How does Teilhard see the process of compression as enabling human evolution?

This Week

Last week we saw how Teilhard recognizes an ‘interrelation ’ thread in the ‘compression’ of the human species which underlies the action of his ‘convergent spiral’ as it spills over into human evolution.

This week we will apply his ‘lens of evolution’ to take a closer look at how it plays out in the ‘compression’ phase of human history.

   Compression, Evolution, and The Human Person

There’s much to be concerned about in the compression phase of our evolution on this planet.  The anxiety which seems so prevalent in our society today is surely not misplaced as we cautiously tread upon the bridge to the future while we are building it. Teilhard acknowledges the anxiety that arises as we move from expansion to compression:

“Surely the basic cause of our distress must be sought precisely in the change of curve which is suddenly obliging us to move from a universe in which … divergence… still seemed the most important feature, into another type of universe which .. is rapidly folding-in upon itself.”

At the same time, Teilhard asserts, if we know how to see it, the very compression that causes such concern can be seen as an agency necessary to our continued evolution.

Teilhard can make this seeming counterintuitive assertion based on his six observations of the ‘noosphere’, the layer of human influence on our planet:

1. We are the latest products of evolution, and certainly subject to the same rise of complexity seen by our precedents.  Therefore, we can expect to see in ourselves the continuation of the energy of evolution that we saw at work in the previous products.  Put simply: the agency of evolution as increased ‘complexification’ will continue to find ways to assert itself in us as it had in our evolutionary precedents.
2. Just as the ‘laws’ that worked so well for these precedents in each of their evolutionary stages were not replaced, but expanded in each new stage, this trend can be expected to continue in the ‘human stage’.
3. Therefore, the inevitable compression in the human stage must contain some means of moving us forward. ‘New laws’ must be discovered.  As Teilhard puts it, humanity is

“…vitally forced to find continually new ways of arranging its elements in the way that is most economical of energy and space.”

4. Thus the ‘outer push’ of compression must somehow be accompanied by an ‘inner pull’ which occurs if the human elements are to find new ways to connect which expand their ‘personness’ and become more of what they are capable of becoming. This transition from an external force which pushes us ever closer, to an internal force which pulls us together by freeing us from our limited possession of ourselves, allows compression to effect complexification. In this way Teilhard understands love as the latest manifestation of the basic force of evolution:  the only energy capable of not only uniting us by what is most unique in us but in doing so increasing our uniqueness.
5. Human ‘invention’ is a manifestation of ‘finding new laws’ (# 3 above). John McHale, in his book, The Future of the Future, echoes Teilhard when he notes

“At this point, then, where man’s affairs reach the scale of potential disruption of the global ecosystem, he invents precisely those conceptual and physical technologies that may enable him to deal with the magnitude of a complex planetary society.”

6. Teilhard does not underestimate the risk, stressing the importance of choice, which requires the existence of faith:

“At this decisive moment when, for the first time, man… is becoming scientifically aware of the general pattern of his future on earth, what he needs before anything else, perhaps, is to be quite certain, on cogent experimental grounds, that the sort of temporo-spatial dome into which his destiny is leading is not a blind alley where the earth’s life flow will shatter and stifle itself.”

Teilhard sees the need for “cogent experimental grounds” for us to have faith in the evolutionary process in which we are enmeshed.  The problem of course is that neither traditional science nor religion have thus far developed a clear picture of how evolution proceeds through the human, much less the ‘cogent experimental grounds’ which would articulate it.  In many cases, both often question the concept that it may do so at all.

It’s been some eighty years since Teilhard made his case for optimism about the evolutionary future of the human species.  Since then, human society has become ever more proficient at gathering data; we are drowning in it today.  With all the facts at our hand, is it possible to find some ‘cogent experimental grounds’ in this data to meet the need that Teilhard identifies?

The Next Post

This week we turned from using Teilhard’s ‘lens of evolution’ from seeing ourselves as moving from expansion to compression to a more detailed look at how he sees this transition manifesting itself in the ‘noosphere’, the layer of human-induced changes to our world.  We noted his identification of both the risks that are present in this transition, as well as the need for faith in the fourteen billion year rising tide of evolution that will usher in a new phase in which compression brings complexity in the form of ‘personization’.  We noted that with all the data generated in today’s ‘dataorcacy’, is it possible to see examples of such a counterintuitive process occurring?   Next week we will begin to overview how examples of such ‘personization’ can be seen in today’s events.

   How does Teilhard’s ‘lens’ help us to see the benefits hidden in human compression?

This Week

Last week we saw how human history presents the development of the human species as an ever-increasing compression as we fill up the globe, but how the application of Teilhard’s ‘lens’ helps to uncover its potential benefits..

This week we will use his ‘lens’ to recognize the continued rise of evolution’s fourteen billion march toward ‘fuller being’

A Second Look at Compression

As mentioned last week, the idea of ‘compression’ continues to have negative overtones today.  In the past few hundred years, humanity has experienced many examples of ‘compression’ which degrade human life.  In 1800, Thomas Malthus, citing such examples, predicted that future population increases would doom humans to extinction in a very short time.  Mao Zedong demonstrated that the deliberate political compression of society would lead to the deaths of millions.
Teilhard takes a different view of ‘compression’.

“…the more mankind is compressed upon itself by the effect of growth, the more, if it is to find room for itself, is it vitally forced to find continually new ways of arranging its elements in the way that is most economical of energy and space.”

   From his viewpoint, the external forces of ‘compression’ must be countered by ‘inner’ tactics of ‘interrelation’ if human evolution is to continue.

“…what appeared at first no more than a mechanical tension and a quasi-geometrical re-arrangement imposed on the human mass ..” must “.. now take the form of a rise in interiority and liberty within a whole made up of reflective particles that are now more harmoniously interrelated.”

   The obvious question to one caught up in the compression of society is, how can our ‘rise in interiority and liberty’ take place in a ‘whole made up of reflective particles’?  Further, how can these reflective particles (human persons) become more ‘harmoniously interrelated’?

Part of Teilhard’s answer falls into his identification of a positive aspect of societal compression.  He relates ‘compression’ to human evolution when he states that compression

“…simultaneously and inevitably increases each human element’s radius of action and power in penetration in relation to all the others; and in proportion as it does so, it has as its direct effect a super-compression itself of the noosphere.  This super-compression, in turn, automatically produces a super-organization, and that again a super-‘consciousisation’: that in turn is followed by super-super-compression and so the process continues.”

   This assertion is quite a mouthful, but points back to his ‘convergent spiral’ and four levels of human evolution.  The phenomenon of ‘compression’ is very real and can be seen daily in the plethora of news which engulfs us.  He suggests, however, that the compression itself, since it pushes us closer together, unleashes a new phenomenon, that of ‘super-consciousisation’.  Effectively, by coming closer together, our individual ‘radius of action’ is extended, and those more economical ‘arrangements of elements’ can spread more quickly and efficiently.  While beneficial to the ‘monad’ and ‘dyad’ levels of human evolution, it is of immense value to the ‘psychism’ and ‘noosphere’ levels.

This reflects Richard Dawkins grasp of the advancement of human evolution by the spread of ‘memes’ (units of insight) through the ‘vehicle’ of human culture.  The tighter the fabric of human society is woven, the greater the opportunity for transmission of those insights which will most benefit it.

Once again, this reflects Teilhard’s ‘convergent spiral” and shows the recursive influence of each of his four levels.

At the ‘monad’ level, the individual person becomes ‘fuller’ by assimilation of the cultural values available in the noosphere.

At the ‘dyad’ level, his insights, and hence his maturity, are enhanced by the close relationship afforded by love.

At the ‘psychism’ level, this fullness is increased by the extension of this dyadic energy to a wider group.

At the level of the ‘noosphere’, the collective insights from the individual’s enrichment from the noosphere, through enhancements afforded by his relationships, are refined and added to the noosphere.

Thus, the ‘super-compression’ speeds up and intensifies this recurring activity, leading not only to its ‘convergence’ but to an ever increasing enrichment of not only the individual, but the pairs, the groups and ultimately to the noosphere.

One of Teilhard’s familiar insights can be seen anew in this ontological dance.

“Fuller being from closer union and closer union from fuller being.”

To return to our fears of increased compression, this recurring action also illustrates the ‘interrelation’ phenomenon precisely required to offset the ‘compression’ and therefore insure our continued evolution.

