One Of Those Asides

The main focus of my random intellectual musing for the past month or two has been on this idea of an evolutionary universe and as Pere Teilhard de Chardin calls it "the phenomenon of man".

The more I think about it, the more troubled I become by this idea of evolution being structured around this idea of "survival of the fittest", that changes in species arise and are sustained solely because they are beneficial to that species continued existence. It seems science would have us believe that the material world behaves according to strict principles of economy, that is that the universe is not wasteful. Indeed that idea is rather implied in the standard, extremely mechanistic, approach to evolution. Only the most well adapted and well structured beings survive; aberrant or wasteful forms die out before they can propagate.

When you consider this within a broad context of life on earth, and especially the absurdity of humanity it begins to seem pretty implausible. I think, within most circles, it’s rather taken for granted that humanity is the pinnacle of evolution on earth, yet when you think about it, the survivability of mankind is questionable. From a purely survivalist standpoint, the pinnacle of evolution would be viruses, some strands of bacteria, or the cockroach. These forms of life, although seemingly "simple" in comparison to human beings, have immense potential to survive in numerous sorts of hazardous environments. Human beings on the other hand, are incredibly susceptible to climate extremes, are slow moving with little in the way of natural defenses, reproduce slowly with long periods of gestation which can easily render the mother practically immobile, and weighed down even further by their level of consciousness.

Consciousness itself seems counter-productive to the notion of absolute survivability. Human beings are, to my knowledge, the only species on earth that commits suicide and produces mass murders. If we step outside inter-species relations, environmental suicide through mass pollution (check the recent news on global warming's effects of the Arctic Circle, be prepared to cry) rears its head. Granted intelligence on the human scale brings with it many benefits, tool use, language, etc, but by that principle of the economy of nature it seems as though intelligence should have reached some equilibrium point where the gains should balance out against the opposed negative aspects. That point seems to be about where chimpanzees are, they use tools, rudimentary elements of communication and social organization, yet seemingly do not have the level of awareness where by they can actively choose to work against survival instincts.

So why are humans here then? Perhaps we're one of those aforementioned aberrations that will ultimately just wipe itself out. The human race, as we are now, has only existed for 50,000 years; that is the point at which our consciousness seems to have evolved to the level it is currently at. When put into perspective with the big picture, that's a miniscule amount of time. It could very well be that humanity will barely even be a blip on the cosmic timeline.

But I don't really believe that will be the case. There's quite a few reasons why that I'm still rather trying to correlate together, so you'll have to excuse any disjointedness that occurs.

Complexity Theory is something that originally arose in the field of computing; it essentially talked about the inherent difficulties (i.e. complexities) and necessary resources in the solving of any computational problem. Left solely within the realm of computer programming it bears little significance or meaning to my general topic, but some extreme visionaries have extrapolated the more radical ideas of the field into other realms of human thought.

In the cosmological sense, it gives the notion, expressed I believe most poignantly by Terence Mckenna, and before him de Chardin (who hit upon the general idea before the field of computing even existed) that the universe is a complexity conserving system. That is to say that when some new level of complexity arises it will be maintained indefinitely and furthermore each instance of new complexity will be used as a springboard into greater forms of complexity.

To give examples, the advent of multi-atom molecules after the first generation stars in our universe went supernova was a new expression of complexity, and as such that expression has continued until this point in time and will continue onwards for as long as the universe exists. Of course, individual expressions of this complexity may cease to exist or in some way change, but the phenomenon itself is now eternal. Multi-atom molecules will exist forever more. Also, from multi-atom molecules we know that further expressions of complexity have arisen, such as organic molecules. Organic molecules are now seemingly also eternal; presupposing the universe is eternal that is. This line of thinking can be applied to any cosmic evolutionary jump, from cellular life to the rise of consciousness. In fact let us consider for a moment the complexification of human awareness. In its beginning human awareness was probably limited to simple differentiation; the recognition of self and not-self. That level of complexity has been maintained, and from it humanity has leapt into greater bounds of recognition about each other, the universe, and its workings. Human understanding continues to complexify in every field. Spiritual as well as scientific thought is ever evolving towards more intricate and unified ends, a topic of later discussion.

By the thinking of complexity theory, the rise of human consciousness, of abstract thinking and active remembering; can be seen as a new leap in complexity. If humanity is truly the only intelligent life in the universe, than our continued existence is insured so long as we are the only expression of such a level of self awareness. That is rather questionable proposition of course, but I find that when considered this permutation of complexity theory seems almost self-evident. So perhaps mankind will destroy itself, but this will only occur if there are other forms of advanced self-awareness in the universe.

