#18. Called By the Universe

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ARCHIVE. For a list of all my published posts:
http://www.sammackintosh.blogspot.com/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Each of us has been gathered for all time and from the four corners of space.... We have our own inner world; we are its center and we are called upon to introduce harmony into it.

The words are Teilhard's, from his Writings in Time of War, written in the trenches of France during World War One. They were formulated as scientific concepts a half-century later, thanks to Biogenetic Structuralism's perspectives combining biological evolution, neuro-physiology and cultural anthropology.

I describe them in posting #12, on the Cognitive Extension of Prehension, and #13, on the Cognized Environment. They are central ideas in the contemporary scientific understanding of personal self-awareness, but they are difficult concepts to keep in mind; we're simply not used to thinking of ourselves in terms of our brain's activities.

===

In my most recent post (#17, What Is the Universe Doing?), I offered some thoughts about how the neurological idea of cognized environment helps us to understand that we have been gathered by the cosmic process; it allows us a better understanding of the traditional religious idea of creation in an evolutionary context.

In this posting I want to share some thoughts about what it means to say that we are called to introduce harmony into our own inner world of which we are the center. The Biogenetic Structuralist concept of the cognitive extension of prehension helps us to have a deeper understanding, in an evolutionary context, of the age-old religious idea of vocation.

===

In the static worldview of religious dualism, creation is understood as something which happened a long time ago, but in the evolutionary and neurological perspective, we can see that it is a process which has been going on for billions of years.

At the first level of complexity the cosmic process produces the chemical elements and compounds of which the stars and the Earth and our bodies are made, at the second level it produces the Earth's living creatures, and at the third level it doubles back on itself allowing human consciousness to emerge.

In the static worldview, humans didn't really belong to the universe; the world was only a backdrop for our existence, and our main purpose was to escape from it. In contrast, the dynamic perspective allows us to see that we have indeed been "gathered for all time and from the four corners of space," as Teilhard says, so that the resulting "wondrous knot" is nothing less than our personal subjectivity and interiority; each of us is indeed an utterly unique-in-all-the-world expression of the universe become conscious of itself.

In the dynamic view we see that our real lives in the real world have meaning and purpose, that we are called forth by the universe to do something. We have a cosmic vocation.

I see three ideas to sort out with regard to this idea of being called by the universe. One is the fact that we are called. A second is to what we are called. And the third is how we are to go about responding to that calling. Each of these ideas provides us with a greatly enriched religious understanding of our place in the universe.

===

The fact that we have been called by the universe makes good sense in terms of the neurological concept which Biogenetic Structuralism refers to the cognitive extension of prehension.

But it's not an easy concept to keep in mind, as I said above, so you might like to look back at posting #12. The main idea is that thanks to the structural organization and functioning of the human brain, we have a degree of freedom from the instinctual responses to things in the environment which even our closest animal relatives don't have.

In blog entry #11, on the End of Dualism, I emphasized that the idea of the cognitive extension of prehension allows us to see that the human spirit is rooted in the Earth and the cosmic process, that personal awareness is not something alien to the physical universe.

In this entry I want to emphasize the other side of the concept, that human consciousness is indeed free. While we are rooted in the material world like all other creatures, we also can imagine things not present in the physical environment, we can create tools and complex technology and we can make choices.

==

It may not be obvious at first that it's our freedom to choose that indicates that we are called by the universe. But we need only think for a moment about our experience of calling in the broadest sense in everyday life to see that freedom and vocation go together.

In our daily life, we don't address non-living objects or plants and animals such as fish or frogs. We only address living things that, because they have a sufficiently complex brain and nervous system, are able to respond.

We even address very young children, once their brain and nervous system have reached a level of development which allows for a response. We also address our family pets, animals who have been in close relationships with humans for many thousands of years, but we never make phone calls even to them.

It's human freedom, thanks to the cognitive extension of prehension, that allows us to see that we are in fact addressed by the universe. We know we are called by the cosmic process because it has given us the ability to respond.

===

What we are called to is nothing less than participation in the cosmic process. Again, the neurological concept of cognitive extension of prehension lets us see that we are not alienated from the material universe but a part of it.

And, as I described in posting #17, what the universe is doing is making persons. We are called to participate in the cosmic process by contributing our own person to it. We are part of the cosmic process simply by being ourselves.

At first, it sounds almost trite to say that what the universe calls us to do is simply to be ourselves. How can we not be ourselves? And yet we know that it's no small task to be who and what we can be. It is in fact quite a tough job to be responsible for ourselves and to live up to our potential. Teilhard calls this "our work of works."

It's important to see that recognizing that we are called by the universe to take charge of ourselves is a very big step away from the dualistic mentality of former times. There, external authority told us what to do and how to do it. In the contemporary scientific perspective, we see that we are called by the universe to take responsibility for ourselves. 

It is our own inner world, our personal cognized environment, which we are called to contribute to the evolutionary process. And no one can do it for us.

