I was particularly taken by this passage near the end: "There is something unsatisfying, almost nihilistic, about this idea. It deprives us of answers". It go

I was particularly taken by this passage near the end: "There is something unsatisfying, almost nihilistic, about this idea. It deprives us of answers". It got me thinking about the big mistake that we often make about evolution: that it has a purpose, a goal. The idea that evolution involves progress is as old as Darwin, as can be seen in the "March of Progress" illustration showing a parade with a chimpanzee, then pre-humans, then caveman hunter, then modern man. We have been reminded many times that the illustration is too suggestive, but the idea refuses to die. It's very hard to accept that evolution is full of accidents, and that as a species there is nothing remarkable or inevitable about us. Similarly, there is nothing special about many microbes that cause illness, but it's hard to accept the idea. It's surprising that streptococcus pneumoniae isn't trying to kill us at all, but merely trying to outcompete hemophilus influenzae in our noses, and sometimes the mechanism that aids its struggle ends up preventing our immune system from killing it. We walk into a fist-fight between strangers, and end up hurt ourselves. Hell, the phrase "trying to outcompete" contains teleological assumptions which the author himself can't escape from. Those dueling bacteria aren't "trying" to do anything. They accidentally mutate, and circumstances make them more or less successful at increasing their numbers relative to the other species. It's hard to avoid seeing purpose in the living world around us, even when we know it doesn't know us or care about us.