Developments in Other Sciences Indicating Interconnectedness

Note: All posts are interconnected, so you are requested to read the previous posts before reading this post. 

Biological Sciences

The phenomenon of interconnectedness in biology has become increasingly evident in recent decades. One such example is the fact that a typical human body replaces 98% of its 10²⁸  atoms annually through interactions with the environment. This means that the carbon atoms in our body were once a part of the Earth, and will eventually return to it in the future. This highlights the interdependence of living beings and their environment.

The study of symbiotic relationships in organisms is another example of a holistic worldview. Living organisms display behavior patterns that favor the whole over individual parts. This is evident in the way cells work for the integrity of the tissue of which they are a part, and how tissues work together to maintain the integrity of organs. Organs, in turn, work to maintain the integrity of the entire organism. Any part of a living organism is willing to sacrifice itself in order to protect the genetic wholeness of the larger entity.

The Morphogenetic Field Theory

            Rupert Sheldrake's concept of the morphogenetic field proposes that there is a field of consciousness specific to a given species. This field allows for the transmission of certain behaviors and traits among members of that species. The more individuals that exhibit a certain behavior or trait, the easier it becomes for others to also exhibit that same behavior or trait, as it becomes part of the collective consciousness of the species.

The Hundredth Monkey Effect is a well-known experiment that illustrates this phenomenon. In this experiment, Japanese monkeys on the island of Koshima were observed to be washing their sweet potatoes in a stream to remove the dirt. This behavior was initially discovered by an 18-month-old monkey named Imo, who showed her mother and playmates the trick. Gradually, more and more monkeys learned this new behavior, until a certain number had acquired the habit. Then, something remarkable happened - suddenly, the behavior spread to the whole population in the tribe. This was called the hundredth monkey effect.

What is even more fascinating is that the habit of washing sweet potatoes then spread beyond the tribe of monkeys on Koshima. It jumped over to the sea-monkey colonies on other islands and even to monkeys on the mainland at Takasakiyama. This suggests that the transmission of new knowledge can occur from mind to mind once a certain amount of individuals within a species have acquired the behavior or trait, which then enters the field consciousness.

Other examples have been cited in literature to support this phenomenon, such as the way birds learn their songs, or the way bees communicate with each other about the location of food sources. These examples suggest that the collective consciousness of a species plays an important role in shaping the behavior and traits of that species.

In conclusion, Rupert Sheldrake's concept of the morphogenetic field and the Hundredth Monkey Effect suggest that the transmission of new behaviors and traits can occur within a species once a certain number of individuals acquire it, which then enters the collective consciousness of the species. This phenomenon has been observed in various animal species, indicating that the collective consciousness of a species plays a vital role in shaping their behavior and traits.

The Holographic Perception of the Universe

Michael Talbot's concept of the holographic universe suggests that the nature of reality is such that each part of the universe contains information about the whole universe. This view is supported by the unique properties of holograms, which contain the whole image or information within each part of the hologram. This interconnectedness implies that everything in the universe is intimately linked and that our perception of separate, discrete objects is an illusion.

This view of interconnectedness is not limited to Talbot's holographic theory, but is also supported by other developments in modern science. For example, quantum physics has shown that particles are not separate objects, but rather are entangled and connected in ways that cannot be fully explained by classical physics. Similarly, systems theory, widely used in biology, ecology, and other fields, emphasizes the interconnectedness of all parts of a system and how changes in one part can affect the entire system.

This interconnected view of reality has implications for how we understand ourselves and our place in the world. It suggests that we are not separate from the world around us, but are rather part of a larger, unified whole. This view challenges the traditional Western worldview that emphasizes individualism and the separation of self from other, and instead highlights the importance of community and connection.

Overall, the various developments in modern science point towards a more unified and interconnected view of reality. This view challenges our traditional ways of thinking and invites us to re-imagine our relationship with the world around us.

INDICATIONS OF INTERCONNECTEDNESS EMERGING FROM THE REVOLUTIONARY DEVELOPMENTS IN THE DOMAIN OF MODERN SCIENCE

 

Note: All posts are interconnected, so you are requested to read the previous posts before reading this post. 

