Part 8:6 Summary of the history of efforts to seek support for—and the subsequent rejections, vilification and lack of acknowledgment of—the biological explanations for the human condition, for the origins of our moral soul and conscious mind, and for the truth of the integrative meaning of existence that are contained in this book

(Note: The full presentation of this history can be found at
<www.humancondition.com/​full-history-of-rejection>.)

• In 1983 I wrote to Sir David Attenborough and Professor Stephen Jay Gould, presenting these insights, but received no real response.

• Later in 1983, when the full synthesis of explanation of the human condition—including the explanation of our moral soul and the explanation of the origin of our fully conscious mind—was completed, I travelled to England to personally submit an 8,000 word summary of this all-problems-of-the-human-race-solving breakthrough synthesis to John Maddox (1925-2009), later Sir John Maddox, who was the then editor of Nature magazine, which at the time was considered the world’s leading science journal—this submission can be read at <www.humancondition.com/nature>. I responsibly took the answers that save the world to the person in the world in charge of the search for it—but he initially refused to even see me! It was only after I wrote an offended letter of protest saying I had come ‘half way around the world to see you’ and Maddox had made me feel like ‘a piece of mud that had been scraped off on your doorstep’ that Maddox granted me an audience. However, when I began the meeting by trying to convince him of the foundation truth of Integrative Meaning, Maddox became animated in his denial of it, saying to me twice that the concept of Integrative Meaning arising from negative entropy ‘is wrong’ (from audio recording of the 15 Dec. 1983 meeting), terminating the meeting soon after. While in England I also personally submitted my synthesis to Colin Tudge, the then Features Editor of New Scientist magazine. Both Maddox and Tudge declined to publish the article.

• In 1988, 800 copies of my first book Free: The End of the Human Condition, which contains all the insights being presented in this book, were sent as part of a first-rate publicity package to every relevant scientist and journal in the world for review, including Richard Wrangham and 70 other key primatologists. Commendations were received from pre-eminent philosopher Sir Laurens van der Post, archaeologist, geologist and prehistorian Professor Henry de Lumley, conservationist Dr Ian Player and Professor John Wren-Lewis but apart from Sir Laurens’ support, which included an appeal to his publishers to publish Free, and Wren-Lewis becoming a strong supporter of the ideas and a number of excellent book reviews, there was no real response. The cover letter that accompanied their copy of Free stated: ‘I think you might find the work of special interest. The book interprets our human development in terms of what was happening to us psychologically as a species. In so doing many insights become accessible such as the prime mover in human development of “love-indoctrination” or nurturing. The concept accounts for so many aspects of our development such as our neoteny, why it was the primates that developed consciousness, why and when we learnt to walk upright and the role of matriarchy in our past. Love-indoctrination and material relating to the pygmy chimps is introduced on page 46 and in full later on page 138.’ Free explained in detail how ‘self-selection was to play a part’ (p.47) in early human development; how ‘the mind also began to support the process [of selection]. We self-selected integrative traits by seeking mates who were loving’ (p.141); ‘how important self-selection was in human development’ (p.142); and discussed the neotenisation of wild dogs into the domestic breeds we see today (on page 142)—issues highly relevant to the Social Ecological Model and Self-Domestication Hypothesis theories that claim to explain many elements of bonobo, and by inference human, behaviour.

• In 1989 Professor Wren-Lewis presented Free to 10 science journals including Nature, New Scientist and Endeavour, but for no response.

• In 1989 a booklet summarising the explanation of the human condition titled Reconciliation was circulated to 600 scientists, scientific journals (again including Richard Wrangham) and other relevant parties, for little response.

• In 1991 over 1,000 copies of my second book Beyond The Human Condition, with first-rate publicity packages, were circulated to scientists, journals, universities, relevant institutions and media. Beyond reiterated the importance of self-selection for less aggressive males, for example, ‘females were first to self-select for integrativeness by favouring integrative rather than competitive and aggressive mates’ (p.142). I also met with and received some supportive commendations from several notable scientists, including biologists Professor Charles Birch and Professor John Morton, anthropologist Professor Colin Groves, physicist Professor Paul Davies and Professor John Wren-Lewis. There was however little response from the scientific establishment.

