war and I think some of the things we do as humans are terrible.
But humans are not de-evolving, we are simply scared of the future.
Jane Peterson
ReplyDeleteI believe it is important to recognize that as human beings we wrestle with our brain power and ability to flourish and destroy. That mankind all too often can "devolve" by making wrong decisions and harmful choices; however, I do not think we are only regressing. In the process of making poor decisions we also make good decisions. I believe it is human nature to seek balance in life and here there is only the focus on the negative aspects of devolution or the lack of evolution. There are just as many positive events, decisions, and choices being made on this Earth as there are negative ones. Devolution comes hand in hand with evolution.
Alex Remar:
ReplyDeleteAlthough I admire DEVO and welcome their thought provoking criticism on human nature, I must say that I disagree with their conclusion. The notion that humans are experiencing de-evolution ridiculous. Saying that “it’s not nuclear weapons we must fear but rather the human mind itself” is the same thing as saying “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” This is no revolutionary idea. We humans are capable of limitless love, care, and compassion. Sadly, this same human nature also makes us capable of horrific violence and evil. Our behavior has always been this way throughout human history, and can even be seen today in chimpanzees (our closest living relative and the species that we EVOLVED from).
When our ancient hominid ancestors evolved with enough intelligence to create the first weapons, they were used to provide food and protection for their families. These weapons were also surely used to kill fellow rivals. Millions of years later we humans have evolved with enough intelligence to be able to control a nuclear reaction, which has been used as a massive energy supplier and a massively destructive bomb. With greater technology comes a greater ability for humans to do extreme good and extreme evil. Although this presents us with a scary reality, it is not fair to attribute it to de-evolution. The mere ability for human beings to produce atomic bombs is proof enough that we are evolving.
Aaron Presberg (ANT 250):
ReplyDeleteI have always enjoyed Devo's catchy songs, such as Whip it, but I never knew what they stood for. I find their view about de-evolution very fascinating. Although I don't completely agree with Devo's standpoint on this issue, they are right about some things.
Humans, particularly Americans, take EVERYTHING for granted. With advances in technology, we have become more and more lazy and more and more harmful to the environment. We now drive our gas guzzling down the street to the super market. Not only is this showing our laziness, it also hurts the environment and we can solve both of these problems by simply walking or riding a bike.
In addition to cars, we take one more enormous thing for granted: communication. Face-to-face and in person conversations are diminishing year by year. We can now "chat" online with someone who lives on the other side of the world in just seconds. While this concept is incredibly convenient, it is taking mankind down a very slippery slope. People around the world are becoming less personal and are even carrying on relationships with people they have not truly met in person. To me, this is completely ridiculous and I believe that Devo is making a significant statement.
With regards to the nuclear weapons, I still think we should fear them. I mean a strong enough nuclear weapon could take out all of North America and that is definitely something that we should fear.
I agree with Gerard Casale in that the human mind is something to fear--that can't be contested. But rather than a product of de-evolution, it has seemed to me for some time that humans are essentially too smart for their own good. I don't believe it is a "lack of" mind that makes such extensive evil in the world possible; lack of love or lack of tolerance would seem more appropriate.
ReplyDeleteThe term de-evolution is misleading and seems a little contradictory to me. The creation of weapons and nuclear missiles is not the result of humans regressing back into cavemen or our ape ancestors. It took great intelligence. Our motives for creating such destructive elements were certainly not in the best interest of humanity, and I have to say I find it upsetting that humans tend to use their creative minds for evil more often than for good. However, there are countless examples of humans harnessing their abilities for the advancement of our species (we are capable of sending people to space!) Violence has been evident since before the first humans walked the earth, and it is not unique to humans. Chimpanzees, our closest relatives, commit horrendous acts of violence on each other for no apparent reason. The fact that evils exist in the world (and humans do contribute a great deal of it) is a sad fact, but it has nothing to do with us "de-evolving."
Paige Smith:
ReplyDeleteWhile I admire Devo in its quest to provoke thought and change through music and a controversial declaration of the human species as we relate to evolution, I have to respectfully disagree with its claim that humans are devolving.
In fact, in order to fully understand what the artists mean by "de-evolution," we need to come to a consensus about the definition of evolution. When I think of evolution, I think of humans developing into more competent, more intelligent, more useful beings capable of accomplishing "impossible" feats and beginning revolutions of change. We can cure illnesses, send people into space, run hundreds of miles, build airplanes and skyscrapers, communicate with loved ones even hundreds of miles apart. We are not regressing; we are constantly improving, attaining, achieving, building, expanding, and enriching our lives and our minds as ideas that once never entered the brain of a human are made into reality.
We are not devolving. Rather, I feel the human race's evolution of love, compassion, and generosity is at a much slower than its evolution of the mind and body. Because the ability to love, to care, and to sympathize is emotional, rather than mental or physical, it will take some time before these are fully developed, or at least equivalent to the progress our brains and body have made thus far.
