“There are various meanings of the word evolution. As a theory of speciation, genetic inheritance and mutative development, it is largely factual. This does not mean it is anything like complete. Or that it frames its subjects, contexts, and elements appropriately. I suspect that the metaphors we use to understand these processes are badly malformed in the image of our own preferences, biases, expectations and inventions.

That said, it is not clear that the only possible route to Homo Sapiens is the route suggested by evolution. Personally, although I realize it’s the only theory with much evidence, and I thus value it accordingly, I do not consider it conclusive. Not by a long shot. I do not speculate on precisely what forces may have been or remain involved in our specific developmental history. I do remain curious and observant. I want to understand this better than other humans do.

There is something peculiar about establishing a species capable of actually inventing a new domain of being which is abstract, by a variety of feedback like processes, and then having the results of beings who exist in these invisible inner structural reference universes interacting with living beings, and thus inverting the loop. There is something peculiar about a world driven by biorelational evolution suddenly and shockingly coming under the sway of representational and technological evolution.

A lot more is happening here than our common perspectives convey to our imagination, and in order to understand it, we must be willing to step beyond our habitual explanations and preferences and ask questions whose nature and form have never before been attempted. Indeed, if there is a mandate for our species, this is amongst the most crucial of its underpinnings.”

— an anonymous informant