• In 1992 I travelled to Africa to launch Beyond at the National Museum of Kenya; gave over 70 copies of Beyond to eminent scientists and influential people, with many of whom I held meetings, including Dr Meave Leakey, Dr Shirley Strum, Dr Iain Douglas-Hamilton, Dr Cynthia Moss, Dr Joyce Poole, Dr Mark Stanley-Price, Dr Ros Aveling, Prof Simiyu Wandibba, Dr Pieter Kat, Dr Kathy Alexander, Dr Kay Holekamp, Dr Susanne Abildgaard Anderson, Allan Root, Annette Lanjouw, Simon Trevor and Tom Sambrooke. Professor Phillip Tobias invited me to give a lecture at the University of the Witwatersrand, but unfortunately due to timing problems the lecture didn’t go ahead. Shirley Strum invited me to visit her group of study baboons in Northern Kenya and report back to her which I did with a written report; and I was also invited to spend time at the Jane Goodall Chimpanzee Rehabilitation Centre in Burundi which I did. Although many of these scientists were enthusiastic about these insights, no lasting support eventuated.

• I should mention that also in 1992, Professor Wren-Lewis, one of the few scientists who had been supportive of my work (he had provided this commendation for use on the back cover of Beyond: ‘At the core of Jeremy Griffith’s argument lies a brilliantly original insight into the basic nature of human conflict’, and even had become a director of the Foundation for Humanity’s Adulthood—now the WTM), published a paper in which he plagiarised it, claiming the insights were his own! Redress was achieved and Wren-Lewis ceased his involvement.

• In 1993 I again travelled to England and the USA to promote these insights and made enquiries about a possible publisher and/or distributor for Beyond in the UK and USA. In total 76 first-rate publicity packages with copies of Beyond were sent to all the leading literary agents and publishers in the world for no acceptance, with one publisher revealingly saying, ‘I find your theories fascinating, but I also find your arguments elusively receding from my mind as soon as I stop reading them. I can understand that this is totally a failing on my part’ (Marianne Velmans, Doubleday Publishing, UK). Whilst in the UK I met with Sir Laurens van der Post; and returned to Australia via the USA where I met with Professor Adrienne Zihlman and tried to meet with Professor Donna Haraway, but she was unable to at short notice, and wildlife photographer Frans Lanting, who was interstate.

• In 1995, two highly defamatory publications—an Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) television program; and a full page Sydney Morning Herald newspaper article—were made about me, my work and its supporters which resulted in a 15 year legal action that eventually exonerated us. A detailed description of the legal action and our eventual stunning victory can be read at <www.humancondition.com/persecution>.

• In 2002, my third book, A Species In Denial was completed, and in an attempt to have the book published, 70 copies of the manuscript were sent to the leading literary agents in the world, and another 70 copies to the major international publishers, but all declined to represent or publish the book. While one found it ‘far too dense and in parts incomprehensible’ (Gail Winston, Executive Editor, HarperCollins, USA, 12 Jun. 2002), and another was ‘not convinced that there is a cohesive argument there’ (Tim Whiting, Commissioning Editor, Time Warner Books, UK, 25 Jun. 2002), others found it presented ‘a formidable work synthesizing philosophical, historical, religious, scientific and cultural currents’ (Anne Jump, Andrew Wylie, UK, 26 Mar. 2002), and was ‘extraordinarily rich and well researched’ (Roland Philipps, Publishing Director, Hodder & Stoughton, UK, 1 Jun. 2002), and ‘an original and carefully conceived idea and the writing is clear and accomplished’ (Sebastian Godwin, David Godwin Associates, UK, 15 Apr. 2002). The extraordinary range of contradictory comments strongly suggests that it was not the merit of the book that was the problem but that publishers and literary agents were variously confronted by the content. The comment that the material is ‘far too dense and in parts incomprehensible’ is a classic ‘deaf effect’ response (see Part 3:13).

• In 2003, a further 800 copies of A Species In Denial, with first-rate publicity packages, were circulated to scientists, journals, universities, relevant institutions and media, once again containing explanation of the origins of human morality, for example, ‘It was through nurturing, the process of love-indoctrination and the accompanying self-selection of cooperativeness or selflessness, that humans were able to develop an instinctive orientation to behaving unconditionally selflessly and as a result become an utterly integrated cooperative, selfless, loving species’ (p.110). Despite a foreword by Professor Charles Birch, a commendation by Professor John Morton, and becoming a bestseller in Australia and New Zealand where it sold more than 10,000 copies, the scientific community all but failed to respond.

