reflections on the thought of ibn `Arabi and the impact of an integral perspective

16 Pages·2017·0.8 MB·English

by  Nikos Yiangou

World Futures
The Journal of New Paradigm Research
ISSN: 0260-4027 (Print) 1556-1844 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gwof20
Is a New Consciousness Emerging? Reflections on
the Thought of Ibn ’Arabi and the Impact of an
Integral Perspective
Nikos Yiangou
To cite this article: Nikos Yiangou (2017) Is a New Consciousness Emerging? Reflections on the
Thought of Ibn ’Arabi and the Impact of an Integral Perspective, World Futures, 73:7, 427-441, DOI:
10.1080/02604027.2017.1366794
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02604027.2017.1366794
Published online: 26 Oct 2017.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=gwof20
Download by: [49.248.225.40] Date: 27 October 2017, At: 06:35
WorldFutures,73:427–441,2017
Copyright©Taylor&FrancisGroup,LLC
ISSN:0260-4027print/1556-1844online
DOI:10.1080/02604027.2017.1366794
IS A NEW CONSCIOUSNESS EMERGING?
REFLECTIONS ON THE THOUGHT OF IBN ‘ARABI AND
THE IMPACT OF AN INTEGRAL PERSPECTIVE
NikosYiangou
MuhyiddinIbn‘ArabiSociety,MillValley,California,USA
7 Everyeraembodiesaperspectiveorworldview.Inatimeofprofoundchange,
01 whatistheworldviewthatdescribesourcurrentera?Atthefrontiersoftheculture
2
r anintegralwayofthinkinghasstartedtoform.Anintegralmodellookstoincor-
be porateandembraceknowledgeintoaunifiedframework,andtocastanewlight
o
ct onthetransformationalprocessesthatareatworkbothinhumanconsciousness
O andintheculture.Evolutionaryprinciplessuchasdirectionalityandthecease-
27 lessmovementtowardincreasingcomplexityandwholenesshaveinfluencednot
5 onlyscience,butnowalsopsychology,culture,andspirituality.Aswelookback
3
6: atthestagesofourdevelopmentinhistorywithanever-sharperlensandcon-
0
at templateourpresentandourfuture,weask:isanewconsciousnessemerging
] aswetransitiontoanincreasinglyinclusiveandholisticworldview?Thisarticle
0
4 reviewssomeoftheideasofthinkerssuchasKenWilber,JeanGebser,Michael
25. Murphy,TeilharddeChardin,andSriAurobindo,andsuggestsfurtherwaysof
8.2 advancing integral thought by reviewing the work of one of the greatest early
4 integralthinkers,Sufimysticandspiritualgiant,MuhyiddinIbn‘Arabi,andhis
2
9. teachingsontheLogosasaprincipleforemergence.
4
[
y
b KEYWORDS:Emergence, evolutionary theory, Ibn ’Arabi, integral theory, Ken Wilber,
d Logos.
e
d
a
o
wnl INTRODUCTION
o
D Anybroaduniversalperspectiveinvitesmeaningfulengagementwiththebigques-
tionsoflife.Butmeta-narrativesingeneraldonotreadilyfindpopularacceptance
inouracademicinstitutionstoday—ourintellectualclimateisoneofdeconstruc-
tion and reductionism, and postmodern scholars tend to privilege pluralistic and
subjectiveperspectivesoverunifyingnarrativesthatattemptanyholisticormean-
ingfulinterpretationofthehumanexperienceandtheworldthatweinhabit.
However,somethingisstirringwithinthecultureandtakingrootinthemain-
streamofoursociety.Itisthesecontemporaryvoicesthatarethesubjectofthis
article and an attempt, with very broad strokes, to outline an emerging meta-
narrativethatembracesaspiritualperspectiveofevolution,suggestingnewways
AddresscorrespondencetoNikosYiangou,MuhyiddinIbn‘ArabiSociety,38Miller
Ave,#486,MillValley,CA94941,USA.E-mail:[email protected]
427
428 NIKOSYIANGOU
ofthinkingaboutourplaceinhistory,andwhatourpotentialforfutureevolution
mightbe.Thisisclearlyanimmensestudy,thusthetenorofthispresentationcan
be thought of as journalistic reporting rather than expert analysis, reflecting on
someinfluentialcontemporarythinkerswhoseideasarepercolatingintothecul-
turalconsciousnessofourtime,withtheintenttoreviewthebroadimpactoftheir
ideasonboththecurrenteraanditsfuturepotential.
