When scientific concepts become metaphors, nuances of meaning often get lost. Some such errors are benign. In the vernacular, “quantum leap” has come to mean tremendous change. This misrepresents the physics but usually without serious implications.
Yet errors in translation are not always neutral. As a popular metaphor, the phrase “to evolve” gets conflated with progress. “Evolved” means “better,” as if natural law normally dictated constant improvement over time. In this interpretation, the significance of a species’ dynamic relationship to a specific environment gets lost. Through natural selection, species become more equipped to survive in their particular environment. In a different environment, they may find themselves vulnerable. The popular metaphor of “evolve” misses this crucial point, often connoting progress without reference to context. People playfully tease that one or another friend needs to evolve. Businesses boast that they’ve evolved. In such usage, “evolved” means essentially better, more sophisticated, more developed. Since evolving occurs over time, the past is by definition inferior, a lower rung on the linear ladder to the future. Rapid changes in technology magnify the disconnect between present and past. Even the recent past may appear primitive, bearing little relevance to contemporary life.
A keen awareness of history is vital to intelligent decision-making. Used accurately, in its scientific sense, the evolution metaphor encourages historical acumen by emphasizing the significance of specific context. “Evolve” in its common usage actually obscures the importance of context, undermining interest in connections with the past. This erasure of relationships has serious implications. Species evolve in complex, nonlinear ecosystems; this use of the metaphor extracts the measure of progress from a multifaceted historical environment, linking it instead to a simple position in linear time. Recognizing current global challenges demands a different vision, one that acknowledges history and context. Climate-change denial does not rise from a deep appreciation of complex dynamic relationships. In simplistic linear paradigms, it thrives.
The popular usage of “evolve” reflects a symptom rather than a cause. The metaphor itself did not create disinterest in specific complicated conditions; rather, a widespread preference for simplicity and essentialism over complexity and connections shaped the metaphor. Now it perpetuates that outlook, while all signs point to an urgent need for a more accurate apprehension of reality.
Today we face problems much more daunting than the distortion of scientific concepts in popular metaphors. It’s tempting to consider such misappropriations as mere annoyances. However, they reflect an issue informing many of our greater challenges: a failure to educate about how the sciences relate to the humanities, social sciences, and fine arts. Without such integrated education, scientific concepts dangerously mutate, as nonspecialists apply them outside the sciences. When these misunderstandings infiltrate popular language and thought, realistic approaches to global problem-solving suffer.