Next Week

This week we saw examples of how Teilhard’s four levels of human evolution, from the ‘monad’ to the ‘noosphere’ serve as the ‘inner pull’ which counters the ‘external force’ of compression as universal evolution spills over into the milieu of human life.

Next week we will refocus our look at evolution through Teilhard’s ‘lens’.

How does Teilhard’s ‘lens’ help us place our evolution into a wider context?

This Week

   Over the past few weeks, we have been looking at human history through Teilhard’s ‘lens of evolution’.  This week we will look a little more closely at how the universal rise of evolution can be seen to be active in the evolution of the human person.

A Second Look At Human Evolution

Teilhard’s vision permits us to see human evolution as powered by the same energy by which the universe has increased its complexity over time.  He begins by stepping back and observing human history through his ‘lens of evolution’.

First, a simple look at the history of humans on our planet shows that a key attribute of humans has been to expand into every possible nook and cranny of the biosphere.  In Teilhard’s graphic metaphor of the development of human society, humanity starts out from the Southern pole of an imaginary sphere, and ramifies into many threads: races, tribes, and nations.  In its expansion Northward, it spreads into an ever-increasing space. Because of this it is possible for many centuries for an arm of the ramification to remain unaware of the others.

 Second, it is obvious from this simple graphic that as humans reproduce and expand, eventually the threads will reach the midpoint, the ‘equator’, of Teilhard’s imaginary sphere.  As it does the threads begin to encounter each other.  (The resonance of this imaginary sphere with our own very real planet is obvious).  When we eventually expand into space occupied by others, we cross the imaginary equator where expansion begins to give way to compression and hence from divergence to convergence.

As is obvious from history, new tactics of contact, conflict, conquest, and subjugation emerge as the stage of compression begins.  A belief persists to this day that the dire consequences of these tactics are simply an unwanted but inevitable consequence of population increase.

However, as seen in the ‘Axial Age’, (800 BC), early in this new compression stage, new paradigms of societal evolution begin to emerge.  Karen Armstrong, in her book, “The Great Transformation”, sees civilizations across the globe beginning to rethink “what it means to be human”.

The adaptation of Christianity by Constantine was an example of this shift.  While certainly less religious than political, it nonetheless reflected the same rethinking.  Constantine saw the integrative potential of Christianity as a political paradigm for ensuring the smooth assimilation of the new Northern European Celts and Franks as they were incorporated into his empire.  While not abandoning the ‘compression’ tactics of contact, conflict, conquest, and subjugation, Rome was beginning to adopt tactics which would add a social level of assimilation and accommodation to its tactics.

Third, that this new paradigm was slow to take hold is obvious, considering the ensuing two thousand or so years of human conflict, particularly in the West, frequently among those espousing the new religion.  The success of the new tactic, however, could be seen in the emergence of the new paradigm of democracy, underpinned by the belief in human equality first envisaged in the Axial Age.

In this three millennia of world history, we can see the ‘crossing of the equator’ and the gradual transition from ‘expansion’ to ‘compression’.  This transition from one to the other also maps the evolution of human relationships from ones in which the individual is reduced by the contact to one in which the individual can potentially become enriched by it.

This is truly an astounding paradigm shift, first asserted by Confucius in the Axial Age, and a tactic necessary for human survival as it compresses itself:

“Never do to others what you would not like them to do to you”

“In order to enlarge oneself, one should try to enlarge others”.

   These simple adages are not only reflected in nearly every religion, but they also offer the earliest use of self-reference as a hermeneutic for understanding the nature of human co-existence.

Teilhard recognizes that as humanity enters the compression stage, the historical relationship between conquerors and conquered, common in the early compression stage, will no longer satisfy the need to continue evolution. The paradigm of ‘enrichment of the conqueror by diminishment of the conquered’ must give way to a different paradigm if the universal rise of complexity is to continue by the enrichment of the human person so essential to the survival of the species.

An approach more in line with Confucius than with Caesar is required.  Teilhard suggests that the tactic required is one which can unite human persons in a way in which their potential is increasingly realized.

Next Week

This week we saw examples of how Teilhard’s ‘lens’ provides a wider context for seeing our own evolution on this planet.

Next week we will expand this context to better understand how the ‘complexity’ of the human person can continue to rise even as the forces of compression increase.