THE FUTURE OF MAN
I take as the title of my essay today the title of an excellent work of speculative philosophy and theology from the great Roman Catholic theologian Teilhard de Chardin. (Teilhard was a French Jesuit professor of paleontology, who lived from 1881-1955.) It is his magnum opus; a culmination of his life's work and philosophy. I've remarked to many colleagues of mine, on several occasions, how interesting it is to read the later works of great thinkers, as these most likely reflect what he/she has to say about reality/God/existence from a superb vantage point - that of their older years. While earlier works are always beneficial, it is really the later works that come to be the legacy of what the individual actually thought near the end of their earthly career of hard work in the field of human thought and speculation. (Think Einstein's "The World as I See It")
"The Future of Man" is actually a compilation of a series of essays delivered by Teilhard in various settings and venues (the lectures were presented mostly in Europe in the middle part of the 20th Century - the book was not published in English until 1964).
Teilhard's work and philosophy are reflective of the prevailing optimism of the time, especially in Europe, regarding the efficacy of Socialism to combine with the Christian faith to alleviate many of the world's social justice problems. In his view (and in that of many other intellectuals of the time), Socialism was the cutting edge, or culmination of centuries (millennia, actually) of human thought regarding the forward evolution of the polis. He believed in a sort of gradualism in human evolution, somewhat similar to thinkers such as Henri Bergson, Albert Einstein (see my essay below), and Asa Gray (Christian evolutionist; Harvard professor).
The prevailing view of today however (and I should offer that we have "evolved" towards it, after decades of tireless work on behalf of innumerable great thinkers both in academia and in the field) is that of "punctuated equilibrium," the idea that evolution actually has unfolded oftentimes due to massive external stimuli (think the crash of the comet/asteroid "Nemesis" into the Yucatan peninsula which set the stage for the dinosaurs' extinction in the late Triassic); the occasional mass extinctions in various geologic eras; massive global climate change, etc. Common to all these evenst is that they are reactions to exogenous events, which then set the stage, so to speak, for significant evolutionary change. The late and great Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould wrote broadly about "E.Q." in his many books (I refer you to an excellent one from his later output - "Dinosaur in a Haystack"). He was an ardent, articulate proponent of non-theistic evolution in our time.
Back to the "gradualism" theory, much work has been done in our era regarding the Omega Point Theory and the Anthropic Principle, which are intellectual and scientific bulwarks and underpinnings of modern "Intelligent Design" Theories, especially prominent among THINKING Christian intellectuals (Dr. Hugh Ross and his fine books, for one instance - cf. www.reasons.org, for starters). Physicist Frank Tipler wrote an outstanding book about ten years ago propounding the Omega Point Theory in a way that most intelligent lay readers could grasp. It is entitled "The Physics of Immortality." Read it sometime...
In this view (and Teilhard's), what we have witnessed over eons is evolving "complexity" (think homo sapiens - the "thinking" man). We are the first species on earth to actually be able to witness this, think about it, comprehend at least some of it, write about it, and use our reason to "plan" for it on this planet. (Whether we are doing this adequately is the subject of another essay!) For Teilhard then, the work is NOT finished with homo sapiens - we, and the entire creation/cosmos - are a work yet in progress. Think about it, those of you who are Christians or profess faith in God - do you really think creation was/is a "one time only event" (God created it, set it, and left it - like the 17th C. "Divine Watchmaker theory")? Or is creation an ongoing, unfolding event? Many modern translations of Genesis 1:1 include alternate renderings of the Creation event, such as: "In the Beginning, when God began to create..." (along with the entirely plausible traditional past tense interpretations; Hebrew is a notoriously difficult language to render in modern words - Biblical Greek perhaps even more so). Personally, I hold to the view that creation is indeed an unfolding, ongoing phenomenon. How could God be "finished" with Creation, when most of the empirical evidence that science has uncovered, both from astronomy and biology, underscores the idea that creativity has been and indeed is ongoing?