We do have reason to fear the human mind, but not because we are thinking less and devolving intellectually. We have reason to fear the human mind because humans as a collective whole have not fully evolved love, tolerance, and compassion. I
Ryan Yanda- I beieve that de- evolution is not true. Thinking the way that humans think currenty is evolution because we all grow to construct our own ideas and beliefs as indivisuals.. turning your attention to the growing technology in our society is not de- evolution, it is only a growth in the interest and use of technology created by others. Because devo(a band which wears red pyramids on their heads and attempts to make fun of others around them) believes that people are becoming less intelligent does not make it true. I have seen them in concert and they only encourage uniqueness by doing as they do, which is not wrong, but only shows that uniqueness amongst indivisuals is growth. I think that people evolve only as far as the environment in which they live in allows them to evolve. If we turn our attention to technology as a source for entertainment and socializing then that is only the evolution of people. We are born to look towards technology as a source of growth. Because some choose to only use technology as their only source of growth does not mean that others are not surpassing them and creating their own technology to follow. It is fair to say that certain people are not taking advantage of their intelligence that has increased from past eras, but to say that society as a whole is degressing because they are attracted to the ever- increasing technology in society is FALSE. The human mind evolves every day, and just because this is not the evolution devo supports, it does not mean we are de- evolving.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it is necessarily that humans are "de-evolving," it is merely that machines are doing the evolving for us. Why would humans need to adapt and have longer arms to say, reach higher fruit on a tree, when there are cherry pickers to raise us up to fruit level? So rather than de-evolving, humans have merely reached a point of stagnant evolution where we are not moving forward or backwards. Only the machines are changing and evolving in that they are becoming more advanced. As many science fiction movies have theorized, there may come a day in which machines evolve past humans to become the most powerful organism. Only then will humans begin to evolve once more.
ReplyDeleteErin Kelly
ReplyDeleteI tend to agree with what Megan has said (May 5 8:06), it is not "necessarily that humans are "de-evolving", it is merely that machines are doing the evolving for us." Our minds have clearly evolved and are continually getting more powerful, and so we are creating new and more efficient technologies every day. If your interpretation of evolution is a physical change, than yes, we are not evolving any more. I prefer to think of evolution as any change affecting our survival. The ability to create better medicines, safer vehicles, and increased accessibility to knowledge have all affected our ability to survive, even though they are not physical changes we have made. The invention of refrigeration drastically changed our diet. By making fruits and vegetables available all year round we created a healthier diet.
Our minds are constantly evolving and even though we ourselves are not physically changing, we are changing our environment. This has put us in an interesting situation, because now we are hurting our environment more than we are helping it, and I worry that since we have become so dependent on our creations, that we have forgotten how to think on our own and have creative thought. We have most definitely become a lazy society. One example that comes to mind is my roommate's inability to recycle. He likes to eat those individually wrapped yogurts, which is another issue all together (so much packaging!), and then throw away the plastic container. Our recycling bin is a mere 2 feet away from the trash can, yet I continually find yogurt cups in the trash. It is even easier to recycle, since the recycling bin doesn't have a lid on it and the trash can does, but since my roommate is too lazy to rinse out the yogurt cup, he doesn't recycle. Did I mention that he also like to preach sustainability and organic practices? Yet he can't find the extra 5 seconds to recycle. These are the kinds of things that scare me. What if everyone who is "fighting" to stop climate change is only fighting on the surface, and once they go home, out of the public eye, they revert back to their bad habits?
"It's not nuclear weapons we must fear but rather the human mind itself, or lack of it, on this planet."
We are definitely still evolving, but perhaps we are evolving to a point where we will no longer need to think; that is when we will have truly stopped evolving.
Chynna Rowe
ReplyDeleteOn the topic of de-evolution and the continuing lack of the human mind, I agree to some extent. I had a realization not too long ago about how much humans are regressing, not intellectually, but physically and the way we perceive things. As intellects we have made or make things such as stop lights, cell phones, and cars. I think its great that we have made humans lives in the current century that much easier. Like rather than having to walk to get water, we have pipes going to our houses, instead of relying on horses we have cars, we don't have to strain our eyes with candle light because we light bulbs. I have no problem with a little convenience. But what I realized was that we have allowed ourselves to become controlled by our inventions. We are told by street lights when to stop and go, we have doors that open for us, automatically flushing toilets, we even have automatic soap dispensers. When will the time come when we become fully incapacitated physically? Humans are losing almost all primal instincts to be out in nature. Even if its once a year, we as humans, need to get away from conveniences and appreciate where we originally come from, nature. We forget that the natural conveniences are the ones we should be indulging in, such as clean air, food and water, and other conveniences should be a bonus.
But as an after thought on intellect, I've noticed that we are running out of new ideas. so many things have already been invented, while other inventions are merely prototypes of the originals. For example, if anyone opens a smoothie shop now, they would be copying Jamba Juice. I hope we never stop inventing new things, but it seems like the new ideas we can come up with are decreasing exponentially. Maybe we've done all we can do? Maybe this is a sign that we have everything we need, now we just need to smooth the edges and clean up our earth a little, with all the progression to now, we've been neglectful. Maybe that is a way we can stop the perceived de-evolution and step up our game in the areas that we need to keep strong.