THEEVOLUTIONARYCONTEXT
The New York Times columnist David Brooks (2007) said in an article: “And it
occurredtomethatwhilewepost-modernssaywedetestall-explainingnarratives,
infactanewishgrandnarrativehascreptuponuswilly-nillyandisnowallaround.
7 OncetheBibleshapedallconversation,thenMarx,thenFreud,buttodayDarwin
1
0 iseverywhere”(p.WK14).
2
r Darwin published his theory of evolution in 1859, yet there were others that
e
ob precededhimthatneverthelessgraspedthepowerandimportanceoftheconcept
ct of development and change over time (Wilber, 2001, pp. 29–30). Any philoso-
O
7 phy of creation or becoming, such as those put forward by Plato and Plotinus
2
5 forexample,involvedideasoftheprogressionfromtheOnetotheMany,whatis
3
6: calledinvolution,andtheinverseorreturnfromtheManytotheOne,whatwecall
at 0 evolution(Wilber,2000,pp.329–336,pp.346–348,pp.660–662).Thematterof
] the “becoming” of the world and the troublesome relationship of a perfect tran-
0
4 scendentrealitythatsomehowmanifestsinconnectionwithaworldofchangeable
5.
2 andimperfectformshaschallengedandconsumedthinkersthroughouthistory.In
2
8. theWesternphilosophicaltraditionGermanidealistssuchasHegelandSchelling
4
2 predatedDarwinyetexpressedtheirideasinevolutionaryterms(Murphy,2013,
9.
4 p.1).ForHegel,thetruthofanyerawasnotstaticbutfollowedadevelopmentalor
[
y dialecticalprocessofunfoldinginthecontextofhistory,andSchellingwasper-
b
d hapsoneoftheearliestthinkerstoviewevolutionasanopen-ended,spontaneous
e
d andcreativeprocess,whileatthesametimeaffirmingthedivineasbothtranscen-
a
o dent from the world and immanent in its unfolding through evolution (Wilber,
nl
w 2011,pp.454–455;Phipps,2012,pp.186–187).
o
D TeilharddeChardin,aremarkableevolutionarythinkerandoneofthescientists
on the team that discovered Peking Man, asserted that evolution follows a clear
trajectorytowardhigherandhigherlevelsofunityandorganization(Teilhardde
Chardin,2008,pp.287–288).Whilenotallscientistsmightagreewithconflating
theideaofdirectionalityorpurposewithatheoryofevolution,theideaofnatural
selectionaloneastheengineofevolutionhascomeintoquestion(Wilber,2001pp.
30–31).Othertheoriesofthemechanismsofevolutionhaveemerged,forexam-
ple the principles of self-organization arising from complexity theory and chaos
theorythatarefoundatboththegeneticandtheculturallevelandthatgiveriseto
thenotionofhierarchicalgovernanceasawaytoachievehigherformsoforgani-
zation,fromcellstotribestoplanetarysystems(Combs,1998,p.2;Wilber,2001,
pp.58–59).Thewaycomplexsystemscoalesceandself-organizeallowsforthe
emergenceofnovelnewformsthattranscendandarealwaysmorethanthesum
oftheirparts,andtheseprinciplesareunderstoodtoapplygenerallytoanycom-
plexsystem.Spontaneousorderhasbeenobservedtoemergefromsystemssuch
ISANEWCONSCIOUSNESSEMERGING? 429
asahumancommunity,anorganism,swarmingbehaviorinnature,atrafficcircle,
or the development of a city (Wilber, 2000 pp. 81–83; Combs, 1998, pp. 1–2).
Reductionismaloneisnotsufficienttoexplainemergence—afragmentedviewof
theworlddoesnotadequatelyexplaintheemergentwhole,norcanitmakesense
ormeaningoftheastonishingplenitudeandcreativityoflife.