And there most presumably are. Rupert Sheldrake has observed that if we take the standard scientific approach to human consciousness, that it arises due to the complex electrical activity of the human brain, then it stands to reason that anything within the universe that gives off a similar amount of electrical activity should also be self aware. He then goes on to point out that the Sun exhibits a degree of electrical and chemical activity that is vastly greater than the human brain. Therefore if self awareness is simple electrical activity than the Sun, and indeed every other star in the universe, must be a being of far greater consciousness than ourselves. Following such thinking outwards, it would become evident that the universe as a whole exhibits the most such electrical activity imaginable and must be consciousness, and that all of existence seems to be nothing more than various degrees of self-awareness stacked within one great universal mind. This of course all assumes that consciousness is merely electrical activity. Several other theories abound that posit that consciousness is much more widespread than we’re used to believing. Within the last 50 or 60 years many people have come to believe that consciousness permeates reality.

Some thinkers have postulated that consciousness is a naturally emerging trait within nature. In other words, any system in which there is a complex sharing or exchange of information consciousness can and does arise. To summarize a bit more concisely, in any system whereby there is a total complexity greater than the sum of its parts, consciousness emerges, or has emerged.

Along this line of thinking we can be brought to an example which has always interested me. Snowflakes are, at first glance things of great simplicity. The water molecules which form them are simple constructs, and are mostly uniform in shape as well. Yet snowflakes form in an immensely wide variety of shapes and sizes, seemingly ignoring mechanistic conditions in the process. Take for instance a cubic foot of air somewhere up in the atmosphere. Within that space conditions will be pretty homogeneous, temperature, wind direction, wind speed, amount of free-floating water molecules, etc and yet from within that space a huge variety of snowflakes can arise. One would assume by the base precepts of science that given the same materials in the same conditions the form and size of snowflakes would be uniform, but that is not the case at all. There seems almost to be some sort of artistry those falling ice crystals, something that science as it stands now cannot account for. ( www.brunel.ac.uk/research/AI/a… for more on Daniel Hillis and non-biological consciousness)

Teilhard de Chardin made the observation that for anything to currently exist within the universe it must have had some sort of primitive precursor at the creation of the universe. It seems to be rather stating the obvious; at the beginning of the universe there were no lithium atoms for instance, but there were electrons, neutrons and protons locked within helium and hydrogen atoms. Those early helium and hydrogen atoms "evolved" through the life cycle of early stars and became more and more complex, until finally the first stable atoms of lithium appeared. When the statement is applied to consciousness however, it implies something that is heretofore unheard of in the realm of science; that some degree of self-awareness has permeated the universe since its birth and has evolved along with the chemistry and biology of the universe.

All of this leads me to wonder if evolution is not a matter of simple “surivial”, than what is the fundamental principle guiding the complexification of reality and the rise of ever greater forms of self-awareness?

Early scientists and philosophers used to use a Greek word, Telos meaning goal or end point, to talk about the purpose or goal of the universe. When theology was still wed with scientific exploration, it was generally assumed that the Telos of the universe was a complete understanding of God. In the Abrahamic tradition of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam there was a spiritual progression, evolutionary steps of revelation on the nature of God that animated human history. This is the line of prophets, from Abraham to Mohammad (and beyond), the sources of western wisdom and knowledge up until the scientific revolution which began with Descartes. Descartes is responsible for two traditions within western thought, dualism and the scientific method. This was also the birth of the concept of mechanistic reality, that the universe was a giant machine, that nothing was really alive or free and that everything occurred due to laws of cause and effect that had yet to be understood. Telos began to drop out of the general discussion at this point, and the rise of Deism (the belief of the clockmaker God who creates the machinery of the universe, winds it up, and then steps back to watch it run) further pushed the idea of the universe having purpose or meaning out of intellectual discussion.

Things are beginning to change though, as quantum mechanics tears down the machine analogy from within the orthodoxy of science and various rogue theorists attack it from without, discussion is picking up in certain circles about the idea of a guided evolution or evolution towards some end.

Brian Swimme has proposed that humanity exists to be in awe of the universe. Looking at it from a sense of ecology, different species tend to play different roles within a given environment. Swimme believes that humanity’s special adaptation which no other species can come close to replicating is the ability to appreciate beauty and be in awe of the grandeur of existence. Both traits are seemingly innate to human beings, they do not and cannot be taught, but develop or exist within us naturally. To that end humanity might have come into existence for the sole purpose of allowing the universe to express its own sense of awe and wonder at itself. This smacks of religious ideas, as one of the primary aims of every religion I can think of is to instill in its followers a continual sense of awe and wonder. Likewise, it has been often said within the sciences that the more you understand the more you appreciate the grandeur and beauty of the universe. Both fields, which have dominated human intellectual existence for the last 50,000 years, seem to coincide with Swimme’s theory.

There is a similar idea floating about now, I can’t remember at the moment who proposed it, that humanity exists so that the universe can come to better know itself. It is the same basic concept as above, with a slight change of focus. It could be thought of as humanity serving as an “organ” within the cosmic body, the organ by which the universe reflects upon itself. In both cases there is implied a great deal of inter-connectedness between humanity and the rest of existence. Such an idea has always been taken for granted within much of religion, but ignored within science.