Of course, orthodox Darwinists and other modern evolutionists cannot account for the origin of matter or the origin of consciousness. If you read Darwin's great book carefully ("On the Origin of Species..."), he very humbly and respectfully concedes these points. Read the book, by the way - very carefully - before you voice an opinion on Darwin. No matter what "camp" one is in or what one believes about biology, creation/evolution, God, etc., we all owe a great debt to this erstwhile Anglican Church Seminary student. Darwin thought deeply, researched thoroughly, articulated brilliantly, and pondered reality respectfully and humbly.
"There are parallels, too, between Teilhard's work and Carl Jung's, in that Teilhard posited the "Noosphere," which I find much akin (in fact identical in their essence) to Jung's "global mind." There is a pool of world thought within which we all share somehow. Teilhard's Noosphere" ties in with his view of the gradual flowering or unfolding of the the human experience. Think of what many scholars refer to as the Axial Age, for instance, when all over the globe, roughly simultaneously (give or take a few centuries), global cultures all enjoyed a religious and philosophical "Great Awakening" - think of the 4th and 5th Century BC origin of Buddhism in India, the time of Socrates/Plato/Aristotle in Greece, the times of the great Hebrew Prophets and flowering of Hebrew sacred literature; and Confucius in China. This is just one example...
Teilhard found, in his words, that Christianity was the "cosmic axis of evolution," and for him, the revolutions of Socialism (as an answer to social inequality and wealth inequity), the progression of Christianity as it gradually penetrated the globe, and the formation of the United Nations all coincided at a unique, pivotal juncture in human history as "evidences" of the unfolding divine plan.
As I alluded to earlier, I believe Teilhard's conclusions are fundamentally flawed, even if I do concur with the view that the human experience represents an "unfolding" and that God is not "done" with Creation (why should He be?). It is easier to understand Teilhard's optimism, though, if we consider his European vantage point, the aftermath of two catastrophic global wars, and the era in which he lived. Probably most thoughtful people harbored the view that the formation of the United Nations represented a watershed moment of hope for the planet when it started out. In fact, one should remember that it was our U.S President Woodrow Wilson, out of his Christian convictions (Wilson was a Presbyterian), who initiated the League of Nations after WW I. He had the best of intentions, and was a product of his time.
I would think, and I rather hope, that both Teilhard and Wilson are rolling over in their graves at what the United Nations has become today - an institution of global collectivists who consider themselves a de facto world government, fostering hatred for the United States and it's sacred values, promoting class warfare/hatred, and promoting global misery through Socialist wealth-redistributionist objectives and projects(think of the dreadful "global taxes" it was proposing not too long ago). The UN needs to, as Ayn Rand used to famously say: "check [its] premises." It has great potential for good (the alleviation of suffering), and is at its best when it promotes charitable enterprises toward the disadvantaged and those nations and peoples suffering from natural disasters; it is at its worst when it preaches global collectivism and considers itself morally authoritative. ("Authoritative" based on WHAT, I ask??)
A fundamental criticism I would have for Teilhard and those who yet think like him is this: there is way too much optimism that man alone can solve his problems, especially if we all just "get together" in a nutty sort of global collectivist way; "redistribute" wealth, etc. (instead of promoting global growth through free enterprise Capitalism). Teilhard is an orthodox Marxist, unfortunately, and this show up in his book prominently. To me, Marxism and Christianity are fundamentally opposed, but I know many of my more Socialistic friends and professors would disagree with me. Can't we all just get along?
At least Teilhard took a positive view of evolution (its the only option open to thinking Christians and all believers); a view informed by his Christian convictions and thoughtful philosophical speculations. As explained in his book "The Future of Man" (and his life work), the whole creation "event" is summed up in four overarching, grand "epochs" of Creation: the Cosmogenesis, the Biogenesis, the Noogenesis (Greek noos = "mind"), and finally culmination in "Christogenesis." (The growth of all humanity into the knowledge of Christ and his redemption - Christ indeed is the "Omega Point" alluded to earlier.) It is through this grand, eons-old cosmic process that God will finally be "all in all." (from I Corinthians 15:28 - Teilhard uses the pericope from I Cor. 15:12-28 to underscore his epochal outline and grand sweep of thought; a "life verse" or "verses," as it were.)
For Teilhard, the Universe naturally evolves towards an ever-increasing complexity and wonder of creation and culminates in universal knowledge of God. For him, this is "The Future of Man..."
TTC
"The Future of Man" is actually a compilation of a series of essays delivered by Teilhard in various settings and venues (the lectures were presented mostly in Europe in the middle part of the 20th Century - the book was not published in English until 1964).
Teilhard's work and philosophy are reflective of the prevailing optimism of the time, especially in Europe, regarding the efficacy of Socialism to combine with the Christian faith to alleviate many of the world's social justice problems. In his view (and in that of many other intellectuals of the time), Socialism was the cutting edge, or culmination of centuries (millennia, actually) of human thought regarding the forward evolution of the polis. He believed in a sort of gradualism in human evolution, somewhat similar to thinkers such as Henri Bergson, Albert Einstein (see my essay below), and Asa Gray (Christian evolutionist; Harvard professor).
The prevailing view of today however (and I should offer that we have "evolved" towards it, after decades of tireless work on behalf of innumerable great thinkers both in academia and in the field) is that of "punctuated equilibrium," the idea that evolution actually has unfolded oftentimes due to massive external stimuli (think the crash of the comet/asteroid "Nemesis" into the Yucatan peninsula which set the stage for the dinosaurs' extinction in the late Triassic); the occasional mass extinctions in various geologic eras; massive global climate change, etc. Common to all these evenst is that they are reactions to exogenous events, which then set the stage, so to speak, for significant evolutionary change. The late and great Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould wrote broadly about "E.Q." in his many books (I refer you to an excellent one from his later output - "Dinosaur in a Haystack"). He was an ardent, articulate proponent of non-theistic evolution in our time.
Back to the "gradualism" theory, much work has been done in our era regarding the Omega Point Theory and the Anthropic Principle, which are intellectual and scientific bulwarks and underpinnings of modern "Intelligent Design" Theories, especially prominent among THINKING Christian intellectuals (Dr. Hugh Ross and his fine books, for one instance - cf. www.reasons.org, for starters). Physicist Frank Tipler wrote an outstanding book about ten years ago propounding the Omega Point Theory in a way that most intelligent lay readers could grasp. It is entitled "The Physics of Immortality." Read it sometime...
In this view (and Teilhard's), what we have witnessed over eons is evolving "complexity" (think homo sapiens - the "thinking" man). We are the first species on earth to actually be able to witness this, think about it, comprehend at least some of it, write about it, and use our reason to "plan" for it on this planet. (Whether we are doing this adequately is the subject of another essay!) For Teilhard then, the work is NOT finished with homo sapiens - we, and the entire creation/cosmos - are a work yet in progress. Think about it, those of you who are Christians or profess faith in God - do you really think creation was/is a "one time only event" (God created it, set it, and left it - like the 17th C. "Divine Watchmaker theory")? Or is creation an ongoing, unfolding event? Many modern translations of Genesis 1:1 include alternate renderings of the Creation event, such as: "In the Beginning, when God began to create..." (along with the entirely plausible traditional past tense interpretations; Hebrew is a notoriously difficult language to render in modern words - Biblical Greek perhaps even more so). Personally, I hold to the view that creation is indeed an unfolding, ongoing phenomenon. How could God be "finished" with Creation, when most of the empirical evidence that science has uncovered, both from astronomy and biology, underscores the idea that creativity has been and indeed is ongoing?
Of course, orthodox Darwinists and other modern evolutionists cannot account for the origin of matter or the origin of consciousness. If you read Darwin's great book carefully ("On the Origin of Species..."), he very humbly and respectfully concedes these points. Read the book, by the way - very carefully - before you voice an opinion on Darwin. No matter what "camp" one is in or what one believes about biology, creation/evolution, God, etc., we all owe a great debt to this erstwhile Anglican Church Seminary student. Darwin thought deeply, researched thoroughly, articulated brilliantly, and pondered reality respectfully and humbly.