Lee Richardson
ReplyDeleteI think humans still have a long way to go in regards to evolving, but I think de-evolution is a threat that we have to pay attention to. There are lots of people in the world today who are doing new research, trying to figure out the world in more depth, inventing new things, and progressing society in general. However, the majority of people are not involved with working hard at progressing our race and are merely content with going through the motions of life without really questioning what is happening to us or why. I think the reason that Aristotle, Plato, COnfucious and other people of the Axial age were so celebrated is because they tackled lifes most complicated and controversial questions because they deemed them as the most important. However, it seems strange that after a few thousand years, we still are contemplating the same debates that Aristotle and Plato were arguing about, rather than developing new theories and experimenting with ideas that people are too afraid to talk about.
One example of this could be the youtube conspiracy theory called the Illuminati. This theory is the idea that all of the most powerful people in the world are working together to create a New World Order that will be implemented in the year 2012. While this theory seems somewhat abstract to lots of people, it is backed with a lot of evidence from people like William Cooper, and unexplained govermental secrets such as Area 51, Mount Weather, and the Bohemian Grove. While there is a lot of area for debate in this theory, it will never become a mainstream argument because if it were to be accepted by members of the population, it would force these people into reconstructing there whole perception of our world and what is actually going on, and see ourselves as members of their plot rather than creators or our own destiny. This would be a very tough pill to swallow for most, and maybe we havent evolved yet into thinking as abstact as we can, which would help us solve some of lifes greatest mysteries, in which Plato and Aristotle attemped so many years ago.
So while the concept of De-Evolution is very scary, I think that there are enough people in the world who are pushing their potential to the maximum and progressing our species, and a lot of room to grow still as a society. I believe that there is still an infinite amount of concepts and aspects to the world that we have yet to scratch the surface of, and the statement that we are de-evolving is very lazy and un-motivated. However, we do need to get a hold of our natural resources so our world can continue to function, so maybe eventually we will peak and figure it out.
Rebecca Costanza
ReplyDelete(ANT 250)
I agree that we are being de-evolved. This quote is very real. We have become so consumed in materialistic things that we lose traditional cultural ways in order to fit the idea that a better society means better technology. We overconsume resources such as plastics for the benefit of human indulgence and don't realize the impacts it may have on the environment or other cultures. Using these resources forbids us to evolve to our natural environment and rather we remain how we are now. We are a society focused on quantity instead of quality; how much food instead of the healthfulness of it; how much money we can obtain instead of how we spend what we have.
On the other hand, the definition "evolve" can be seen differently. We may be biologically de-evolved, but ideologically and technologically we are advancing and evolving with new ways and innovations. Rather than living through harsh environmental conditions and learning to migrate, we figure out how to avoid them and predict changes in the future to better prepare. I do not think de-evolving is necessarily a bad thing, but i would say we are moving more towards globalization and assimilation, which is almost worse and has a heavy impact on traditional cultures in developing countries.
I disagree with the idea of de-evolution. I don't think we are digressing. Yes we are destroying our planet, yes we are dependent on technology. Yes we are endangering species and yes it is really bad. What exactly do you want us to do, go back and become cavemen? We have been given this amazing ability to build and assess and reflect and maybe in many ways we've taken advantage of it but you can't expect people to do anything less. People need to meet their basic needs and in the world we live in today, technology is the way to do it. You can't just run off and go find the land of plenty and become a hunter gatherer. It doesn't work that way. Based on the way the world works today I suppose someone could say we've digressed. My question for you then would be from what though? Any living thing given the brain power to live more easily would exploit the earth. Ever since people became modern day humans they have been exploiting the earth, the rate was just not rapid enough to make a difference before. If you put millions upon million of rabbits all over the world that needed food to stay alive they would not think twice about feeding themselves until there was no food left in order to stay alive. What is the difference between us and the rabbits? We are THINKING about it. We realize what we are doing. We are trying, even in small and seemingly insignificant ways to change that.
ReplyDeleteI had an astronomy teacher who told my class that she believed that the human race's purpose in the universe was to understand it and appreciate it. What's the purpose of a huge, amazing universe if there is no creature with the capacity to know its even there, let alone try to understand it( this is to be taken in the most scientific non religious way physically possible, neither I nor my teacher were asserting that humans were placed on earth by any kind of god for any specific and set purpose). Unlike any other living thing that we know of at this point in time in the universe, we have the capacity to think and reflect. We have the drive to seek out more information. As humans we have a vivacity for knowledge that goes beyond any other creature living on earth. We are abusing our power, there is no doubt about it. But at least we know we are and that is a step in the right direction. Would a million hungry rabbits think twice? No. But I can tell you one thing when those millions of hungry rabbits populate out of control and start messing things up for everyone, humans will be there with our horrible corruptive technology to keep them under control and make sure the rest of the creatures of Earth live another day. You call it digression, I disagree. So far as earth creatures go, we are the single most progressive group, BY FAR, who have ever walked this earth. Does this mean nothing needs to change? Oh course not. If I could just list the things about our human race that need to be changed, this comment would never end. But that list would not be evidence for de-evolution.