Whatthesetheories suggest isthatthedirectionality of evolution fromlesser
to more complex and inclusive structures is an inherent characteristic to evolu-
tionary growth, a built-in blueprint containing the principles for emergence. A
keyoperatingprinciplehasbeencalledtranscendandinclude—inotherwords,as
structuresdevelopfromsimplertomorecomplex,thesimplerformissubsumed
within the higher, newly emerging whole, in the same way that molecules tran-
scendandincludeatoms,organismstranscendandincludemolecules,andsoon
7 (Wilber,2007).
1
0 Itwouldnotbeentirelycorrecttocallthisthelogicofemergence,sinceevo-
2
r lutiondoesnotfollowlogicalprogressionaswemightnormallythinkofit,butI
e
ob would offer that it is a kind of logos of emergence, an inherent order that spon-
ct taneously unfolds according to the conditions and place of its appearance. This
O
7 organicactivityofself-generatingandself-organizingisalsocalledautopoeisis,
2
5 self-creation, originally applied in biology to define the self-maintaining chem-
3
6: istryoflivingcells,butnowextendedtothefieldsofsociology,systemstheory,
at 0 andofconsciousnessitself(Combs&Goerner,1998).Thisnotionofaprincipleor
] orderembeddedbothinmatterandwithintheevolutionaryprocesswillberevis-
0
4 ited shortly in connection with the Logos doctrine found in the teachings of the
5.
2 greatSufithinker,MuhyiddinIbn‘Arabi.
2
8. A perspective of evolution as a guiding force in the world is one that views
4
2 all life forms, including human consciousness and human societies, as evolving
49. according to the same internal structures that guide the evolution of all living
[
y things.Theevolutionofconsciousnessisthustiedtotheevolutionofallformsin
b
d aunified and integrated way. Among Westerncultural creatives and influencers,
e
d thisisbecomingincreasinglyacceptedasanewparadigm,onethatisseenaspro-
a
o gressiveandunconstrainedbytheworldviewsofboththetraditionalandmodern
nl
w mindsets—anewkindofthinkingthatfindsitsrootsinthepostmodernandnow
o
D increasinglywhatisbeingcalledtheintegralworldview.
Thewordintegralisoftenusedinthesamewayasevolutionary—bothterms
pointing to an emerging paradigm. The word integral started appearing around
the beginning of the 20th century, used by Jean Gebser and Sri Aurobindo, and
whose works were highly influential on Ken Wilber, the contemporary philoso-
pher whose body of work is called Integral Theory, which attempts to map the
domainsofscience,philosophy,psychology,cosmology,andreligionintoauni-
fiedmodelofknowledge(Wilber,2000,2001,2007,2012).Thisexerciseofcorre-
lationacrossmultiplespecializeddomainsrequiresonetobeageneralistinorder
todiscernanddiscoverpatternsofmeaning.However,beingageneralistismore
thanjustbeingapluralistandinfacttheintegrative,cross-disciplinaryactivityof
makingspaceformultipleperspectivesandpointsofviewhasitselfbeencalled
ahigherleveloffunctioningthatrepresentsanewstageintheevolutionofcon-
sciousness,andthedevelopmentofacapacitytoembracemultipleperspectivesis
seenasasignificantevolutionaryleap(Phipps,2012).Wilber(2007)arguesthat
430 NIKOSYIANGOU
holdingmanyperspectivesisessentialtodevelopingacorrectviewandindeeda
hallmarkofintegralstagedevelopment.Ibn‘Arabialsodescribesaveryhighlevel
ofconsciousintegrationoftheinfinitepluralityofperspectivesorbeliefsthathe
names“TheStationofNoStation”(Chittick,1994),apotentiallevelofattainment
inherentineveryhumanbeingsinceAdam(Yiangou,2011).
Theassertionisthatconsciousnessistheinternalsubjectivedimensionofthe
cosmos,arealspacewhereweexperiencetheworldandthatisnotseparatefrom
the ontological fabric of the universe, and that it evolves as physical forms do.
Equally, we inhabit a collective field of consciousness, not just as an individual
subjectivity, but also as a communal inter-subjectivity, which is an actual place
where worldviews form and develop. Others have also formulated concepts to
account for this idea of inter-subjectivity, such as Carl Jung’s notion of the col-
7 lective unconscious, described as the structures of the unconscious mind shared
1
0 andinheritedbyourspeciesandcontaininginstinctsandarchetypes.Teilhardde
2
r Chardin(2008)proposedtheideaofthenoosphere,whichhedescribedasathink-
e
ob inglayerthatsurroundstheearthandactsasthesumtotalofhumanity’sinterior
ct life.Thissharedexperientialdimensionofinter-subjectivityisalsowhatwecall
O
7 culture(Phipps,2012,p.167).