"There are parallels, too, between Teilhard's work and Carl Jung's, in that Teilhard posited the "Noosphere," which I find much akin (in fact identical in their essence) to Jung's "global mind." There is a pool of world thought within which we all share somehow. Teilhard's Noosphere" ties in with his view of the gradual flowering or unfolding of the the human experience. Think of what many scholars refer to as the Axial Age, for instance, when all over the globe, roughly simultaneously (give or take a few centuries), global cultures all enjoyed a religious and philosophical "Great Awakening" - think of the 4th and 5th Century BC origin of Buddhism in India, the time of Socrates/Plato/Aristotle in Greece, the times of the great Hebrew Prophets and flowering of Hebrew sacred literature; and Confucius in China. This is just one example...
Teilhard found, in his words, that Christianity was the "cosmic axis of evolution," and for him, the revolutions of Socialism (as an answer to social inequality and wealth inequity), the progression of Christianity as it gradually penetrated the globe, and the formation of the United Nations all coincided at a unique, pivotal juncture in human history as "evidences" of the unfolding divine plan.
As I alluded to earlier, I believe Teilhard's conclusions are fundamentally flawed, even if I do concur with the view that the human experience represents an "unfolding" and that God is not "done" with Creation (why should He be?). It is easier to understand Teilhard's optimism, though, if we consider his European vantage point, the aftermath of two catastrophic global wars, and the era in which he lived. Probably most thoughtful people harbored the view that the formation of the United Nations represented a watershed moment of hope for the planet when it started out. In fact, one should remember that it was our U.S President Woodrow Wilson, out of his Christian convictions (Wilson was a Presbyterian), who initiated the League of Nations after WW I. He had the best of intentions, and was a product of his time.
I would think, and I rather hope, that both Teilhard and Wilson are rolling over in their graves at what the United Nations has become today - an institution of global collectivists who consider themselves a de facto world government, fostering hatred for the United States and it's sacred values, promoting class warfare/hatred, and promoting global misery through Socialist wealth-redistributionist objectives and projects(think of the dreadful "global taxes" it was proposing not too long ago). The UN needs to, as Ayn Rand used to famously say: "check [its] premises." It has great potential for good (the alleviation of suffering), and is at its best when it promotes charitable enterprises toward the disadvantaged and those nations and peoples suffering from natural disasters; it is at its worst when it preaches global collectivism and considers itself morally authoritative. ("Authoritative" based on WHAT, I ask??)
A fundamental criticism I would have for Teilhard and those who yet think like him is this: there is way too much optimism that man alone can solve his problems, especially if we all just "get together" in a nutty sort of global collectivist way; "redistribute" wealth, etc. (instead of promoting global growth through free enterprise Capitalism). Teilhard is an orthodox Marxist, unfortunately, and this show up in his book prominently. To me, Marxism and Christianity are fundamentally opposed, but I know many of my more Socialistic friends and professors would disagree with me. Can't we all just get along?
At least Teilhard took a positive view of evolution (its the only option open to thinking Christians and all believers); a view informed by his Christian convictions and thoughtful philosophical speculations. As explained in his book "The Future of Man" (and his life work), the whole creation "event" is summed up in four overarching, grand "epochs" of Creation: the Cosmogenesis, the Biogenesis, the Noogenesis (Greek noos = "mind"), and finally culmination in "Christogenesis." (The growth of all humanity into the knowledge of Christ and his redemption - Christ indeed is the "Omega Point" alluded to earlier.) It is through this grand, eons-old cosmic process that God will finally be "all in all." (from I Corinthians 15:28 - Teilhard uses the pericope from I Cor. 15:12-28 to underscore his epochal outline and grand sweep of thought; a "life verse" or "verses," as it were.)
For Teilhard, the Universe naturally evolves towards an ever-increasing complexity and wonder of creation and culminates in universal knowledge of God. For him, this is "The Future of Man..."
TTC
posted by thoughtful conservative at 7:08 PM
0 comments