===

The third idea I proposed above-- how we are to go about responding to our calling from the universe-- is difficult to talk about. We don't yet have proper words for it. But even here, significant help is available, both from contemporary science and from the inner core of traditional religion.

As I've mentioned in two previous postings-- #10, an Overview of Biogenetic Structuralism, and #14, on Person as Process-- we know that our personal consciousness is constantly being transformed via what Biogenetic Structuralism calls the Empirical Modification Cycle. By way of the structural organization and activities of the brain, we incorporate the external world, what Biogenetic Structuralism calls the operational environment, into our own inner world, the cognized environment.

The jargon is a major obstacle to easy understanding, to be sure. But once again, Teilhard is helpful. He has some good images of what it means to make ourselves by incorporating the external world into our unique personal world. TIME magazine, in an article on Teilhard which appeared when his works were first being published in English, referred to the process as "the spiritualization of the universe." It's a good name for it.

Teilhard says: "The labor of seaweed as it concentrates in its tissues the substances dispersed, in infinitesimal quantities, throughout the vast layers of the ocean; the industry of bees as they make honey from the juices scattered in so many flowers-- these are but pale images of the continuous process of elaboration which all the forces of the universe undergo in us in order to become spirit."

The TIME article dates from the early 1960s, but it's available on-line. You might like to look at it; its title is "Passionate Indifference."

===

What I find most fascinating about this evolutionary understanding of cosmic vocation is that it's the working of the universe and ourselves together that makes us who-and-what we are. It is especially satisfying to see that the mystery of our personal consciousness is brought about both by the entire cosmic process and by our personal participation in it.

When we're first born, we get lots of help from our parents and family, but at some point we have to take charge of ourselves. It's up to us. In words attributed both to Abraham Lincoln and Albert Camus, "After a certain age, each of us is responsible for the look on our face."

The main idea here is that even though our existence is given to us, it's up to us to accept it and to make something of ourselves. In answering our call from the universe, we have both to accept ourselves as we find ourselves to be and also to create ourselves as our personal contribution to the cosmic process.

===

And what an empowering vision this is! It offers a sense of meaning and purpose for our life which is simply not possible in the old static worldview.

As I said in post #15 (Pre-view and Re-view), I think that of all the various aspects and implications of the modern scientific worldview, the idea that each of us has a personal contribution to make to the world's development will be the most significant in the long run.

To know that we have something to offer the world, to know in the innermost depths of our being that we count, we matter-- that our existence isn't meaningless-- is a tremendously empowering perspective.

Within the evolutionary context of the New Cosmology, the age-old religious valuation of person is confirmed, affirmed and greatly enhanced. It's one of the clearest examples we have of the contemporary convergence of science and religion.

sam@macspeno.com

#15. Re-view and Pre-view

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ARCHIVE. For a list of all my published posts:
http://www.sammackintosh.blogspot.com/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Biogenetic Structuralism's combination of biological evolution, cultural anthropology and neurophysiology makes for a heady mix. But I find it delightful. As I've said a number of times in these blog postings, I think I was born into it.

In any case, it's definitely not trivial. Thanks to the dynamic world view of modern science, especially to the data about the workings of the brain and nervous system coming from contemporary neurology, we can see ourselves differently now from how we have seen ourselves in past centuries.

But holding together the different perspectives of evolution, anthropology and neurology isn't easy. This seems a good point in these blog entries to review what I've had to say so far and to preview what I hope to be describing in the next few postings.

===

In contrast to the old static worldview, the contemporary evolutionary perspective allows us to see that matter, life and mind are three distinct developmental stages in the cosmic process.

We can recognize that life is a more developed stage of the world than water, rocks and clouds. And we can see that mind (soul, human consciousness) is the epitome of the development of life: that humanity is the "terrestrial head," in Teilhard's words, of the entire cosmic process.

This is the context which we now have to understand ourselves. It allows for a deeper understanding both of humanity's relationship with the rest of the physical universe (the anthropos-cosmos relationship) and of humanity's relationship with the creative source behind the physical universe (the anthropos-theos relationship).

===

In recent entries, I described my understanding of several major points with regard to the relationship of humanity and the material universe.

The first, which I spelled out in postings #11 and #12, is that we simply don't need any more to hold to that separation of mind and matter which results in religious and rationalist dualism. Thanks to modern science, we now can understand that the human spirit is free not because it is alienated from, but precisely because it is rooted in, the Earth.

A second major point with regard to the relationship of humanity and the rest of the universe, described in posts #13 and #14, is that we can better understand ourselves not as an entity or substance but as a dynamic process. We can see that each person is a dynamic process precisely because each of us is the dynamic universe, internalized ("cognized").

These are major aspects of what has come to be called the New Cosmology and they have profound implications for our self-understanding.

===

One of the most fascinating findings the neurological perspectives uncover for us is that we each have our own inner world. It's something we experience all the time but rarely give any attention to. I plan to spell out some of the details of this understanding in the next blog entry and to follow it up with several postings dealing with its specific religious implications.