Kylie Breuer
ReplyDeleteGerald Casale's comment that we need not fear the weapons, just the humans in control of the weapons, poses an interesting question. Does it matter whether we have weapons of mass destruction, or does it just matter if we use them? I agree that the danger is really the human mind- because who designed these weapons in the first place? He says there is a "lack of" human mind, and I agree with this as well. Using nuclear weapons in my opinion cannot help any situation, no matter how dire, and we do not need to resort to such extreme measures. Our bodies and minds have been evolving for a few million years; so why are we obviously not thinking clearly when we use atomic bombs and such? To use nuclear weapons is a lack of evolution of the human mind.
I agree with the statement Gerald Casale has posted. “It’s not nuclear weapons we must fear but rather the human mind itself” (Gerald Casale for Devo). This portion of the quote is extremely true. First off, humans have created nuclear weapons. With our extremely complex brains we have figured out a way to create such weapons that can do great damage to the world and human society. Though nuclear weapons are what would physically destroy the earth, humans are what would mentally destroy the earth because they have created these weapons. If the human mind itself had not invented nuclear weapons, then there wouldn’t be this fear of nuclear weapons destroying the earth; therefore, we must fear the creators of such evil weapons rather than the weapons themselves. We may never know what other things humans will come up with that may even be more destructive and harmful than nuclear weapons. Human inventions have seemed to become endless these days. The next portion of the quote, “or lack of it,” is implying that humans may have a lack of intelligence or that we lack fear of the human mind (Gerald Casale for Devo). Humans may lack intelligence because if they were smart enough, they wouldn’t have even created such weapons that could destroy humanity. Or, if we lack fear of the human mind, we may not be conscious of what it is capable of. Clearly, nuclear weapons have been created from human knowledge. If we can make nuclear weapons, we must be able to create other dangerous weapons that can also destroy the earth, which should make us fear the human mind. Finally, de-evolution is the theory of backward evolution, the idea that humans are becoming less advance. Evolution is linked with improving on the species, making it better and more advanced. With this notion that de-evolution is real, humans are now taking a step backwards in the path of progression. Humans are de-evolving because they are making unwise mistakes such as creating nuclear weapons that will most likely eventually end up destroying the earth and all of humanity.
ReplyDeleteNick Powers
ReplyDeleteDe-evolution is false. It is obvious it is false since we can look at the past. We can see that animals have clearly expanded into different species and not degraded other species in order to have only one species. I would almost say the opposite with humans becoming the same and that humans could become more and more different as time goes on. The only exception to the devo theory is the Hitler example of WWII. I think the human species is to smart and is too caring to eliminate a similar species or different race. Also we have the beauty of living in America where we are one of the most diverse nations in the world. This has allowed us to grow up with different races so we would feel less hate towards a different race. Humans also have different hobbies and entertainment. This causes diversity with the human population leading the opposite way of de-evolution.
I am not sure if the direction that twentieth century human society is heading toward is considered "de-evolution" I feel that we have changed so much in small increment in history that is considered "our time" that it is hard to judge or even imagine how evolution will affect us in the future. I feel that because humans have altered the planet so much that adaptation or survival is in the control of humans. Using technology, we have been able to make the environment fit our needs instead of nature altering us.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I believe that we have fallen into a pitfall with our reliance on technology, it is technology that is guiding our evolution now. I feel that it is not necessarily "de-evolution" that is going on, but maybe a higher reliance of technology to do what we should be doing ourselves. This reliance is making humans more and more immobile and less intrigued about the natural world because we have always tried to find an answer to everything.
The human brain has not "de-evolved" in the line of human history, it has only improved and developed more and more ways to ease life in large populations and find explanations to all things paranormal in this world. If anything, I would believe that it is human dependency on technology that is driving away the need for raw natural intelligence. However, it is also because of human intelligence that technology exists.
I do not believe that we are "de-evolving", if anything, it would be that we are evolving too quickly and it will eventually spell global disaster because we will have reached our pinnacle of technology and lose control of it.
The term "de-evolution" is somewhat confusing to me. Evolution is neither progressive nor regressive, rather a cyclical pattern of change, constantly adapting to ever-changing environments. It's impossible to "de-evolve" because it implies a process of reverse change. What I think Gerald Casale means when he says that humans are "de-evolving" is that, as our species evolves, our tendencies resemble that of a more primitive species. These tendencies are similar to our ancient ancestors like the common chimpanzee, showing aggressive tendencies without much reasoning capabilities.
ReplyDeleteThe human species has shown an increased reliance on technology, making different problems and interactions easier than ever before. Thus, we have started to exhibit behavior that lacks certain complex cognitive skills. Although I don't think this can be classified as "de-evolution," technology has certainly caused our society to evolve in a negative direction.
I couldn't agree with Gerald Casale more. As humans we are an extremely intelligent species. However, we are our own worst enemies. We create democracies and grass root movements to fight against inequalities and injustices yet we also allow for the establishment of kleptocracies and institutionalized racism. Edmund Burke said, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Many of us are unaware and feel unprepared to fight for better governments and higher ethical standards. As citizens of the United States we pay taxes to our government and indirectly support measures and policies that promote unsustainable practices and warfare. By not taking a stand and protesting the development and growth of nuclear arms, our silence allows it to continue. These weapons are not to be feared; they are nothing without the men and women who fund their development and give continuous support. We can go on with our daily lives and ignore the eminent danger of the human mind or we can make a change. We have seen throughout human history the power of greed and fear. But just as we have seen the ugly side of human nature, there is a beautiful and creative side that is just as powerful. Change is possible and humans can come together and fight for a progressive global community.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the artists statement that de-evolution is a threat to mankind. Although society is constantly evolving with new technologies, these technologies have made much of the human race lazy, and is resulting in a loss of our survival drive. As we become more dependent on technology we will begin to de-evolve. This is because technology makes our life easier, but when technology makes things to easy, we will begin to lose the skills we once had for those tasks.
ReplyDeleteI believe De-evolution is more of a figure of speech. The "de-evolution" is (in my mind) perceived as the disintegration of the complex human mind into the realm of needless, primitive violence, i.e., in this case, nuclear war. During the Scopes Monkey Trial in 1925, George McReady Price wrote about the possibility of ape devolving from man due to being in a more primitive environment. Not that his view is true or anything, the possibility of man's MIND to devolve is technically possible. If it is in society's view that being more evolved means man can solve problems without violence, then it is true, man is evolved. Yet as time and aggression may prove, humans can devolve issues into primitive violence. As long as there is violence, like hate groups, KKK, supremacist groups, religious violence groups, and such hatred and animosity towards fellow man and woman alike, then yes, the human mind as a whole has devolved into something more primitive. It may not be extremely primitive, but it's still primitive in comparison to what humans can achieve. The idea of becoming more aware of who you are and what you can do with such a complex thinking system is becoming lost as society (yes, society) becomes more saturated to distract and discourage provocative, intelligent, and creative thinking. Back to the quote, I agree it is not WMDs we should fear, but the minds holding the WMDs at their fingertips. It will take time, a lot of time, for humans to drop their drastic way of violence, and as scary as it may seem, it will most likely take a large scale event/catastrophe to bring upon such rethinking of the human mind. Our future is one of such unknown...
ReplyDeleteHowever, the internet is also very likely a significant contributing factor to the reluctance that many youths display when asked to engage their minds by, say, reading a book, or writing a short story. The internet can serve as a refuge for users to play mindless flash games that do nothing to advance the cognitive abilities or education of the user (Robot Unicorn Attack, I’m looking at you…).
ReplyDeleteIt is capable of inundating the user’s browser with an endless display of boobs of all types and sizes. Social networking websites can provide a space for students to dwell for hours on end learning about what a classmate of theirs from elementary school had for breakfast, or what their roommate thinks about Obama’s healthcare policy (although, let’s be honest, nobody really understands politics, and wouldn’t pretend to if they didn’t think it made them seem smart, but I digress…). Now, in fact, we can even play those mindless games from INSIDE our social networking clients! What’s more, because the internet serves as an infinite archive of all human knowledge, we no longer need to use our brains to store this knowledge, which may well be contributing to the mental apathy exhibited by modern day American children and teens (i.e. why memorize it when you can Google it?). The internet, then, sometimes seems a grim representation of the pinnacle of human evolution.
So what am I getting at? The internet – along with all technology, but to a greater extent than any other invention of modern times – is what we make of it. It has the potential to disperse useful information throughout every corner of the globe, contributing to a smarter and more capable human race in the years to come. It also may be the most soporific, zombie-spawning scourge our race has seen in all of history, perhaps eventually resulting in the very “de-evolution” of our species feared by Casale. The exciting thing is, of course, that we’ll get to find out soon enough.
“I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to [located the United States on a world map] because, uhmmm, some people out there in our nation don't have maps and uh, I believe that our, I, education like such as, uh, South Africa, and uh, the Iraq, everywhere like such as, and I believe that they should, uhhh, our education over here in the U.S. should help the U.S., uh, should help South Africa, it should help the Iraq and the Asian countries so we will be able to build up our future, for our children.” – Caitlin Upton, Miss South Carolina Teen USA, 2007.
ReplyDeleteI debated finishing my response at that, as I think it illustrates Casale’s fears adequately enough already, but for the sake of clarification (and extra credit!) I’ll continue. While the unfortunate woman quoted above is perhaps not representative of the overall intelligence level of modern day Americans, I would venture to suggest that her level of awareness of foreign affairs is woefully accurate of our society. Indeed, she may even be bordering on intelligent commentary (!) in pointing the finger at education: not the education dished out in classrooms by teachers, but the education that America’s youth adopts when it dons the professor’s hat itself. I’m referring, of course, to the internet.
The internet is perhaps the most significant innovation of the 20th century. Google, Wikipedia, and YouTube are just a selection of the myriad resources one has as his/her fingertips when he/she logs onto the Web on a quest for information. It can give the user a detailed overview of all of the battles that took place in WWI. It can inform the user how to rid his/her house of a pesky infestation of drain flies (a disgusting process, by the way, that I hope you never have to undergo). It can teach a user how to play a pop song they heard on the radio (although chances are it’s just G,C,D anyway), and what’s more it can teach him/her the concepts behind music theory so that he/she might then be able to compose new songs. The internet’s power to educate and advance the human race is unparalleled, and there is no question in regards to its potential to enrich the human mind.
Megan Korp (ANT 250)
ReplyDeleteI do agree with the artists that many humans have become lazy and unmotivated with all of the available technology. However, I disagree with the idea that humans are regressing and de-evolving. In some ways, the human mind has to be continuously moving forward; we have been able to invent all these new technologies. The internet, the television, and the cell phone did not just appear on earth, they were invented by humans. These inventions are essentially necessary for humans to live today and have greatly contributed to society. I think it is unfair to say that because we have these new technological tools. Creating stone tools made it easier for our ancestors to live and that was considered a great technological advancement in their society. It seems extremely unfair that now that we have these modern tools, which are continuously being remodeled and advanced by human minds, we are being told that we have it too easy and that we as a species in general are de-evolving.
I think that these tools are part of what makes us distinctly human, the ability to further advance the tools we need to survive.
Megan Korp (ANT 250):
ReplyDeleteI agree with the artists in the respect that, yes many humans have become lazy and unmotivated by all of the available technology. I also agree that these new technologies make our lives very easy. However, I think it is extremely unfair to say that humans as a whole are de-evolving and regressing.
Our ancestors created stone tools to make their lives easier and this was considered an amaznig technological development of the time. Today, we have developed tools such as the internet and the cell phone to make our lives easier, but instead of being praised for our technological advances, we are being labeled as de-evolving because life is too easy. I disagree that our minds are not present; the human mind is responsible for the technological advancements we have made.
On the other hand, I agree that humans have become more violent and less interested in the affairs of other humans. However, to say that we are de-evolving is again, very unfair. In some ways, humans care about other humans in many ways that were not present in the past.
I do not believe that humans are de-evolving and in fact do believe that humans still have a long way to go in their evolutionary journey.
Kevin Rask
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the Idea of de-evolution. Technological advancements have really improved our lives tremendously . There's no question that our society is going to keep evolving and new improved technology is going to keep happening. In Gerald Casale quote "Its not nuclear weapons we must fear but rather the human mind itself". To me that quote says that ultimately the human mind is in control. Humans are the inventors of technology and therefore technology isn't the main concern. The main concern is how we as human use the technology and if we use it correctly I believe that technology can be a great tool for the evolution of humans.
Stephen Albertolle Ant 250
ReplyDeleteI believe that humans are not devolving, but rather our brains evolve, but our basic instincts remain. As an individual within a society, one can see that there is still massive competition to gain status within the group. Humans still put in time and work to gain a high rank and win over members of the other sex who are higher ranking as well. We want to spend our time working to provide, and sometimes that means stripping down our enviroment and taking advantage of others. Primates do not worry about the enviroment, or other species, or even members of other groups, they only care about their group, and making sure they can live. This is all that humans have done, only we are so smart our indulgence carries a bigger cost on the enviroment, and others around us. This leads to global warming and extinction of other animals, but we are just evolving to survive and fourish, which we have. Until recently nobody thought about things going extinct(fuel, animals, enviroment), but now because of big evolved brain, we feel bad for the earth and other animals and decisions we've made.
Chris Viehweg Ant 250
ReplyDeleteDe-evolution is certainly real, but I think that the word "de-evolution" is misleading. Thinking in terms of just our human race is too narrow-minded. Let us not forget that the Earth as a whole is evolving itself along with every other living thing on earth; humans being among that. The Earth has its own course of action and it doesn't care what humans want. Yes we are destroying the Earth more and more every day and draining its resources at an alarming pace. If you think of the circle of life on a larger scale, maybe it is just natural course for humans to eventually die out. One day there will be no more resources to support human life as we know it. Maybe by then we will find a new planet to live on, or come up with a way to support ourselves. Either way, eventually, the Earth is going to need a break from humans. It's not like we would be the first species to be eliminated from the planet.
Another way to think about it is maybe we are evolving too fast, and in doing so, evolving the world around us too fast. For instance, humans seem to have a strong desire to want to live forever. We are constantly finding ways to beat diseases and sicknesses, further extending the life span of an average human. The only thing is, you never really completely beat a disease or sickness. Medicine is continually getting stronger because we are continually making bacteria stronger. It isn't natural to be able to cheat death the way humans do, and by doing so, we are making our species weaker. Instead of evolving to beat sicknesses and other things that would naturally kill us, we artificially and temporarily "evolve" ourselves so that we don't die. Aa result, those who are supposed to die don't die, and produce offspring that are prone to the same fatal whatever it was that nearly killed their parent. Thus, the human race is "de-evolving," interupting the circle of life (on a large scale) and exhausting the Earth. I think that eventually the Earth is just simply going to need a break from us, and humans won't be able to do anything about it.
