The issue of teleology is orphaned from science but its place in world history is fundamental, yet elusive. Marxists reject teleology and yet Marx’s theories adopt it in disguise, while religionists take a biblical view of it which distorts their thinking.
The eonic effect shows the way it emerges in world history in a complicated and tricky way: the real thing, so to speak, is at first confusing because it is not quite what we expect…
The issue of teleology is confounding to darwinists, but it is likely to prove confounding to its own proponents, for example, the ID group and the Discovery Institute.
Diamond is a highly successful pseudo-historian whose geographical emphasis, e.g. in Guns, Germs, and Steel (the only book I have read of his, I will try to read/review the later books), is completely inadequate to the analysis of world history. It is almost incredible that this passes even as an attempt for ‘scientific history’. Some of the geographical reductionism is downright crackpot if not simply stupid, yet given an immense amount of publicity. Anyone trying to do serious work has to look askance at this pop history junk. And his best seller popularity further complicates the evaluation of what is in the end a very superficial kind of analysis. It is almost incredible that such thin soup can be so popular while far more cogent forms of analysis never reach public awareness.
One might note the way that an analysis such as the eonic model ends up being ostracized. Diamond is a strict darwinist and that gives him a public where the reality of evolution is totally botched by almost all historians, while critics of the ism are almost totally blackballed…
Even a cursory look at the eonic effect shows how much the powers that be are going to suppress and how in the end the social politics of history is almost complete garbage history.
The eonic effect needs a college course… June 19th, 2018 •
Source: The eonic effect – Darwiniana