WHY ARE WE HERE?

BEYOND THE BLOG
Posted by anthonynorth on January 16, 2008

We are well aware of the idea that life constantly evolves. But how far does this process of evolution go? Does it stop at life, or could it be argued that evolution is a property of the cosmos?
For instance, if the universe began from a Big Bang, and has constantly changed from this point, does this show the property of evolution? And could a similar argument be laid down for known, and constant, change upon planet Earth?

LIFE AND EARTH

The fundamental problem with the idea that planet Earth evolves concerns the place of life within the evolutionary process. Does life evolve separate to the planet, or is life - including mankind - part of the process of Earth’s evolutionary mechanism?
To accept the latter holds severe problems for science. It not only removes us from the top of the evolutionary tree, but would suggest a form of co-ordinated intelligence invested in planet Earth which is guiding us along.
There are, infact, many indicators that this is, indeed, the case. One of the absolutes of evolution is the idea that evolution only evolves what is required for survival. There is no surplus.
However, the massive explosion in the size of the human brain goes way ahead of our ability to use it. Our brain capacity is far greater than is required by this evolutionary law. Yet if seen as part of an evolving requirement of planet Earth, our brain size could fall into the evolutionary pattern.

COLLECTIVE PHILOSOPHIES

French philosopher Henri Bergson would have had no problem with this idea. He believed that nature had an urge to create - a principle he called the ‘elan vital’. Such an urge would be above an individual species, placing all of nature within an evolutionary concept which could easily be seen as part of the evolution of planet Earth.
British physicist Peter Russell could have placed our big brain within this format. He theorised upon a growing planetary level of consciousness called the ‘Gaiafield’ - a self-reflective consciousness of all minds, forming a social superorganism.
In a way this is similar to psychoanalyst Carl Jung’s idea of a collective unconscious lying under the personal mind. But instead of being a species supermind, Russell would invest the property on a planetary level.

THE QUANTUM EFFECT

A big stumbling block to such ideas concerns the extent to which consciousness exists in nature. The suggestion is made that consciousness is a fundamental property of, not only nature, but the universe at large - in effect, a higher intelligence exists.
Yet quantum theory seems to be hinting that such a consciousness may well be out there. For instance, quantum reality is probabilistic. In its natural state, a particle can be said to be in any position possible.
An exact reality is only known through observation by an intelligence capable of understanding it. Hence, for a reality to exist, it must be created through observation. Hence, a form of consciousness must exist for reality to come into existence.
And seeing the reality of a physical universe existed before life entered the cosmos, consciousness must be a property of that cosmos.

UNIVERSAL MIND

If such an evolving universal intelligence does exist, then it is fair to say that the investing of consciousness in life is a recent development of consciousness. As such, human consciousness can be seen to be towards the lower level of consciousness.
But placed in terms of an evolving cosmos, it can equally be argued that it is our place to evolve into a more universal mind.
Such an idea was proposed by Catholic mystic, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. To him, life evolved towards an Omega Point, or completion. When life had evolved to this point, the Omega Point would move forwards.
Hence, we constantly evolve in stages. The Omega Point presently lies at the creation of the ‘noosphere’, which can be described as a planetisation of the mind. This would cause ‘noogenesis’, and the creation of a planetary consciousness.

Read more...