Posterous/Twitter/Facebook readers:
This is an email I posted to the Spiriata mailing list. Spiriata is a new society effort that I am working on in Seattle (and, to have an important online element as well.) For more on that, send me an email, or leave a comment at the end of this post.
The basic telling of this email is a Teilhardian big picture understanding of our universe, from the Big Bang to the present.
Summary, since this is long:
Missing from this picture is any detail on pre-human, human history. You won't see nomadic tribes, farming lands, Egyptian civilization, social unfolding. Nor will you see anything about the development of religion, government, social orders. Nor will you see much of anything looking like theology or new age sensitivities.
Rather, this is a much broader look, on the order of natural history (the Big Bang, formation of galaxies,) the evolution of life, and the emergence of thought, ideals, and dreams. "The human being as universal substance and the body (or brain) of the human being as a new kind of molecule of matter."
Then it looks into the future, and asks, "What kinds of things do we envision in the future?"
There is a brief apology for (apology, in the sense of: "defence of") reductionism.
Brief History & Dream of the Present
HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE
Scientists have discovered that
the material universe is
13.7 billion years old. Many theorists theorize that
there was a history before this, (that our universe was
just a small "bubble" that inflated, from within a larger
structure that we don't understand,) some speculate that
the universe extends infinitely, and so on. There are
theories that we are in one universe amongst many, and
there are theories that the material universe is a dream
or a simulation. All of these are fair and meet
scientific understanding.
Space inflated rapidly. There was NOT an explosion --
"Big Bang" is a misnomer -- there was no "starting
location" for the universe that every thing went out from.
Rather, there was a sudden inflation of space. (
For all we
know, space extended infinitely in all directions, filled
with dense energy, at the very beginning.) After the great
breathing in of space, matter began forming, and it shaped
into galaxies.
Our star, the sun, is a daughter star -- there was a
mother star before it. This mother star exploaded,
forming heavier elements, and the sun we know today formed
from new condensation. Our solar system formed the same
way as well.
The Earth is four and a half billion years old. There was
a long period before what we recognize as life evolved. I
do not know the details of our evolution yet, but I do
recall that mammals formed as an off-shoot from the
reptiles.
GEOSPHERE
For all of this time, the development of the universe's
structure followed natural law. If you wanted to
understand what was happening, you would study nuclear
physics, and chemistry. "Evolution" wouldn't get you very
far.
BIOSPHERE
With the formation of life, nuclear physics ceases to be
interesting. Chemistry, biology, ecology, evolution
(internal and external to the organism) becomes the
domains of study. The matter is comig to life! Things
get interesting, and beautiful. It now makes sense to
speak of organisms, rather than stars, rocks, and gaseous
masses.
This is a much more complex and lively development in
universe, and it is qualitatively different than the
universe earlier.
UNIVERSE AS A SUBSTANCE
A note on the word "universe" -- we usually refer to the
universe as a place, or a space -- we see pictures of
space, and we go, "That's the universe."
But this perspective neglects the universe as Time. For
example, the universe has past and history, and it also
has a present moment. (One of the great unanswered
questions of physics is: "Why is it right now, rather than
any other moment in time?") To privilege space (an
arbitrary decision) is to focus on size -- and we are
small; If we privilege time, though, the focus is then on
development and the future -- and the place of life is
advanced, and profound.
Still another way to understand "universe" is as clay, or
substance. When one holds a piece of clay, it is
perfectly legitimate to call the piece of clay "clay,"
rather than a piece of clay. You could take a still
smaller piece of clay, and continue to maintain, "this is
clay." That is, clay is self-similar, and it does not
matter how large or how small a piece (or lump) of clay
is, you can always say, "this is clay." It is because
clay is of the same composition throughout, in quality.
We can similarly argue that because the universe follows
the same laws throughout, that everything is universe.
Not that everything is _in_ the universe ("universe" as a
space, "universe" as a place,) but that everything _is_
universe. This is a perfectly legitimate understanding of
the universe, and reveals much that other perspectives
conceal. It is important, though, to detach from the
perspective that "the universe is space," because you
occlude a lot when you do so -- vision of the future, and
vision of the self.
We are, ourselves, after all, universe. If you want to
know what it is like to be universe, you don't have to
look very far. We are fundamentally participants in the
universe. Our ultimate nature cannot be far from
"universe." This is not to suggest that the individual is
God; But rather, to say, "Whatever 'The Real' is, surely we
are participants within it." We are Real, and peers with
the Real.
Returning to history --
NOOSPHERE
Evolution led to encephalization -- the development of
nervous systems, and the concentration of nervous systems
into brains. Not abstract brains, but brains connected
with the body and the ecology and each other. At first,
brains developed because they promoted the survival of the
organism and the kinship, -- but with the human being, the
mind fell in love, and developed for the sake of the mind
itself, -- and for the spirit that began taking clearer
form within it.
When I say "spirit" here, I am not referring to something
the existence of which could be debated or not -- rather,
I am talking about that which hears and which is and which
understands music -- that which represents the highest
hopes and aspirations and wisdoms of humankind. I am not
(here) even necessarily referring to consciousness.
Rather, I am referring to a heart and to a divinity and to
a motion that connects many worlds, including worlds of
matter.
This third development -- after Geosphere (the
crystallization of matter,) and Biosphere (the evolution of
life,) is different than classical evolution,) because it
is based in thought -- "the good, the true, and the
beautiful" being a common gross description of how it
orients itself -- and knows free choice, willing, desire,
dreams, love, intuition, independence and difference, and
other spiritual forces as a development path.
