-1

Its mind-boggling, cortex-wobbling, craniofacial-splintering images are there to trigger awe or even a kind of ecstatic despair at the idea of a post-human future, and what it means to imagine the wreck of our current form of homo sapiens. Evolution has not finished yet, any more than it was finished 100,000 years ago. Source

I need your help with understanding the passage in bold. The first part is clear but the second one does not make much sense to me. (Evolution has not been finished and at the same time it was finished 100,000 years ago.) I would understand if there was "not" used before "finished". I probably do not understand the phrase "any more than" in that context.

Andrew
  • 88,266
  • 6
  • 98
  • 187
bart-leby
  • 8,673
  • 15
  • 64
  • 114
  • This question was answered previously: https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/5313/how-is-any-more-than-used-to-compare-two-different-situations – DoWhileNot Sep 29 '17 at 17:41

1 Answers1

1

Your paraphrase is understanding finish as transitive ("has not been finished") but here it is intransitive.

Evolution is presented as a still ongoing process. It has not yet run to completion or has not yet ended, any more than it had run to completion or had ended 100,000 years ago.

Evolution is not at an end now and it was not at an end back then.

It is no more at an end now than it was at an end then.

It is not at an end now any more than it was at an end then.

no more ... not any more

not any more {this} than {that}

TimR
  • 123,877
  • 7
  • 100
  • 202
  • Thanks. But why is "not" not used after "was" when the meaning is "Evolution is not at an end now and it was not at an end back then". – bart-leby Sep 29 '17 at 17:23
  • 1
    @bart-leby - The meaning is : "It is not at and end now any more than it was at an end then - and it was not at an end then, so it is certainly not at an end now." Think of it as being like "I am not taller than I was one year ago." – stangdon Sep 29 '17 at 17:24