It all sounds really harsh... good thing I can be totally wrong - I hope I am
Serena Mistry
ReplyDeleteI agree with the concept of de-evolution. Humans have become so dependent on technology. In the past, people used to memorize and remember large amounts of information. Today, with the Internet, many people are less likely to retain information since they have access to it from their computers, phones, ipods and other technology. Our ability to think critically is damaged since we rely on technology to find answers. Generally, when most people want to learn about something, they will use a search engine on the internet to find it. Though having more information at our fingertips makes us more efficient in finding information, we do not use our brains as much to find the answers ourselves. Since we have access to an incredible amount of information, we have become lazy. Many office jobs involve sitting in a chair in front of a computer for most of the day. In the past, the majority of humans worked on farms and other places where they were standing and moving. Sitting for long periods of time and staring at a TV screen or computer is not healthy for the body. But technology encourages us to do so. Overall, I think technology has made our lives easier but we have become too dependent on it.
Lauren Church
ReplyDeleteI agree with the first part of this statement "It's not nuclear weapons we must fear but rather the human mind itself.."
Humans have the intelligence, ability, and resources to create and discover so many positive things when it comes to medical and scientific studies especially. I feel that people can use this intelligence for so much good however they choose to use it in negative ways. People make nuclear bombs for the purpose of harming others and in the process they harm the environment as well. To be this is a clear depiction of how de-evolution is taking place. We are doing more bad then good a lot of the time without graciously considering and acknowledging all of the harm we are causing to our environment and species. The unintentional lack of sympathy is what makes Gerald Casale's second statement "or lack of it" so relevant. Obviously we are aware of the harm we cause but because causing the harm can potentially increase power, we neglect all possible outcomes. We do in some ways need to fear the human mind and encourage all of its positive uses but also be cautious when it comes to the negatives.
Kristen Fowler
ReplyDeleteANT 250-01
The concept of de-evolution is very intriguing to look at in a cultural context; obviously we are not literally de-evolving as human species, but culturally we continue to rely on barbaric and primitive methods to obtain what we want. As technology grows and expands, we are in a constant want and need for new resources, both natural and artificial and will go to great lengths to get an abundant and cheap supply of them. Now, instead of using our evolved brains that are capable of compromise and negotiation, we resort to war and violence to get what we want. Through threats, force, and a show of power, our species constantly compete for resources that will technologically "advance" our society. Though, maybe it should not be looked at as a regression in our cultural evolution, but rather a lack of progression in the evolution of our cultural concepts. Since war and power battles have been apparent since the beginning of history, and continue to be prevalent, it seems that we are in a state of stasis as far as culturally evolving a way to be competitive in a "friendly" manner. With our evolved brains and apparent abilities to negotiate and come to neutral and logical decisions in, for example, the business world, the next step is to apply this evolved cultural ability to the larger context of the world. De-evolution is an interesting way to look at the way the world works, but I prefer to think that evolution is merely in a state of stasis in reference to our abilities to become neutral and friendly and in reference to our abilities get past the violent, barbaric nature of our past ancestors.
I’m not sure if it is necessarily de-evolution, just a matter of arrogance and pride. There are still many intellectuals out there and there are more people going to school more than ever before. As far as nuclear weapons go, I think that many leaders of nations feel like if they lose face, they will be ridiculed and looked down upon by the international community. I think many of our world leaders are very selfish and arrogant, and will only do things to better their individual country but not the rest of the world. I do not think this is a new development at all. People have been fighting wars with each other for thousands of years. The technology has developed, not the state of mind. From wars fought by empires to the World Wars of the 20th century, this state of being is not new. I do not feel we are de-evolving; merely our weaponry has evolved but our minds have not. I feel it is more a matter of a stagnant mind instead of a de-evolving one. The future of humankind will only change if the mindset changes. Given the thousands of years of evidence, I doubt it.
ReplyDelete- Elika Aram
As our species is becoming more and more advanced in areas such as technology, I do believe that it is true that we are de-evolving in other aspects of life. Currently in our society, natural selection is not as prevalent as it was in the past thousands of years ago; therefore, we are not forced to adapt to our surroundings and adjust according to it because we can simply go indoors and turn on a heater, or grab a jacket instead of having to evolve to withstand the elements. However, as a whole, I think we are de-evolving because instead of natural selection playing a key role in keeping our planet stable and progressively evolving, we took the idea of natural selection and turned on its head with medical breakthroughs, etc. There is truly no need for the human race to evolve if technology can evolve for us.
ReplyDeleteContinuing in the direction we are headed, the future of humanity is looking quite slim. From global warming to the newly invented weapons of war, we need to take a step back and look at the burden we are putting on our planet before we place ourselves in a situation that could perhaps lead to the extinction of our species. I think it is time for us to connect back with the earth itself, and respect Mother Nature and everything she has to offer.