ON REDUCTIONISM
This is not to say that these things (the actors in the
soul's life -- things like free choice, willing, desire,
dreams, love, intuition, and so on) -- don't reduce to
ecologies, that these things don't reduce to nuclear
physics, microphysics -- I believe that they do. But
studying the human soul in terms of nuclear physics
doesn't reveal anything, and more than studying the
ecology in terms of nuclear physics doesn't reveal
anything.
Furthermore, it works the other way around: Nothing cannot
appear new in the higher orders, that wasn't already
present in the lower orders. If we found a fully formed
oak tree, but never found any acorns, we should be rather
surprised..! But when we find the acorn, we know that an
oak tree is going to arise.
Similarly, the human being, the human soul, all the
ecologies of the Earth, and so on, are present within the
miniature space that the nuclear physicist studies.
(This ties in with what I was saying about -- "In order
to properly understand the Universe, you have to see it
not just as space, as a place -- but also as time." If
you didn't understand that idea when I said it then,
please revisit it with this understanding of acorns and
oak trees and the development of the structure of the
universe -- it may click this time.)
It is not so much to reduce the human soul to nuclear
physics, but as to elevate nuclear physics to the human
being; The tie that binds the two is **time.**
We absolutely positively must understand that the universe
is not only alive, but that it is Life. That the desires,
dreams, and hopes of humankind, are not just the desires,
dreams, and hopes of humankind, but further: That they are
the desires, dreams, and hopes of Universe. If we forget
this, then we forget who and what we are, and we cast
ourself apart from nature, from the ecology of right
meaning, from fact, from ideals, and have no meaningful
ground for any of our actions: Our lives are rooted in
the Real, or they are not rooted at all. (*)
(*) I can tell when I am giving insufficient
explanation, and am just speaking from profoundly felt
conviction. This is one such instance here. However, I
invite not skepticism here (though skepticism is fair,)
but rather, exploration and deeper inquiry. It is
valuable to ask, "Just why is this understanding
important? What is the architecture of the argument
here? What are the alternative perspectives, and where
do they shed light, and where do they occlude?" That
is, this is an invitation to deeper inquiry, wherever
the results may land us. I am thoroughly confident that
they will land us in fascinating and wonderful waters,
though. As a prophet, I see the next development in the
human adventure in the direction of these questions.
PARTICIPATION What this means is that we are participants in the
evolution of the universe.
The future of the human being is NOT merely the extension
of breeders into space, like a gas filling a volume. The
future of the human being is NOT to be found in the study
of evolution-like animal market behaviors. These are
useful things to understand and think about -- of course
-- we do not cease to be rock and animal when we begin to
think.
But the locus of spirit progressively begins to shape and
interact with the realms that came before it. At first,
it is very weak, but with the passage of time, it exerts
itself more and more, and for its own stakes and
advantage: Intelligence, the "power arm" of the spirit,
seeks to develop greater capacities of intelligence, and
comes to realize that the only thing it can realistically
develop for is for the sake of spirits it perceives moving
it.
It is as if our minds are simultaneously like computers
and like satellite dishes. We make minute, hair-thin
adjustments to the orientation of the satellite dishes, so
that we can identify pure signal for the direction of the
computers. This is "the development of subtle
sensitivities." We are assemblages of matter and energy
that listen for the resonant frequency of a golden thread,
the heart of all life and imaginations.
If we want to understand the future, the objects of study
are things like: the human spirit; the dreams within the
human heart.
We become something like poets and theologians, tracing
fresh paths through the heart, in service of the spirit,
God, and all imagined virtues that seek out the Human
Being.
============================================================
This concludes the essay;
I have just a couple things to add, though, for the list.
First is, I always see critical failings whenever I've
written something. I don't know how to paint the picture
I see inside myself. The criticisms require answer from
myself. But I want to state what they are, so that the
direction of motion can be understood.
Second is the criticism itself:
This essay reflects NONE of the fantastic imagination and
dynamism that I foresee.
The scientific description of the universe at the
beginning of the essay is dry. It's some of the most
boring text you could read -- it is like a description of
the motion of rocks. (Which, basically, is what it IS,
but, ...) You could read it in just about any flat text
file on science's understanding of history. How boring is
that?
The solution to the boring description of the cosmic
genesis is to just draw it. Words are really the wrong
medium for it -- really, you just want a giant mural that
makes it all clear. This would be a GREAT Spiriata
project. The murals name would be "The Visible Genesis."
(Because: There may well be a Genesis before this one,
and a Genesis before that one -- we do not know how far.
This is just the Genesis that is available to us today.)
The second problem is that I speculate that we have an
imaginal genesis, and that is not reflected above. My
inquiry into the nature of the spirit, the character of
the soul, reveals that imagination is a grossly
underrepresented, misunderstood element. It may be
crucial to understand our mythic formations as well. We
are, after all, imaginary beings, imaginary
personalities. Imagination is substance in the mind, and
to neglect that in our stories (in the name of not
confusing people) may well be sin against the heart.
Our cosmic origins are not merely material. Atoms whisper
with imagination. Ideas come from somewhere, after all.
Researching how to do this responsibly and unambiguously
is important, but it must be done: We must seek out the
Imagi-Real, and reflect it in our origin stories --
otherwise, we paint ourselves as the image of rocks, --
and we are not the image of rocks.
These are my two criticisms of my essay, and so as the New
Society we dream of makes itself, we need to reshape the
clay of the story to match the signal our satellite souls
detect.
Lion Kimbro
See Also: