How can the energy of evolution spill over from the ‘material’ to the ‘conscious’ level?
Today’s Post
In the last two weeks, we have seen how Teilhard parses the increasing complexity of human evolution into its ‘material’ and ‘conscious’ appearances.
This week we will look into how this evolution not only occurs in the individual person itself, but is interwoven in human collective enterprises.
The Levels of Human Evolution
Teilhard’s insights into universal evolution clearly show the increase in complexity which occurs as granules of matter unite in such a way as to become increasingly capable of future unity. Seen through his ‘lens of evolution’, this phenomenon not only continues to increase in the human species but does so at a more rapid rate.
Richard Dawkins recognizes this ‘new’ (compared to biological natural selection) mode when he says
“I think that a new kind of replicator has recently emerged on this very planet. It is still in its infancy, drifting around in its primordial soup, but is already achieving evolutionary change at a rate that leaves the old gene panting far behind. The new soup is the soup of human culture” …and the new replicator “conveys the idea of a unit of cultural transmission”.
Such an increase can be seen once the new facets of the human are put into context.
Dawkins’ ‘replicator’ emerges into the milieu of reflective consciousness by way of ‘cultural transmission’ and does so by way of four distinct levels of human evolution which are identified by Teilhard.
The first level can be seen in the ‘monad’, the individual of the species that reflects the unique manifestation of the ‘person’. As Teilhard asserts, in each trip around the convergent spiral of evolution (June 2, 2022 – Mapping Teilhard’s ‘Energy of Complexity’ | Science, Religion and Reality (lloydmattlandry.com) the three key vectors of the force of evolution are active in the human person. With the two hemispheres of the unique human neocortex brain, resting on the foundation of two pre-human brains (the ‘reptilian’ at the base and the ‘limbic’ above it), the human person is endowed with a brain capacity which has been significantly increased over his predecessors.
The first of Teilhard’s ‘vectors’, ‘connectivity’ comes into play as the multiplicity of brain activities is brought into a collaborative enterprise to permit an integrated response to the stimuli of an increasingly multifaceted and complex reality. As Teilhard sees it
“the history of the living world can be summarised as the elaboration of ever more perfect eyes within a cosmos in which there is always something more to be seen”.
The second vector is that which emerges from such successful integration: the increased clarity by which this complex reality can be understood. This increased clarity can result in the evolutionary value of a more successful interaction with it.
His third vector can be seen in the increased integration and improved comprehension provided by the first two: a human ‘complexification’ step by which the first two results (unity and clarity) are further enriched.
Thus, at the ‘monad’ level of human evolution, the underlying potential for personal evolution is thus activated. Karen Armstrong sees this insight emerging in human history during the ‘Axial Age’.
“By disciplined introspection, the sages of the Axial Age were awakening to the vast reaches of selfhood that lay beneath the surface of their minds. They were becoming fully “self- conscious”.
The second level can be seen in the ‘dyad’, the case of close relationships between ‘monads’. No matter what skill we develop in understanding ourselves, further enrichment is always possible from a closer relationship with another person. Our culture abounds with lore which contrasts the danger of isolated, subjective thought with the richness that a close relationship can bring. Teilhard, succinctly describes this as
“closer union from fuller being, and fuller being from closer union”.
He goes a little further when he addresses the ‘personization’ resulting from such unions:
“True union differentiates”.
Karen Anderson when she notes this evolutive insights of Confucius
“..You needed other people to elicit your full humanity; self-cultivation was a reciprocal process.”
The third level can be seen in what Teilhard refers to as the ‘psychism’, where a group of individuals is united by a common cause, and thus has two outcomes clearly related to human evolution. The first outcome is the easiest to envision, and which can be seen in the product sought by the group endeavor, such as a design, a vaccine or the underlying meaning that lies beneath the diverse data found in a large database. For such a product to emerge, the talents of each member of such a small group are required.
These talents, applied in collaboration, results in a second outcome: each individual is enriched as the strength of the collaboration is increased. This is another example of how Teilhard’s concept of the dyadic phenomenon of ‘fuller being/closer union’ is active when raised to the level of a group.
The emergence of a new level of consciousness from ‘psychsms’ of course can be found in nearly all religious and philosophical thinking. The motto of the United States recognizes this.
“E Pluribus Unum” (From many, one)
The roots of the evolution of the human species can be seen in these three levels. The blossoming of this energy can be seen as Dawkins’ intuition of ‘cultural transmission’ is present in Teilhard’s fourth level.
Next Week
This week we saw how Teilhard, through his ‘lens of evolution’, guides us through three of the four ‘levels’ of human evolution, leading up to that seen by Richard Dawkins as the level of ‘cultural transmission’
Next week we will address the fourth of Teilhard’s level, into what he refers to as the ‘noosphere’.