It reminds me of that story about a man asking Mohammad why God created the world. Mohammad doesn’t know and so he turns to Gabriel. Gabriel too is not sure and so goes to consult with God. He returns to Mohammad with the answer ”I was a hidden treasure that desired to be known”

The mathematics of Chaos Theory, as expressed by Ralph Abraham, hint at this notion of Telos as well. There exists within the field the idea of “Chaotic Attractors” for systems of apparent chaos. In essence chaos in a system is drawn towards a specific chaotic attractor, a state of stability and apparent order. The idea was pioneered within the realm of subatomic particles, but can be seen to be mirrored in the world around us. An example might be when mud is stirred up from the bottom of a riverbed. As an analogy, the chaotic attractor for the loose sediment in the water would be for it to settle back upon the ground. When viewed from this standpoint, the universe as we understand it began in a state of immense chaos (the great out-rush of matter and energy) and has been congealing in some sense into a state of advanced order ever since. The universe is still being drawn toward this state of intricate order by the chaotic attractor at the end of time. This line of thinking led Terence Mckenna to claim that history is pulled forward from the future and not pushed forward from the past.

All of this has been ignored within the greater scientific community, largely due to the obsession with the idea of “objectivity”. It comes from an absurd notion that is possible for human beings to disassociate themselves from their ideas, desires, past experience, and expectations to make completely neutral observations on the nature of reality around them. The theory is that by cutting away all those subjective traits of human beings, the non-measurable unaccountable emotions and aspirations, a more clear vision of reality can be found. To that end science has shunned the phenomenon of human self-awareness, of human appreciation for beauty, and the entire religious phenomenon as being in someway un-scientific, that is untrue or illusionary. Such fields are not studied, but delegated to knee-jerk answers such as self awareness being an accidental byproduct of the brain’s electrical activity, or that the religious experience is simply some heretofore unknown brain chemistry, and that human understanding of beauty is so trivial as to not even be worth considering in a grander context.

This is baffling. Science is based entirely upon empirical evidence. Tests are done and observations are made, and yet in those areas which stretch beyond qualitative measurements human experience is bluntly ignored in favor of ad hoc explanations that seek to neutralize or negate the experience at hand.

Quantum mechanics has shown that it is impossible to make observations in nature without affecting the outcome of those observations. However, the orthodoxy of science holds fast to the pillar of “objectivity” and thus the human experience is marginalized or ignored.

I would argue that, as an integrated part of the cosmic whole, the absolute clearest view of reality human beings could hope to reach could only be found when all aspects of the human experience are considered. Thus those qualitative aspects of humanity cannot be ignored; they must in fact be embraced and worked into our scientific and philosophical examinations of reality. There are several visionaries out there now that are striving towards that end. We live in an exciting time, right on the cusp of a great fusion in the two strands of human progress. A great compromise is unfolding between science and religion, or really more like a mutual recognition of their inherent sameness. It might be a while off still, such thinking is still on the fringe after all, but the general movement is gaining momentum. We’re staring an evolutionary explosion in the face, as our perspective on the universe and our place within it turns more and more inclusive our self-awareness, the complexity of human thought, is about to make an amazing leap forward.

So never stop wondering and being amazed. I think that’s the fundamental social problem we face as a society, the loss of awe. The machine cult of scientific progress dulls us to majesty of the natural world, fills us up on empty entertainment to distract us from our problems, and teaches us our dreams and feelings are meaningless expressions of chemistry. Out of a need to feel connected and a desire for meaning people turn to radical fundamental religion in desperation. They shut themselves off from reality and live within a tiny bubble of narrow-minded intolerance actively denying the progression in human thought over the last several hundred years. As feelings of isolation and monotony grow, murder rates rise, civil society declines and people stop caring about others. Millions of us in the United States alone sit in abysmal poverty and yet most of the country contents itself with television and concerns about their own well-being.

We can’t choke off the spirituality of humanity. As our material understanding of reality evolves so too must our spiritual understanding. Let traditions guide you, but explore your own expressions of amazement and awe. Create art and music, write stories, and contribute to the beauty.

I wonder, when physicists dreamed up that law about the conservation of energy did they account for the creative energy of human beings?

It's hard to remain hopeful at times, things seem incredibly bleak at the moment in almost every realm I can think of. Capitalism chokes at the world, pollution and industralization erode the environment, apathy and isolation infects society, the poor and the sick continue to multiple and on and on. But the thing that is important to remember, I think, is that conflict and catastrophe fuel evolutionary growth. Think back to the early universe, it was the violent death of stars that allowed new elements to be born. Humanity might be the birthing pains of some new great evolutionary jump. Sure we might destroy ourselves, but we also might pull ourselves back from the edge of the abyss and rise to new heights. In some ways we could be thought of as the young child who puts his hand on the hot stove despite his parents persistant warnings that he'll burn himself. We are burning ourselves, if we can pull our hand away I doubt we'll ever do it again.

Either way I for one am extremely excited about what may come.