Implications of the Quantum Theory regarding Interconnectedness

Quantum mechanics reveals an intimate connection between the ‘object’ and ‘observer’. As summed up by Capra, “My conscious decision about how to observe, say, an electron will determine the electron’s properties to some extent. If I ask it a particle question, it will give me a particle answer, if I ask it a wave question, it will give me a wave answer. The electron does not have objective properties independent of my mind.” Thus, “Isolated material particles are abstractions, their properties being definable and observable only through their interaction with other systems”. Thus, in reality, Nature does not show any isolated building blocks but rather appears as a complicated web of relations between various parts of a unified whole, and the entire universe is a single indivisible unit.

Another remarkable feature of quantum theory, which indicates a deeper level of interconnectedness in particles is known as ‘Non-locality’. It defines the apparent tendency of objects to instantly recognize each other’s location, even if separated by large distances (possibly even billions of light-years). Non-locality arises because of the phenomenon of entanglement, whereby particles that interact with each other are permanently interconnected or dependent on the states and properties of each other, to the degree that they essentially lose their independence and function as a single entity in many ways. Various scientists like John Bell, Stuart Freedman, and John Clauser endorse the existence of this kind of characteristic of particles.

Rather than talking in the context of interconnectedness and casual relationships in all units, Bohm proposed a new nature of reality in terms of ‘wholeness’. He proposed a new field at the subquantum level the quantum potential that pervades everywhere with equal power and do not diminish with distance. One of the key characteristics of quantum potential is wholeness. It means the behavior of the parts is actually organized by the whole.  He even suggested that wholeness was the primary reality. Another important implication of the quantum potential is related to the nature of the location. In every day of lives, the specific location of things plays an important role. However, Bohm’s interpretation of quantum physics indicates there is no meaning of talking location at a subquantum level as location ceases to exist at that level. All the points become equal to the other points, thus, there is no meaning of talking separateness. This phenomenon is also known as ‘non-locality’. It implies that he indicates oneness at that level. He explains this oneness through an analogy: 

Suppose, there is a fish swimming in an aquarium. There are two cameras installed at a right angle as shown in the figure and you can see both views at different televisions. Now, suppose you are neither aware of the aquarium nor about cameras, and watching only television. You will mistakenly assume that the two fishes are different. But, after watching sometimes you will be aware that there is a relation between the two fishes as you will feel some movement in one fish with the movement in the other fish. If you are really not aware of the whole setup, you will immediately conclude that the fishes are instantaneously communicating as in the case of the nonlocality effect. But, in reality, there is no communication between the fishes, in fact, you are watching the same reality from different angles. 

From the above analogy, Bohm concludes that due to the all-pervading quantum potential, all particles are nonlocally interconnected. Thus, he indicates that all things are part of an unbroken and undivided web embedded in space. 

The Implicate and Explicate characteristics of the Universe

Explaining relation between the perceptible world and the quantum potential, Bohm explains the holographic characteristic of a hologram. Everyone of us is familiar with holograms – a three-dimensional image formed by the interference of light beams from a laser or other coherent light source. The name ‘hologram’ is derived from the Greek word ‘holo’ means ‘whole’ and ‘gram’ means ‘to write’. Thus, the hologram means to write whole. The important characteristic of a hologram is that each part of the hologram will reflect the whole object with varying intensity. Thus, each part of the hologram records the whole object. The form and structure of the whole object is enfolded within each region of the photographic record unfolded when one shines light on any region. Bohm called it as ‘implicate order (to fold inward)’ and ‘explicate order (to fold outward)’. Whatever, we see is actually the explicate order of a deeper reality of implicate order like a hologram. He sees the whole universe as a result of countless enfoldings and unfoldings between these two orders. Whenever we think of a hologram it gives an impression of a static image that fails to address the dynamic nature of the universe. Thus, Bohm prefers to use the term ‘holomovement’. 

 David Bohm brings out various aspects of the wholeness and inherent interconnectedness existing in the Universe in his book entitled ‘Wholeness and the Implicate Order’. The central theme of the book is the unbroken wholeness of the totality of existence as a continuous flowing movement without borders. Wholeness means that nothing could be understood in isolation, everything exists in relation to others. And ‘implicate’ means every element has detailed information about the other element. Bohm derives these characteristics of the Universe on the basis of the theory of relativity and quantum physics.

In addition to the above, Bohm believes that space is not a vacuum or empty. It is full of energy and a ground for the existence of everything, including ourselves.  Criticizing the fragmentary view of existence, Bohm asserts:

“The notion that all these fragments are separately in existence is evidently an illusion, and this illusion cannot do other than lead to endless conflicts and confusion. Indeed, the attempt to live according to the notion that the fragments are really separate is, in essence, what has led to the growing series of extremely urgent crises that is confronting us today. Thus, as is now well known, this way of life has brought about pollution, destruction of the balance of nature, over-population, worldwide economic and political disorder, and the creation of an overall environment that is neither physically nor mentally healthy for most of the people who have to live in it.”