• Between 2004 and 2006, 2,500 copies of a documentary proposal on the human condition (a 76-page synopsis and DVD video presenting these ideas illustrated with chimpanzee and bonobo footage, which can be viewed at <www.humancondition.com/doco-proposal>) were sent to scientists, scientific publications and organisations, philanthropic organisations, filmmakers and eminent figures. This presentation again contained all the insights contained in this book: for example the four Parts of the documentary proposal were titled ‘God: The Question of God, Meaning and Purpose – and the Human Condition’, ‘Soul: The Question of the Existence of Moral Instincts in Humans – and the Human Condition’ (which posed—and answered—the questions, ‘How could a species selfishly driven only by the need to survive create notions of selfless morality? How does the ‘selfish gene’ theory reconcile with evidence of good in humans? How could a selfish motor create within us a sense of caring, selfless concern for others?’ (p.15)), ‘Consciousness: The Question of Consciousness, What Is It and How did it Emerge – and the Human Condition’ (which concluded, ‘In summary, the processes of nurturing love-indoctrination and the selection by females of non-aggressive, cooperative males as mates not only gave us our moral, instinctive orientation to behaving cooperatively—our soul—it also liberated consciousness in our forebears’ (p.61)), and ‘The Human Condition: The Question of How to Reconcile and Ameliorate Our Estranged, Alienated Human Condition’.

• The proposal did receive over 100 endorsements from leading scientists and thinkers, but, apart from Professor Harry Prosen, no substantial follow up interest has resulted. Relevantly, copies (and follow-up emails) were sent to all three Self-Domestication Hypothesis (SDH) authors: Brian Hare, Victoria Wobber (who was a student under Hare at the time) and Wrangham (who supervised Hare’s PhD); Animal Behaviour journal, publisher of their paper; and Scientific American and Discover magazines, both of whom ran detailed publicity stories on the SDH in 2012. Animal Behaviour Managing Editor, Dr Angela Turner, replied saying, ‘the Executive Editors and Presidents of the societies are the people you need to contact about this matter. I see from your email that you have sent this appeal to them already so I suggest you await a reply from them’, and Scientific American Editor in Chief, Dr John Rennie, replied saying ‘Thank you for your offer to contribute to Scientific American. I regret to say that the piece you propose is not suited to our somewhat limited editorial needs.’ While Discover, Wobber and Wrangham did not reply at all, Hare, and his then communication coordinator, now wife and fellow primate researcher Vanessa Woods, did respond, saying ‘Brian is interested in participating’, then subsequently Hare himself responded saying: ‘I too share your enthusiasm for sharing with others the importance of research on human evolution’, and in a further communiqué: ‘good luck with the project!’

• In addition, all the primatologists mentioned in Part 8:5G who endorse the SEM were sent a copy of the documentary proposal; David Sloan Wilson was also sent it; and every relevant scientific journal and organisation received it including International Journal of Primatology, American Journal of Primatology, Folia Primatologica, Primates, Evolution and Human Behavior, Human Nature, Science, Nature, Animal Behaviour, Scientific American, Discover Magazine, American Anthropological Association, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Max Plank Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Jane Goodall Institute, Leakey Foundation, Wenner-Grenn Foundation, Smithsonian, MacArthur Foundation, John Templeton Foundation, Carnegie Institution, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Nuffield Foundation and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

• In 2005 I submitted a proposal to present a symposium, titled ‘The Citadel Of The Darwinian Revolution—The Biology Of Our Human Condition—At Last Explained’, at the AAAS Annual Meeting titled Grand Challenges, Great Opportunities in February 2006, however the proposal was rejected by the Program Committee who stated that it was ‘Not appropriate…Needs extensive revision…Unclear how it will be integrated with other views.’

