Thursday, September 30, 2010

...On the Other Hand, We're Co-Evolutionaries.

I began writing this post as the one to occupy the space of my last post, but it was the last one that came out. Let's see if I can get it to come out here....

A concept as close to my heart as the concept of Co-creating, is the one of Co-Evolving.  Let me riff a bit, and see what you think.

Our Universe, as we've gotten to know it, followed an arrow of time; as it did, it also grew in complexity.  We call this Evolution.  And we've come to typically think of evolution within the framework of surviving, which is to say simply, the stuff that's here today exists because its forebears survived through yesterday. (Or yester-eon....) I think a prime example of what I'm trying to describe is the Grizzly Bear: when it comes to surviving, it's a tank. Only more elegant.

Sure- when it comes to survivability we have to give a nod to bacteria, or the mushroom, (which has the honor of being the largest organism alive on our planet). But along the arrow of time life doesn't just survive, it grows more complex. So when we link complexity with survivability, we have to obviously consider the Grizzly bear don't we?  I'ts an omnivore and is suited to live in all weather conditions; and when food might be scarce, as it often is in winter, it can hibernate.  I'm sure you might have another favorite choice for the pinnacle of survivability, but your choice would never displace the Grizzly, only stand or swim next to it.  However, you might ask, "what about human being?"

This is where I think things get even more interesting.  As life continued its march along time, In human being, life grew even more complex than the Grizzly.  

In the framework of survival, Life reaches a pinnacle in the Grizzly.  Yet Life continues further into complexity, through the evolution of human being, and seems to be accomplishing something else than what it accomplishes in Grizzly Bears- something else besides surviving:  What is this something else?

Co-Evolution!  I would offer, that the species we call Human Being, is the one species who has a real say in how it evolves.  So what can we say about all this?!

Merlin Donald, a neuroscientist who cross pollinates with archeology and anthropology, points out that the biological platform which you and I live with today--specifically our brains--has been in existence for about 180,000 years.  This means, that our evolution since then, hasn't stemmed from processes of an "at-large biology" alone, but from processes of what Dr.Peter Hubbard, another scientist, who in his case cross pollinates physics based, with social based sciences, would here call Mind. (And- collective Mind- which is what we also call culture.)

In other words, we who are human being today, didn't just evolve, we co-evolved: with Life and each other.  We are involved with the Universe in a joint project....

I'll end here for now with this.  I say in my subtitle that I'm out to create a space between Science and Religion; a space from which we can venture further into our Human experience.  What I'm getting at in this post, is that whichever side of this space you originate, we are bound together by this: In human being, life leaps from inevitability to response-ability. We are, at Heart and in Reality, Co-creators and Co-evolutionaries.


  1. "Our Universe, as we've gotten to know it, followed an arrow of time; as it did, it also grew in complexity."
    Mike, what if it were not an "arrow of time" but rather an "arrow in time"?
    Why does an electron fly around a nucleus, and not "zip" off somewhere? So called "weak atomic force".
    What if it were bound by a "time constraint" - at that time, in that space, the electron was supposed to be there.
    We invented time. I think. I can't find any empirical proof of times evolution other than the theory of the big bang. When time was supposedly "created" or "started".
    But we know that a fifty million kilometre wide black hole - the biggest in the Spiral Arm - exists at the point where we believe the Big Bang occurred.
    So what was created? Was it gravity, or time? And if you "co-create", are you evolving or creating?
    Nice to read your posts!

  2. Pete, I love your questions!

    Your juxtaposition of "weak atomic force" with "time constraint" interests me. Your sense of the "electron was supposed to be there" sounds pretty close to how I have used the word "meaning" along with information in a previous conversation.

    Your note/question about co-evolving/co-creating hits me like a chicken--egg scenario, and I'm having fun thinking about this question!

    (I'm having fun with your time questions too).