Gould and Darwin

I have definitely enjoyed reading this section of our book as well as the discussions that follow. Most of the pieces in this section incorporate two of my biggest passions in life—religion and science. I thought the most interesting essay was Stephen Jay Gould’s “Nonmoral Nature.” Gould’s essay was based off of the question (and history of the question) if God is so benevolent, why does the animal world exhibit such cruelty and pain? The main subject of examination was the ichneumon fly. This insect has a somewhat eccentric way of feeding. The mother will insert her ovipositor into a living creature so that when the larvae need to feed they are already surrounded by food. The main part of concern with this method is that the larvae will eat the creature’s nonvital organs first, leaving the heart, lungs, brain, etc for last and therefore prolonging the caterpillar’s life as long as possible. The people studying this saw it as cruel, but is it really? Do we even have a right to classify the “cruelty” of nature? There are so many of Darwin’s theories that can be incorporated into this piece. First of all, we must remember survival of the fittest. If the wasps are more equipped for survival than the caterpillar, then they will survive. At this time it appears that the wasps have the upper hand in this situation. But let’s think for a moment what the next step is. Basically, one of two things may happen next. First, the caterpillar could develop some means of protecting itself against the wasp. If this happens, then the wasp must either find some new form of food or die off. Second, if the caterpillar does not develop a way of defense, then the wasp may eat all of the caterpillars and, consequently, need to find some other form of food. If the wasp cannot find food, then its population will decrease in number. If this happens, then the caterpillar population may rise.
I think what some people do not realize is that nature is always shifting to adjust from changes. Ok, time for the off the wall analogy. I see it as trying to walk on a water bed. If you take one step, the entire surface shifts in response. Each movement is altered depending on the movement next to it. If you stop walking (no changes are made) the bed will calm down (not as drastic of changes), but it isn’t really ever perfectly still (stable). Everything in nature is cause and effect. This species of wasp has survived because of its superior method of protecting its young.
Gould also brings up a good point when he turns the table and presents and argument that focuses on the good aspects of the wasp (efficiency, protecting and providing for young) rather than on the suffering of the caterpillar. This just goes to show you that determining what is good or bad, fair or unfair, often depends on which angle you are looking from.

Here you can get a close up of what the ichneumon fly looks like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCLYCpSo6sI
Here you can see one drilling:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA25evZKBLk