Krista Galatolo
Zeno Muscarella
ReplyDeleteI agree with the artists opinion, however there is a substantial argument against de-evolution too. De-evolution through technology is what I truly agree from the argument. I do believe humans have become lazier and lazier for the past decades. technology dose make things easier which makes previous knowledge less accessible which in turn makes humans dumber than before. The use of our technology is also "de-evolving" as well, we are using technology for a few wrong reasons such as war. A nuke to blow an entire country up is unnecessary and the money funding it should be dispersed elsewhere. De-evolution is a scary thought but evolution always benefits a species so we might not actually be in trouble. we might in fact be more efficient in all aspects of life.
Mimi Ho
ReplyDeleteI like this quote a lot because recently, I have been getting all kinds of thoughts relating to why, we as humans, act this way and just life in general. I believe the world is like a baby and is still growing and developing. We as humans are assisting in providing changes, as we are the ones making them, good and bad. As our world has evolved through different time changes and centuries, we’ve learned to adapt to the lifestyles that come with it. I guess for a lot of us, we have gone through wars, which has caused us to think that fighting violent, long, overseas wars will solve problems with other countries and how technology is such a life saver. As said by Gerald Casale, “It’s not nuclear weapons we must fear but rather the human mind itself or lack of it”. Although nuclear weapons are a problem, we must look deeper as to who made them and why were they created. Humans, nonetheless, created them for purposes, particularly in war. The human mind or lack of, leads certain individuals to do things. It’s like when you were growing up as a child, you would hear the phrase, “Don’t have the player, hate the game”. Humans are to blame for the changes that go on in our society. We are currently aiming towards vamping our society into the technologic world as well as trying to keep and rid the special individuals for the future. Maybe it is just my values, but I feel like technology takes over a lot of the things in life and does cause people to act sadistically. If it were not for the idea of inventions, we would not be fueled to want to create something for our needs, more bad than good.
Lance Thompson
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the provocative quote from the artists DEVO, I was slightly offended at first but once I started thinking about it, I can see where they are coming from. I realize that in today's society we as humans have many amenities and things in our lives to make them easier, which in turn may make some of us lazier and less willing to push our minds to invent and create new things. My problem with this quote is it generalizes everybody in one group and says we are de-evolving. This statement is not true and in fact we are actually evolving because if you compare the people today with the people in the past then it is clear that all throughout history the generation before always had less to work with. This obviously means that we keep pushing ourselves to greater heights and have no choice but to evolve and get smarter as an overall race. For example, if we compared what a child today learned in elementary school to a child in the early 1900's then it isn't even comparable!
Nowadays we learn so much and keep expanding our minds without even realizing it. Everybody is doing it so it doesn't stand out any more like it used to in the past. Therefore I still believe we are evolving and getting smarter!!
"It's not nuclear weapons we must fear but rather the human mind itself, or lack of it, on this planet."
ReplyDeleteWith the brilliant technology we have today, we need to start using it to create a more positve, peaceful planet. We need to focus more on sustainability and keeping earth beautiful rather than hurting and killing others.
Also, with this modern, advanced technology, many people begin to stop thinking for themselves. Like Erin Kelly said, we are still evolving, and won't stop until we stop thinking for ourselves. However, we need to make it a priority to make sure this never happens.
Although this statement definitely accounts for many people in society, it detracts from the large population that is not conforming and that does support positive aspects like peace and global sustainability.
Foley Wu
ReplyDeleteHow is de-evolution real? The way I see it, it seems we, humans, are becoming smarter everyday, not less intelligent. We are consuming more information than ever before! Current technology allows us to access information instantly and anywhere. This is something we could not do 30 years ago. We are at a point where only more information will be available for us at easy access.
On the other hand, knowledge is power. People with more knowledge can become threats and that can potentially be harmful. However, our minds do not degrade just because we become a threat or harmful.
Stacy Carsey
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree that society puts such an emphasis on fearing the common fears (nuclear weapons) rather than the actual threats to the destruction of environments, cultures, and species. Nuclear weapons themselves don't even cause destruction unless they are empowered by a human anyways so I believe this statement has a lot of credibility. However, i disagree with the end of the statement where it says de-evolution is real. I feel that people everyday are discovering new things and science is advancing by the second, thus people are becoming more and more knowledgeable; quite the opposite of the beliefs of Gerald Casale. Yes, technology is providing us with the luxuries of less manual labor but that doesn't mean we are becoming less intelligent or regressing as a culture or species.
Emily Pool
ReplyDeleteDe-Evolution is a poorly keyed term. We are not in any way regressing, but rather progressing without foresight. The growth of mans knowledge and ability to-do is expanding faster with evolving technologies. In the excitement and growth of the human race we forget to look at our decisions and their impacts to the rest of the world. This selfishness and greed can be poorly reflected as short comings, something our critical society may consider an indication of de-evolution.
When positive changes occur without a trail of experimental destruction behind it and harmless results in its future, is that what we are to consider evolution? If that is the case then Casale's statement is correct, we have been in de-evolution since we began evolving. This is hardly the case because evolution is change and we are changing everyday.