THE FANTASY OF A SUPERMAN

A few years ago I wrote a short story about a Genie that could bring you anything you desire simply by asking for it.

There are two points I wish to make. One is that if Superman or Jesus were alive today, they would be stoned. Neither one could be everywhere at once rescuing people.

How would they choose whom to save? Nowadays, they might even be charged with racism or xenophobia for violating some nebulous equity violation.

And wouldn't everyone else be mad if they or their loved weren't rescued?

This goes to the core of magical thinking.

Imagine you had the power to wriggle your nose like Samantha in Bewitched and your breakfast would magically appear. Why would you work? Why would you even bother thinking or learning anything?

Everyone would remain in a child-like state, meaning they could not function and would cease to exist in the real world. There would be no need for arms or legs to develop, for example.

We see that every living creature must struggle to eat and survive, which is why we cannot possibly live in a magical world where superpowers give us everything we want.

Many years ago a book title The Naked Ape theorized that modern humans adapted to their mostly hairless body and lack of natural defenses. His argument is that early humans, lacking the natural defenses of many animals, had to rely on their cognitive abilities to survive and thrive.

Schonfield's argument is built on the observation that humans are remarkably vulnerable compared to other species. Unlike animals equipped with physical defenses such as claws, teeth, or speed, early humans had to depend on their intellect to outwit predators, adapt to diverse environments, and find food. According to Schonfield, this vulnerability drove the evolution of the human brain, pushing the development of complex cognitive functions that would eventually distinguish humans from other primates.

One of the strengths of Schonfield's thesis is its innovative approach to understanding human evolution. By highlighting the lack of physical defenses as a key factor in the development of intellect, Schonfield provides a fresh perspective on why human cognitive abilities became so advanced. This argument challenges more traditional views that attribute intellectual development solely to environmental challenges or social factors.

However, Schonfield's claim is not without its criticisms. Some critics argue that the evolutionary pressures he describes are more complex than his theory suggests. While it's true that early humans faced significant survival challenges, attributing the entirety of human intellectual development to a single factor may oversimplify the myriad influences that shaped our evolution. The interplay between social structures, environmental changes, and genetic mutations likely also played critical roles in developing human cognition.

Moreover, the book has been critiqued for its speculative nature and reliance on assumptions that may not be fully supported by empirical evidence. Schonfield's conclusions, while thought-provoking, are part of a broader and still-developing discourse on human evolution. As such, his claims should be considered alongside other theories and ongoing research in the field.

In summary, The Naked Ape offers a fascinating exploration of the relationship between human vulnerability and intellectual development. Schonfield's argument that human intellect evolved as a survival mechanism in response to a lack of natural defenses is intriguing and provides valuable insight into the evolutionary process. However, readers should approach the book with an understanding of its speculative aspects and consider it as one piece of a larger puzzle in the study of human evolution.