Life's Solution: what happens
when we re-run the tape of life?

Simon Conway Morris

Issue 386, vol.97, Summer 2008

I would beg to differ, and in fact insist that the evidence points in precisely the opposite direction. In brief, I am persuaded that evolution is constrained to navigate across a landscape of very narrow possibilities, that the line of vitality lies between immense and uninhabitable zones that are either areas of crystalline immobility or perhaps even larger unstructured regions of chaos in a constant flux of instabilities.

So where is the evidence ? It is a phenomenon that has been viewed on a case-by-case basis rather than from a wider perspective. The phenomenon in question is known as evolutionary convergence, and simply states that near-identical functional solutions will evolve from very different starting points.

Evolution is far more constrained than is usually supposed. The evidence for both directionality, and also progress (increasingly complex systems), is based on the ubiquitous nature of convergence. What constrains evolution ? In part, it is simply the physico-chemical parameters, but when we come to the convergences in intelligence and cognitive awareness, we stray into metaphysical questions.

[Towards the end] Given that, at some level, sentience is based on sensory input, this suggests that, if convergence is central to all sensory systems, then we can predict that not only are they universal, but so is mentality itself.

This conclusion reinforces the paradox of what it is to be conscious. With such deep evolutionary roots it is easy to see why this strange property should be seen in the context of emergence. But will this do ? Amongst the most striking discoveries in convergence is not only clear evidence for the evolution of cognitive maps in unrelated animals, but in some cases very striking parallels.

So where exactly does this cognitive landscape, the underpinnings of mind, actually reside ? It is hardly surprising that the naturalistic view attempts to explain mind away as effectively a stack of illusions, local answers to local problems, with no over-arching unity. This is difficult to reconcile not only with our own sense of identity, but with our skills in creativity and rational discourse. An alternative is to remind ourselves that the only way we could attempt to begin to understand the property of mind is with our minds (and convergence gives us some confidence that the repeated arrival at the same cognitive solution underpins at least a local reality).

Let me float an alternative, which is one of the oldest ideas of all. Suppose mind precedes matter ? It certainly seems possible, and at the least is no more daft than supposing that mind emerges from matter. Suppose also that our brains are more like an antenna, tuned to – or embedded in – “mind-stuff”. From this perspective, evolution takes on an interesting possibility, although it will not be very fashionable in materialist circles. Evolution not only reveals increasing complexity and progress, but it is also a search engine, a way of contacting and then developing an association with realities that are ostensibly invisible. The theological implications of this will be obvious.

(This article, written with the assistance of Vivien Brown, is based on a talk sponsored by Studies and the Iona Institute and given in Dublin on 21^st February 2008)

 Simon Conway Morris is Professor of Evolutionary Palaeobiology at the Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge.