Are you sure?
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
The Cosmic Serpent: DNA and the Origins of Knowledge
Summary
This adventure in science and imagination, which the Medical Tribune said might herald "a Copernican revolution for the life sciences," leads the listener through unexplored jungles and uncharted aspects of mind to the heart of knowledge. In a first-person narrative of scientific discovery that opens new perspectives on biology, anthropology, and the limits of rationalism, The Cosmic Serpent reveals how startlingly different the world around us appears when we open our minds to it.
Read on the Scribd mobile app
Download the free Scribd mobile app to read anytime, anywhere.
Reviews
Fascinating book that explores the possible link between shamanism and molecular biology. Do plants have souls that speak to us about how they can be used to heal us? Even if you disagree with Narby, this will provide you with a window into another world.
This is one of the most thought provoking books I have read, not so much because the arguments and theories presented are correct (they can never be scientifically proven) but because it really gave me cause for wonder and to ponder on how the mind/brain/body might function right down to the DNA level. Who is to say that the arguments the author presents are wrong? And if so, prove it!
This really doesn't belong on a science shelf. Terrible biology but cool reading on psychedelics and an interesting (and utterly failed) attempt to scientifically explore the origin of knowledge.
Well researched, excellent synthesis of the shamanic and the scientific. Frustrating that he refuses to offer his personal perspective on the books central question "What is the origin of the DNA molecule?" Although he suggests that it did not spontainiously arise as the result of natural processes on earth.
pretty awesome but underestimates the power of chance and the rate that it could happen in specific environments. Pockets of radiation where likely much more common and mutagens can force an increase of the rate of mutation that encourages the growth of new structures. Anything from a solar flare to some volcanic rupture could explain a spike in mutation rates.
This audio file is corrupt. Can another be uploaded in its place?
Great because the author takes an honest approach to enquire simple yet deep questions while shedding the all-too-frequent ego boost oriented taboos of the professional academic profession.
If I was feeling really kind and generous, I would call this book "woefully misinformed and outdated". If I was feeling cynical and insensitive I would say that it is just complete crap. I'm feeling somewhere in the middle.The irony of this book is that the first couple chapters are devoted to bemoaning the fact that no one takes anthropologists seriously. The rest of the book is devoted to making wild generalizations based on faulty, incomplete science. Essentially it goes like this: The author went to the Amazon to study Amazonian Shamans. He took the drugs that the shamans take. While he was hallucinating, he saw brightly colored snakes. He asked the other members of the tribe and they said that they saw snakes too. He read some books about drug-induced hallucinations in other indigenous tribes around the world and learned that they see snakes too. Thus, he decided that when shamans take hallucinogenic drugs, the "snakes" that they are seeing are actually DNA, and the DNA talks to them.Do you see the disconnect? Apparently it seemed much more logical to the author that all squiggles and snakes in artwork and mythology are direct communication from DNA than that squiggles and snakes are very common shapes. The author tries to debunk modern biology using the same tactics that he complained about biologists using against anthropology. He says that all biologists are cold and overly-rational and "deny themselves a sense of wonder". For example, the following paragraph: "One of the facts that troubled me most was the astronomical length of the DNA contained in a human body: 125 billion miles. There, I thought, is the Ashaninca {an Amazonian tribe with a myth about a rope that connects earth and heaven}'s sky-rope. It is inside us and is certainly long enough to connect earth and heaven. What did biologists make of this cosmic number? Most of them did not even mention it, and those who did talked of a 'useless but amusing fact.'"What more does he want from biologists? Yes, that is a very very large number. We do sometimes sit back and think about how large that number is. But what else are we supposed to do? Stop doing science immediately because omg look at how big that number is?The author apparently believes that his theories are scientifically sound, because he read some books on genetics. However, since the author did not start learning about molecular biology or biochemistry or genetics until after he had come to his conclusions, his evidence is circumstantial at best, but mostly leans toward flat-out-wrong. He believes things about DNA replication and cell structure that are not true, and confuses metaphors that are commonly used to teach genetics with actual genetics. Like most other creationism arguments (and that is what this book turns out to be), the author uses a very common set of examples that supposedly provide proof against evolution. As usual, these are all easily proven incorrect.It's a good thing that I was rather fond of anthropology before I read this book, because otherwise reading drivel like this would certainly turn me off.
Apparently countless civilizations have recognized the serpent or other double-helix like shapes as of primal importance, and consumption of hallucogenic drugs induces similar visions. Narby has taken this information and declared that humans are, and always have been, somehow aware of the DNA that underlies our existence. He also believes that DNA has intentions, can communicate with us, and it not of this world (he does not believe in natural selection, etc). As a geneticist with an interest in neurobiology and consciousness myself, I am aware that he has butchered much of the science he presents (for example, claiming that the circularity of natural selection makes it untestable). However he writes well, and I enjoyed reading about the anthropology (which appears well documented to my admittedly inexpert eye) that led him to derive this new mythology. I certainly don’t agree with his conclusions, but I appreciate his intellectual creativity and sense of discovery.