Part 9: Naturalism, Eden, And The Fall
The Eden story teaches us the importance of the sacred whole
Read also earlier posts »Intro: About Naturalism »Part 1: A New Faith, Born Of Lockdown »Part 2: The Need For Naturalism »Part 3: The Equivalence Of God And Nature »Part 4: The Special Role Of Science In Naturalism »Part 5: Right And Wrong Technology »Part 6: Smartphones And Covid Vaccines »Part 7: Irredeemable Tech »Part 8: Naturalism And The Tower Of Babel
In Part 8, I gave a Naturalist interpretation to the Tower of Babel story. Naturalism enables us to see that this story is not necessarily a warning. It is also a description of a “natural punishment” that occurs when humans attempt to be become equal to nature in the material world.
There are other traditional stories that also lend credence to the wrongness of human technological over-reach.
Even the story of Eden and the Fall of Man in the book of Genesis has hints at the same. The one taboo in Eden is for Adam and Eve not to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, which grows at the center of Eden. God doesn’t say not to touch the fruit, but only forbids the eating of it.
In a Naturalist interpretation, the Eden story is rich in meaning. Think of a fruit as something that can either be (1) simply observed, touched, and studied, or else (2) used, by being eaten. This is parallel to the difference between science and technology. Science is the observation and study of nature, whereas technology involves the use or employment of products. Adam and Eve were tending Eden, and God gave them the use of the fruit of all the other trees, except for this one. This implies that the use of most things is good and natural, but there are some things that are off-limits for humans, things that they should appreciate and observe but not use. Some things are just sacred.
Eve first eats the fruit partly because of the promise of the serpent that she will have Godlike knowledge if she does. This desire to be Godlike is repeated later in the Tower of Babel story, with similar disastrous results.
Immediately after Eve and Adam eat the fruit, the first Biblical mention of technology appears: sewing, specifically to make clothes out of fig leaves. It is the first mention of humans creatively manipulating their environment, and it happens as a direct result of eating the fruit. Eating the fruit brought lots of misery on Adam and Eve, but it also opened their eyes in many ways.
In Naturalism, we can see this story not just in its classical interpretation as a warning against disobeying God. We can also see it as simply a description of what happens when people use what they shouldn’t use for the tempting goal of being equal with nature. In Naturalism, this human desire for material over-reach could be viewed as inevitable. Humans will naturally tend to reach too far, and nature will eventually restore balance. The balance is something very simple: a balance between the unsacred and the sacred, between the things that can be used and the things that properly should not be used, but appreciated and protected instead. By over-reaching, humans can gain knowledge, but also suffer painful consequences when nature corrects.
One interesting part of the Eden story is that God never prohibited Adam and Eve from touching or observing the fruit. Eve seems to be trying to fool the serpent--or fool herself--when she tells the serpent that she isn’t allowed to touch the fruit. On the other hand, Eve is the first to ingest the fruit, on egoistic impulse. Why did she give in to such impulse? I find meaning in this part of the story by comparing it to the modern pursuit of genetic science versus genetic engineering. Think of the fruit as a whole organism, worthy of scientific study. Think of the bitten, eaten fruit as an altered organism intended for technological exploitation. Scientists could choose to study how DNA works only in the context of the wholeness of organisms. However, most genetic scientists have instead chosen to manipulate the DNA, intruding into the wholeness of the organism and altering it. In fact they are no longer scientists when they do this. They are biotech engineers. They skip the pursuit of science and instead act on the egoistic impulse of short-term industry profits, parallel to Eve’s own motives. They meddle with the sacred instead of simply studying it. The Eden story suggests that nature will issue us a punishment if we do this. It took God a while to punish Adam and Eve in Genesis. How long will it take nature in the modern world?
The Tower of Babel story and the Garden of Eden story are similar in that they both warn of the consequences of seeking to be Godlike. The stories both warn that it is not our proper place to assume that we are equals with God-as-nature. We are simply not qualified. On the other hand, these two stories are different in the scale that they are concerned with. The Babel story concerns the large scale, and indicates that we should not seek a status—including a technological status—that exceeds our level of wisdom. The Eden story concerns the small scale, and indicates that humans—in any of their pursuits—should not overlook or ignore sacred wholeness, even when it appears in small form.
In the next part, I’ll explore other traditional and classic stories that deal with technological over-reach,