• Also in 2005 I also submitted an abstract of a paper titled ‘Nurturing as the Prime Mover in Primate Development and Human Origins’ for presentation at the International Primatological Society’s (IPS) 2006 Congress in Uganda (the submission and subsequent correspondence can be viewed at <www.humancondition.com/ips-2006-congress>), but it was rejected on the grounds that ‘Both reviewers felt this abstract presents no data nor a testable hypothesis’. This is the absurd rebuttal that was also used against Darwin’s theory of natural selection when the geologist and bishop Adam Sedgwick, amongst others, said that it was ‘based upon assumptions which can neither be proved nor disproved’ (Sedgwick in a letter to Darwin, 24 Nov. 1859). Despite pointing out that my nurturing, love-indoctrination explanation for humans’ moral instincts ‘contains a great deal of supportive evidence in the form of many summaries of data-supported studies of bonobos and other primates by leading primatologists’, and ‘is an entirely testable, validatable hypothesis, as the evidence just described about bonobos shows’, and submitting this protest to the President and 38 members of the IPS Congress Committee (who were all either Officers of the IPS (including Richard Wrangham in his capacity as President of the IPS), or Editorial Board members of the International Journal of Primatology), the rejection was upheld!

• In 2006, in a similar refusal to tolerate presentation of the nurturing explanation of both humans’ and bonobos’ moral nature, Jo Sandin was unable to include a reference to my nurturing explanation for human and bonobo moral behaviour in my 2007 book about the bonobos at the Milwaukee County Zoo, Bonobos: Encounters in Empathy. This despite the request of Professor Harry Prosen who is highly respected at the Zoo for being such an effective psychiatric consultant for all their social animals, and despite wanting to herself. My work was mentioned in the concluding chapter of Sandin’s book, but the key reference to ‘the nurturing explanation for empathy and altruism’ wasn’t included.

• In 2006 my book The Great Exodus: From the horror and darkness of the human condition was published online. Despite a publicity campaign, including personal emails to many of the scientists who had responded positively to the documentary proposal, including self-domestication hypothesis author Brian Hare, and a condensed version of the book being included as a chapter in the 2006 book Living a Life of Value by Jason Merchey (see <www.humancondition.com/​great-exodus-essay>, there was no response from the scientific community.

• By 2008 it had become apparent that presenting the biology of the human condition alone, as the documentary proposal had done, is not enough—the problem of confronting the human condition has to be addressed, as does the problem of coping with the exposure of our less-than-ideal condition that understanding of the human condition brings. To cover these additional aspects, in 2008 the WORLD TRANSFORMATION MOVEMENT began production of videos explaining the breakthrough understanding of the human condition and the TRANSFORMED life for humans that it makes possible (see <www.humancondition.com>). Despite becoming available on our website in 2009, and in the highly accessible format of video, there has been little response from the scientific establishment to these introductory videos.

• In 2009 Freedom Expanded was published online, to no real response.

• In 2011 The Book of Real Answers to Everything! was published online but has so far failed to attract significant support from the scientific community.

• In 2012 Wrangham, Hare and Wobber published their paper ‘The self-domestication hypothesis: evolution of bonobo psychology is due to selection against aggression’, making no acknowledgment or even mention of my love-indoctrination synthesis, despite, as is detailed above, each being previously informed of it (in the case of Wrangham on four separate occasions)—even appearing to subvert and misappropriate virtually all the elements of my synthesis, while leaving out anything to do with nurturing.

• In 2014, despite the explanation of the human condition that is presented in my books being the fulfilment of the core vision of Geelong Grammar School of cultivating the sensitivity needed to achieve that specific, all-important-if-there-is-to-be-a-future-for-the-human-race task, the school chose not to include an essay on my life’s work that was commissioned by its publishers for possible inclusion in its Corio anniversary book 100 Exceptional Stories which ‘celebrates the lives of 100 exceptional past students’—see <www.humancondition.com/​100-exceptional-stories>.

• From July to September in 2014 a special edition of my new book FREEDOM: The End Of The Human Condition that was orientated to scientists (it was even given its own title that focused on the very serious plight of the world: IS IT TO BE Terminal Alienation or Transformation For The Human Race?) was sent to 930 leading science organisations, scientists and science commentators in the English-speaking world, including the scientists involved with the main Brain Initiatives. But despite each copy being accompanied by a personal appeal for support for the book’s insights from Professor Harry Prosen, and undertaking two trips to the US and UK to discuss the book with interested scientists and commentators, the situation in early 2015 is that while there has been a few positive responses from individual scientists, our publishers are still waiting for appreciative responses from the scientific establishment.

(Note again that the full presentation of this history can be found at
<www.humancondition.com/​full-history-of-rejection>.)