Two of those implications have to do with how we are related to the rest of the universe, with what I've called, above, the anthropos-cosmos relationship.

One is that each of us not only has our own inner world, we also make that inner world. We create ourselves.

The other is that, in creating ourselves, each of us is making a personal and unique contribution to the evolution of the universe.

It's my view that, of all the various aspects and implications of the modern scientific worldview, this idea-- that each of us has a personal contribution to make to the world's development-- will be the most significant in the long run. I think it will have the greatest impact on how we live our human lives in years to come because it's the opposite of meaninglessness and despair. To know that we have something to offer the world, to know in the innermost depths of our being that we count, we matter-- that our existence isn't meaningless-- is a tremendously empowering perspective.

===

Two other significant implications of the insight that we each have our own inner world have to do more explicitly with the anthropos-theos relationship: they have to do with how humanity, as part of the created universe, is related to the creative source of the universe.

Western religion begins with the idea that we exist to "know, love and serve God." Modern science helps us to better understand how we do that. In an evolutionary context, we can see that we serve the Divine Mystery precisely by contributing our personal self to the cosmic process.

It's a challenging idea, to be sure. But the second explicitly religious implication of the fact that we each have our own inner world is even more challenging. It has to do with an ancient religious doctrine-- older than Christianity and Judaism but enshrined in the earliest Christian creeds still used by countless persons and groups today-- the doctrine of "the resurrection of the body."

I'm sure even the most good-willed readers of this blog will raise their eyebrows at that last statement. All I can say is that I'll spell out my thoughts as well as I can, and you can see what you think.

I started this blog to share with interested readers my thoughts about the convergence of science and religion. It doesn't seem surprising, to me at least, that if we have a new understanding of matter and life, thanks to the modern scientific worldview, then that understanding should have some impact on age-old religious teachings as well. So why not on a teaching that declares the physical body to be of great value to the universe?

===

Besides religious ideas, the findings of modern science also offer new insights into religious practices: what nowadays is sometimes called "following a spiritual path." We can expect that the data of biological evolution, cultural anthropology and neurophysiology will also have an impact on how we are religious; that is, on how we live out our inner life as the cosmos become conscious of itself.

My discovery of the Biogenetic Structuralists' perspectives was personally so exciting precisely because these scientific researchers in the field of cultural anthropology were using insights from evolutionary biology and neurology to understand better global humanity's religious practices.

Just knowing, for example, that cultural anthropology can trace a contemporary spiritual practice back to our Paleolithic ancestors of 70,000 years ago, and that it makes sense in terms of what's going on in the brain today, can make those who were bought up in the rationalist worldview a bit less uncomfortable with the inclinations they may find in themselves to engage in religious activities.

Knowing that the religious impulse is in our genes makes it easier to move away from the rationalist prejudice that every kind of religious practice is simply superstition. Ironically, it's the prejudices of scientific rationalism which, thanks to contemporary science, can be recognized now as uninformed superstitious views.

As I said, the "combination of biological evolution, cultural anthropology and neurophysiology makes for a heady mix." What I find most delightful about it is that it brings together my life-long interests in biological evolution and religious ritual.

===

From an evolutionary perspective, we are neurologically wired by the cosmic process itself to be conscious. Biogenetic Structuralism calls this the "cognitive imperative." We seek not only to know and understand the world, but also (as they put it) "to understand understanding."

Because their basic starting point is the human sciences, specifically Cultural Anthropology, the work of Biogenetic Structuralists also is open to the fact that consciousness operates primarily by way of story, myth and symbol. Much of this is spelled out in their second book, The Spectrum of Ritual: A Biogenetic Structural Analysis, by Eugene G. D'Aquili, Charles D. Laughlin, Jr. and John MacManus (Columbia University Press, 1979).

It was references to these ideas-- which I discovered in second generation researcher Andrew Newberg's book, The Mystical Mind: Probing the Biology of Religious Experience (Fortress Press, 1999)-- that originally opened the door to, and hooked me on, Biogenetic Structuralism.

It "hooked" me for two reasons. It's clear in this context that ritual activity is a primary means by which our most intimate personal development is nurtured. But beyond that, it's also clear that because we are the universe become conscious of itself, religious ritual is the primary means by which the cosmic process itself proceeds at the human level.

My two life-long interests come together in this radical convergence of science and religion, where sacred ritual is seen to be the very means by which we enter into and are empowered by the universe to participate in the dynamic process of cosmic evolution.

===

So that's where I'm coming from in this blog adventure, and a preview of some of the thoughts I hope to be sharing in the next few postings.

Meanwhile.... The noosphere is a global reality. Thanks to the Internet, it's at our fingertips. Please don't be intimidated by the mechanics of sending suggestions, comments and questions about these blog postings. You don't need a Google account: just click on "Comments" at the bottom of this post, and when it opens click on "Other" to use your regular e-mail. Don't hesitate to share what you're thinking and feeling with other readers. Thanks!

sam@macspeno.com