 As a consequence of these developments, science itself is demanding a new, nonfragmentary worldview, in the sense that the present approach of analysis of the world into independently existent parts does not work very well in modern physics. It is shown that both, in relativity theory and quantum theory, notions implying the undivided wholeness of the Universe would provide a much more orderly way of considering the general Nature of reality.

INDICATIONS OF INTERCONNECTEDNESS EMERGING FROM THE REVOLUTIONARY DEVELOPMENTS IN THE DOMAIN OF MODERN SCIENCE

 

Note: All posts are interconnected, so you are requested to read the previous posts before reading this post. 

Implications of the Theory of Relativity regarding Interconnectedness

The perception of interconnectedness in the scientific domain can be traced to the theory of relativity given by the well-known scientist Albert Einstein during the 20^th century. The theory of relativity provided a serious jolt to some of the fundamental tenets of the mechanistic worldview propagated in the 17^th century. The worldview considered the world as a collection of independent entities situated outside of each other in different ‘regions’ and ‘space’, working under various external forces. In this way, the dimensions – region and space – were considered independent. It implies that everything appears the same to everyone else in the cosmos, regardless of their position or velocity. Thus, two observers traveling in opposite directions would observe identical events unfolding. This can be thought of as a large machine where various parts are working under some external factors.

Einstein’s theory of relativity brought a revolutionary change in perception about space and time.  According to this theory, both space and time are relative concepts. Whereas Einstein believed that objects move according to distortion in space, while the distinction between space and time depends on the frame of reference. He proposed a ‘relativistic’ framework to understand the movements of various objects in the cosmos. In such a framework, time and space are interdependently, interconnectedly, and inseparably connected,  and form a four-dimensional continuum called ‘space-time’. It implies that we cannot leave ‘space’ while talking about ‘time’ and vice-versa.  Both Mikowski and Einstein evolved the integrated perspective of space and time in which "space by itself and time by itself are . .. mere shadows and only a sort of union of the two will preserve an independent reality. It implies that just as it makes no sense in our everyday life to ask for the real length of somebody’s shadows, it makes no sense to ask for ‘the real size of the object’ .

He proposed a ‘unified field theory ’ which means there is the widespread existence of various interconnected fields that move as a ‘whole ’ through ‘space’. According to the theory, the whole universe including all ‘particles’, human beings, their laboratories, observing instruments, etc. is a single undivided whole where fundamental characteristics of an individual object cannot be understood.

Einstein, commenting in the context of the interconnected nature of our Universe, said;

“A human being is a part of a whole, called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest. . . a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and affection for a few persons nearest us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty”.

Twentieth Century Paradigm: Ecological Evidence Showing Interconnectedness

 

GAIA THEORY

Note: All posts are interconnected, so you are requested to read the previous posts before reading this post. 

In the previous section, the interaction of individual species with their environment was highlighted. The Gaia theory introduces a further ‘paradigm shift’ taking Earth as a single self-regulated organism, composed of all life tightly coupled with the air, the oceans, and the surface rocks, rather than focusing on various parts. This new paradigm shift was proposed by James Lovelock in the 70’s, as Gaia Hypothesis which became one of the most hotly-debated topics within scientific community.

This revolutionary hypothesis strongly points towards the dynamic interconnectedness and self-regulating nature of our planet Earth. It propounds that the Earth functions as an interconnected living organism which maintains conditions necessary for its survival. Lovelock defines Gaia as,

“. . . a complex entity involving the Earth’s biosphere, atmosphere, oceans and soil; the totality constituting a feedback or cybernetic system which seeks an optimal physical and chemical environment for life on this planet.”

Thus, Lovelock proposes that the planet earth apparently exhibits the strange property of keeping itself always fit and comfortable place for living things to inhabit. Our biosphere is the 3-dimensional geographic region where living organisms exist. Self-regulation is the property of the whole evolving system of life, air, ocean and rocks. This has been called the Gaia Theory.

 In the Gaian perception, our species along with its technology is simply inevitable part of the larger Natural scene. The three principal characteristics of Gaia as described below are considered important;

1.  Gaia’s most significant characteristic is the tendency to maintain constant conditions for all terrestrial life, provided, the state of homoeostatis[1] (of Gaia) is not interfered by human beings.

2.    Gaia has vital organs at its heart, as well as those that are expendable or redundant primarily at the periphery. What we are doing to our world will significantly depend on where we are doing it.

3.    Gaian responses to changes for the worse must follow cybernetic laws where the time constant and the gain in the chain are important factors.

Commenting on the prevailing worldview, Lovelock mentioned that we human beings are too obsessed with the belief that all that matters is the ‘good’ of human kind while foolishly forgetting how much we depend upon all the other living things on this planet. We need to love and respect the Earth with the same intensity that we give to our families and our tribe for our own happy survival. Thus, according to Gaia hypothesis we are parts of a greater whole. Our destiny is not dependent merely for what we do for ourselves but also what we do for Gaia as a whole. If we endanger her, she will dispense with us in the interest of higher value -life itself.

 Some Evidences Showing Self-Regulation

Following are scientific pieces of evidences given by Lovelock in his book titled as ‘Gaia Theory’ which indicate the self-regulated characteristics of Nature;

 Regulation of Earth’s Temperature

The systems of planet Earth can be thought of analogous to the workings of any individual organism, say, a human body, that regulates body temperature, blood salinity etc. So for instance, even though the luminosity of the sun – the Earth’s heat source – has increased by about 30 percent since life began almost four billion years ago, the living system has reacted as a whole to maintain temperatures at levels suitable for life.

Regulation of Salinity in the Oceans

There are evidences, directly and indirectly, which show that the salinity level of sea - water has varied very little in hundreds of millions of years from what is required to sustain life of sea creatures. It is incredible to understand that, despite broad flux differences as well as evaporation rates, the salinity of sea water is quite tightly self-regulated around 3.4 percent, making it conducive to aquatic animals.

 Constancy of water at Sea Level

Lovelock claims that there are evidences which show that the total volume of water, which is approximately 1.2 thousand million cubic kilometers, remains unchanged while the continents formed and deformed, sea level rose and fell, the polar ice melted and refroze.

Thus, Gaia theory clearly points towards the fact that there is interconnectedness and self-regulation or a dynamic order in Nature even without the intervention of human beings.

 

---

[1] The tendency is towards a relatively stable equilibrium between interdependent elements, especially maintained by physiological processes.

Twentieth Century Paradigm: Ecological Evidence Showing Interconnectedness

 

Note: All posts are interconnected, so you are requested to read the previous posts before reading this post. 

Trophic Cascade 

The interconnectedness in various species can also be understood through an ecological phenomenon known as ‘Trophic Cascade’ coined by Rober Paine in 1980. It is caused by adding or removing top predators and causing reciprocal changes in predator and prey relative populations through a food chain, often leading to drastic changes in the structure of the ecosystem and nutrient cycling. For example, the absence of mountain lions in Zion National Park resulted in a decline in cottonwood trees due to an unchecked population of herbivores. Consequently, these changes in plant communities resulted in an increased stream erosion and a decline in the number of terrestrial and aquatic species including wild flowers, butterflies, reptiles and amphibians. While the addition of lions affected the overall variety of various species. It is found that the number of native fishes were also higher in the presence of Lions than in those without Lions. As another example, the elimination and gradual reintroduction of wolves in areas such as the Rocky Mountains has disclosed to researchers that in areas where wolves are absent, uncontrolled populations decrease the abundance of native plant species and their overgrazing leads to widespread destruction of forests and riparian habitats. While the reintroduction of wolves restores these ecosystems and further decreases the number of coyotes, thus improving pronghorn antelopes and other small mammals. The ethologist Rober Fantz demonstrates through experiments how species are born with the innate knowledge of the environment and maintain a harmonious relationship with it.

Normally, Darwin’s work is believed to have encouraged the attitude of ‘survival of the fittest’ thereby the powerful assuming the right to suppress and exploit the weaker ones. However, let us look at the following statement given in the last paragraph of Darwin’s ‘The Origin of Species’ which very much corroborates diversity and interdependence existing in Nature;

 “It is interesting to contemplate a tangled bank, clothed with many plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the bushes, with various insects flitting about, and with worms crawling through the damp earth, and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other, and dependent upon each other in so complex a manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us.”

Systems Ecology

Systems ecology focuses on the properties of ecosystems from a system approach. For example, to see a forest through trees. Jorgensen defines six properties of ecosystems from a system perspective: (i) Ecosystems Are Open Systems – all ecosystems are open to exchange matter, energy, and information with the environment. (ii) Ecosystems Have a Hierarchical Organization- There is a hierarchy in ecosystems (molecules, cells, organs, species, populations, ecosystems, landscapes, regions, and the ecosphere) with various advantages such as any loss due to malfunctioning at any level may be repaired by other components of networks on the lower level. Thus higher networking means less vulnerability; each level has enough inherent ability to integrate the functions of the lower level and to coordinate with the functions of the upper level etc. (iii) Ecosystems Have a High Diversity- the ecosystems exist with high diversity that ensures a wide spectrum of services in networks. (iv) Ecosystems Have a High Buffer Capacity. (v) The Components of Ecosystems Form Ecological Networks- the components of ecosystems are enough capable to form networks. Recycling and reusing of matter and energy are made possible because of the networks. (vi) Ecosystems have a very high content of information- an individual has enough information to coordinate with its networks.

Deep Ecology

In 1973, the Norwegian philosopher Arne Næss coined the phrase ‘Deep Ecology’ which is considered as an ecological and environmental philosophy promoting the inherent value of all living beings in the natural system regardless of their utility to human beings. It also gives guidelines for modern human societies to live with ecological balance. Deep Ecology proponents believe that Nature is not a resource that can be exploited freely to any extent by human beings. It is not difficult to observe that material goods do not guarantee fulfillment beyond a very moderate level and the biosphere is also threatened by over-consumption. Then, it seems imperative to define a new non-consumptive health paradigm. The ethics of deep ecology considers that the survival of any individual species -biotic or non-biotic- depends on the well-being of the ‘whole’ and offers eight principles to encapsulate this view. These are;

1. The well-being and flourishing of human and non-human life on Earth have intrinsic value in themselves. These values are independent of the perceived usefulness of the non-human world for human purposes.

2. Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of these values and are also values in themselves.

3. Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital needs.

4. The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantially smaller population. The flourishing of non-human life also requires a smaller human population.

5. Present human interference with the non-human world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.

6. Policies must therefore be changed. These policies affect basic economic, technological, and ideological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present.

7. The ideological change will be mainly that of appreciating life quality (dwelling in situations of inherent value) rather than adhering to the so-called ‘higher standard’ of living.

8. Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly to try to implement the necessary changes.

Summing up all the above guidelines, it may be concluded that there is rich biodiversity and complex dynamic interconnectedness in Nature having inherent value regardless of their utility to human beings. Human policies and activities must be in coherence with these diversities.

TWENTIETH-CENTURY PARADIGM

 

Note: All posts are interconnected, so you are requested to read the previous posts before reading this post. 

Twentieth Century has witnessed a series of revolutionary developments in science, seriously challenging the Newtonian Vision of the Universe as a Giant Machine. The worldview emerging from the twentieth-century developments could eventually lead to a 'holistic' or 'humanistic' worldview. In this and onward sections, we shall attempt to bring out the salient features of this emerging paradigm from various domains of science. 

Deductions from Ecological Studies

 Ecological Principles showing dynamic interconnectedness:

In 1866, the German biologist Ernst Haeckel came up with the term ecology derived from the Greek word oikos (household) implies the study of Earth household and defined as the comprehensive science of the organism’s relationship with their environment. Hereafter, various authors proposed several definitions of ecology. The intention behind all the definitions is to understand the relationship of an organism with its environment. Thus, we can say that Ecology is the systematic and scientific study of organism-to-environment interactions. The environment includes both biotic (living organism) and abiotic (non-living organism). Ecology is not only biology but also an interdisciplinary science dealing with the totality of living organisms and their connections with the surroundings.

A fundamental concept of Ecology is that each living organism has a continuous relationship with all the rest that makes up its environment. The total sum of the biotic and abiotic environment is called the ecosystem such as ponds, forests, mountains, etc. The whole Nature is a collection of such ecosystems that are interconnected with each other and dynamic in time and space. This is known as ecological balance.

From a network perspective, Ecology may be seen as a network of interrelated networks in the form of a web of life where interactions between an organism and its environment can only be understood with the understanding of networks. It means that each node of the network is a network itself. Thus, the perspective implies that nothing can be understood in isolation due to the web of networks. Capra brings out the following six fundamental principles of ecology to account for the sustainability of Nature:

 (i)  Interdependence (Networks)

Each member of an ecological community is interdependently entwined in a complex web of interactions. Their existing properties and survival are an outcome of their interactions with the rest. The sustainability of each member depends on the sustainability of the whole while the sustainability of the whole depends on the sustainability of its members. Interdependence exists due to inherent relationships that can be visualized through a perceptional change – from the parts to the whole, from objects to relationships, and from contents to patterns.

(ii)  Cycles

Cycles play an important role to feed the whole ecological community. There is no waste in ecosystems due to interconnected cycles that help matter and energy to flow from one place to another place. One’s waste becomes input (food) for another.

(iii)   Solar Energy

The ecosystems use renewable sources of energy. The primary source of the energy is Sun. The sun’s energy is transformed into chemical energy through the process of photosynthesis and drives all ecological cycles. 

(iv)   Partnership

Partnership implies an inherent tendency to cooperate, recognition of relationships, and mutual support which are pervasive in ecosystems. In fact, the conductive environment for living organisms is an outcome of cooperation, partnership, and networking.

(v)  Diversity

Diversity helps ensure the stability and resilience of the ecosystem. More diversity means more networks that result in more resilience. For example, When a particular species is wiped out by a severe disturbance, a varied community can survive and rearrange itself, because other links in the network can perform at least some of the functions of the wiped-out species.

(vi)  Dynamic Balance

An ecosystem maintains itself dynamically with the help of multiple feedback loops.  

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Closing Circle

Ecologist Barry Commoner in his book “The Closing Circle” mentions the complex relationships and interdependencies in ecological systems on the basis of the following considerations;      

(i) Everything is connected to everything else 

(ii) Everything has to go somewhere 

(iii) Everything is always changing 

(iv) There is no such thing as a free lunch. Let us look at these in some more detail.

‘Everything is Connected to Everything else’

This law indicates the existence of intricately interconnected networks of relationships among organisms and their physicochemical environment. He explained the first Law through examples like food chains and webs. The source of energy on Earth is Sun. Energy from the sun goes to plants and is consumed by the primary consumers (herbivores) which are, in turn, consumed by the secondary consumers (carnivores). In a similar manner, the mouse eats hundreds of various plants and an owl consumes mice along with various other animals. In this way, both animals and plants are linked by hundreds of food chains making a complex food web. For common people, the chain may seem rather disorganized but actually, it is highly structured and stable.

‘Everything has to Go Somewhere'

This law emphasizes that there is no ‘waste’ in ecosystems. One’s waste becomes food for others. For example, animals release carbon dioxide as respiratory waste, an essential nutrient for green plants. Plants excrete oxygen, which is used by animals. Animal organic wastes nourish the bacteria of decay. Their wastes, inorganic materials such as nitrate, phosphate, and carbon dioxide, become algal nutrients.

‘Everything is always Changing’

The species found in a community of plants and animals do not remain the same forever. This transition is called the succession of ecology. The first phase in succession, called the pioneer stage, starts with lichens growing on bare rock. Eventually, enough soil is generated to provide the nutrients needed to support grass and herbal production. Seeds from briars, shrubs, vines and trees are blown or transported to the site by animals or water, where they can germinate eventually. Soon the trees and shrubs begin to grow, the grasses and herbs compete, and a new forest begins. Changes in plants occur until the last stage of succession, a climax group, is reached. The animal population is also witnessing several changes when one successive phase transitions to another. In the grasses and herbs of early succession, rabbits, meadow mice and groundhogs etc. seek abundant food. When grasses and herbs are replaced by shrubs and trees, deer and grouse are increasing in numbers. Thus, the species are undergoing constant change.

‘There is no Such Thing as a Free Lunch’

This signifies that the exploitation of nature always carries an ecological cost. From a strict ecological standpoint, human beings are consumers more than they are producers. And if this continues, environmental degradation becomes inevitable. The dominant pattern of modern development is clearly counter-ecological. In this development, all social relations between people and all the relationships of humans to nature are reduced to mere economic relations. Everything we eat, wear and use during our lifetime has only monetary and environmental costs.

Commoner says that the ecosystem is like a net, in which multiple strands connect each knot to another. Such a fabric can withstand collapse better than a straightforward, unbranched circle of threads, which breaks down as a whole if cut anywhere. Botkin and Keller call this interconnectedness as ‘Environmental Unity’ which implies that nothing can be changed individually, everything effects everything else. Various examples showing interconnectedness are mentioned in their book - ‘Environmental Science: Earth as a Living Planet’ . An excerpt from the book is quoted below;

“When cities, such as Chicago and Indianapolis, were developed in the eastern and midwestern United States, the clearing of forests and prairies and the construction of buildings and paved streets increased surface-water runoff and soil erosion, which in turn affected the shape of river channels—some eroded soil was deposited on the bottom of the channel, reducing channel depth and increasing flood hazard. Increased fine sediment made the water muddy, and street and yard runoff chemicals polluted the stream. These changes affected fish and other life in the river and terrestrial wildlife that depended on the river. The point here is that land-use conversion can set off a series of changes in the environment, and each change is likely to trigger additional changes.”

The Rise of Mechanical Philosophy

 

Note: All posts are interconnected, so you are requested to read the previous posts before reading this post. 

After the Renaissance, the spirit of open inquiry mainly flourished outside of the Church. The book De Revolutionibus Orbium Celestium by Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus was published just a few days before his death in 1543 and is often praised as the forerunner of the spirit of free inquiry. Copernicus advocated a heliocentric view of the cosmos (i.e., a stationary sun with other planets, including the earth, revolving around it) in this book, as opposed to Ptolemy’s geocentric theory (i.e., stationary earth at the center with other heavenly bodies, including the Sun, circling around it), which was believed as Church’s ‘official’ theory. This view was a serious attack and a challenge to Christian Philosophy. So, Copernicus's theory was pronounced “false and altogether opposed to Holy Scriptures”.  A similar case was with Galileo when he was imprisoned in 1633. It was a period when a lot of confrontations took place between the Church and the protagonists of free inquiry (the scientists). Over time, the Church was finally proven to be incorrect, and it was forced to make an unseemly retreat from its position. The Church ultimately adopted the heliocentric perspective in 1982 and Darwin’s theory of evolution in the late twentieth century. As a result, the intellectual authority of the religious thinkers was utterly shattered within a few centuries, thereby putting the Christian worldview to rest. 

     During the 16th – 17th century, scientific development gave birth to a new worldview where that of the world replaced the notion of interconnectedness, underlying unity, purposefulness, interconnectedness, etc., as a mechanical system, i.e., an only machine with no purposefulness. Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Bacon, Descartes, and Newton actively contributed to spreading this worldview. Bacon can be credited to the advent of this worldview mentioned in his classical book Novum Organum  in 1620. Unlike Aristotle and Plato’s philosophy, Bacon’s approach was based on experimentation, data gathering, and analysis to unravel Nature’s truth systematically and organized. He believed science is a tool for only the betterment of human beings at any cost paid by Nature. Therefore, he stressed that rather than asking the metaphysical ‘why’ of things, the science of learning should be committed to the ‘how’ of things.

     Renes Descartes (1596 – 1650), another analytic philosopher, a great scientist and mathematician, systematically initiated the task of explaining the ‘how’ of numerous phenomena already known by the seventeenth century. He believed in breaking up problems and thoughts into smaller parts and then rearranging them systematically in a logical order. This theory became an essential characteristic of science and prevailed in the scientific community. However, the theory spread a ‘reductionist’ and ‘fragmentary’ approach, unlike an integrated and wholeness approach that prevailed during the earlier Greek philosophers. The process originated a completely new mode of thinking that has come to be known as Mechanical Philosophy. Basic to this mechanical philosophy is Cartesian Dualism. “All of reality, he argued, is composed of two substances. What we may call spirit is a substance characterized by the act of thinking; the material realm is a substance the essence of which is an extension. Res-cogitans and re-sextensa – Descartes defined them in a way to distinguish and separate them absolutely. To think of substance one cannot attribute any property characteristic of matter – not extension, not a place, not motion. Thinking, which includes the various modes which mental activity assumes, and thinking alone, is its property. From the point of view of natural science, the more important result of the dichotomy lay in the rigid exclusion of any and all psychic characteristics from material nature (Westfall, 1971). ” To Descartes, the matter was thus really dead and possessed no activity except motion derived from God in the beginning. He visualized the whole Universe from the same perspective. He concluded that Nature is made of various disconnected parts and can be completely described in terms of the movements and arrangements of its parts.  This mechanistic visualization of Nature became a widespread dominant paradigm in the then scientific community in every emerging field,  for example, living organisms: the seventeenth-century’s physiologists tried to explain bodily functions such as digestion, blood flow etc. from the same perspective; Cell Theory: the biologist recognized that all animals and plants are made of cells and compared body as a factory where cells are produced, assembled and distributed in body; Genes: the biologists of twentieth-century found that all the biological structures could be understood in terms so molecular structures unlike cells during nineteenth-century; Mechanistic Medicine: by concentration on the smallest part of any organism, the healing of human body shifted to cell and then finally to molecules which lost the vision of human being as a whole. Descartes visualized even organic phenomena from the same perspective. He described men as a machine that performs all physiological functions of a man – circulation, digestion, nourishment, growth and perception. Newton intensely participated in the same direction by introducing the concept of force to already existing notions of matter and motion. Newton saw particle forces as ontological realities, and he was modest enough to concede that he had no idea what caused them; in fact, he linked them directly to God’s intervention. But his French followers believed that the Newtonian system only validated the Cartesian vision of reality as a great machine. The references to God made by Newton and Descartes were quickly dismissed as superfluous and overshadowed by the successes of their mathematical mechanics. Newton had called God’s mercy to restore order to the solar system after it had become drenched, either due to external factors (comets etc.) or due to its inherent character. When Laplace demonstrated that disturbances caused by mutual forces or external bodies like comets were only transient and that the Solar System was intrinsically stable, it was considered as another ‘evidence’ of God’s redundancy. All of this resulted in a resurgence of materialism – a belief that hard stuff in unyielding lumps is the Universe’s solitary ultimate reality.

Impact of the mechanical philosophy on Social thought

The application of mechanical philosophy to sciences dealing primarily with human and social institutions resulted in the materialistic worldview.

    One of the first systematic attempts of this kind was made by John Locke in the late seventeenth century. He was so much influenced by the ‘reductionist’ or ‘fragmentary’ approach that he visualized society from an atomistic perspective. He considered an individual the smallest unit (basic building block) and tried to understand the ‘natural laws’ governing individual behaviour. He found the natural laws, including personal interest, to protect and allow for the increase of the property of its members, freedom, etc., denying any connection between people and God. In this way, he successfully separated religion from people’s activity as well as integrated concerns related to society.  The consequences of this monumental is best put in the worlds of Rifkin and Howard:

“Having removed God from the affairs of people - as Bacon had removed him from nature – Locke was left with human beings all alone in the Universe… Now, men and women became just what Bacon, Descartes and Newton had made of nature: mere physical phenomena interacting with other bits of matter in the cold, mechanical Universe. This being the case, on what basis could a social order be formed?... Once we cut through useless custom and superstition, argued Locke, we see that society, made up solely of individuals creating their own meaning, has one purpose: to protect and allow for the increase of the property of its members. Pure self-interest thus becomes the sole basis for the establishment of the state, … for reason leads us to conclude that this is the natural order of things…”

In this way, the personal goal of salvation during the medieval ages shifted to achieving things and ensuring personal interests. This ensued the idea of progress.

    Adam Smith, a Scottish economist of the eighteenth century, also recognized selfishness as something ‘natural’ and did not like the idea of erecting social and moral barriers to its pursuit. Smith, based on Locke’s idea, formulated a theory of economics and concluded laissez-faire- the general principle of non-interference with the free action of the individual, is the most efficient method of economic organization and instead believed that there was an ‘invisible hand’ of ‘Providence’ which governed the economic processes so as to “make nearly the same distribution of the necessaries of life which would have been made had the earth been divided into equal proportions among all its inhabitants”. Unfortunately, the “invisible hand” of ‘Providence’ did not act as Smith had predicted, and his laissez-faire philosophy simply served to promote the pursuit of material abundance to meet physical demands, with little regard for ethics. This ethical evasion became the trademark of all subsequent mainstream economists, resulting in the assumption that what is ‘pleasant’ is ‘good’ and what is ‘unpleasant’ is evil. By this way, under the influence of Newtonian physics, the human movement was considered merely a physical movement under the various forces of attraction or repulsion. The overall philosophy of utilitarianism, which was first articulated by an Englishman named Jeremy Bentham, is based on these ideas, and is summed up in Bentham’s famous phrase:

“Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we should do ”

The message of Bentham’s phase is very clear that men should act in a manner that maximizes their ‘pleasure’ and minimizes the ‘pain.’ It implies a theoretical framework justifying a materialistic worldview. When social philosophers like Herbert Spencer interpreted Darwin’s theory of evolution to sanctify the philosophy of ‘survival of the fittest ’ as a law of Nature, the journey of modern civilization to the pinnacle of a materialistic worldview was nearly complete.