2
5
3
6: HUMANDEVELOPMENT
0
at
] According to this emerging way of integral thought, human evolution is seen
0
4 as a progression of levels or stages that have both psychological and cultural
5.
2 dimensions. We start life as children and progress through a series of develop-
2
8. mental stages that have been found to correlate closely with stages of cultural
4
2 development. By cross-referencing many developmental models, ranging from
9.
4 childhood development, values, religious beliefs, cultural worldviews, cosmol-
[
y ogy,andthelike,integralthinkershavemappedstructuralsimilaritiesandpatterns
b
d and connected the dots in increasingly more holistic ways. Stages of cognitive
e
d development within a lifespan from infancy to adulthood, for example, are thus
a
o mappedtostagesofculturaldevelopment,whichinturnaremappedtostagesof
nl
w consciousness.
o
D Attheindividuallevel,developmental psychologistssuchasJeanPiagetrev-
olutionizedthewaywethinkaboutthewaychildrendevelop.Thediscoverythat
childrengothrougharecognizablecognitivestagedevelopmentprocesswasasig-
nificantbreakthroughinunderstandingthewayinwhichcognitionunfolds,show-
ingthatmindisnotstaticbutfollowsaprogressionthatcanbedescribedinevolu-
tionaryterms.Variousresearchershavelabeledthestagesslightlydifferently,but
againtypicallyfollowthestagedevelopmentmodelofsimpletomorecomplex,as
inPiaget’sdescriptionofthesensorimotor,pre-operational,concrete-operational,
andformaloperationalstages.Thisprogressionisunderstoodtodescribenotonly
abiologicaldevelopmentalprocess,butalsothenatureofcognitionandconscious-
nessandhowhumanscometoacquireit.KenWilber,forexample,hasembraced
Piaget’sworkandmappedthestagesofinfantdevelopmenttothestagesofcultural
developmentinanefforttoidentifycommonstructuresunderlyingtheemergence
ofbothindividualconsciousnessandculturalsystems(Wilber,2007,p.67).
ISANEWCONSCIOUSNESSEMERGING? 431
CULTURALDEVELOPMENT
To explain development at the cultural or collective level, few have been more
influentialthanJeanGebser.Hedemonstratedthathumanculturescanbetraced
throughfourdistinctphasesorstructuresofconsciousness,and,positionedashe
was between two world wars, he believed he was witnessing the birth of a fifth
stage,thatofanewkindofconsciousnesshecalledintegral.Thisnewconscious-
nesshealsoreferredtoasaperspectival,sinceoneofitsprimaryattributeswasthat
itwasnotlimitedtoitsownperspective,butwasabletore-integratealltheper-
spectivesthatcamebeforeitandallowthemto“becomepresenttoourawareness
intheirrespectivedegreesofconsciousness”(Gebser,1984,p.268).
He believed that consciousness had an atemporal, immaterial source that he
calledorigin,andthatthisorigincontainsinitself,inaformoflatency,thestruc-
7
1 turesofconsciousnessthatwouldunfoldovertime.Thefirstconsciousnessstruc-
0
2 tureGebseridentifiedisthearchaiclevel;hesuggestedthatitiszero-dimensional
r
e and pre-temporal, where man was still indistinguishable from the world and the
b
cto universe, living in a state of consciousness with no differentiation between self
O andother.Thesecondstructureisthemagiclevelwheremanisreleasedfromhis
7
2 identity with the whole, representing an egocentric level of development where
35 identityisofselfandeverythingisseenasmeaningfulonlytoone’sownself.Here
6: the magic world is a real world, where consciousness is single-dimensional and
0
at timelesswithpoint-likeunityandwherethepointorpartcanstandforthewhole,
0] asseenwiththeinterfusingofacavepaintingofabisonwiththespiritofthebison
4
5. itself.Thethirdormythicstagemarksthebeginningoftimeandhistory,whereas
2
2 themagicalstageispre-history.Themythicischaracterizedbypolarity.Language
8.
4 and imagination flourish, and the oral tradition that emphasizes the Word takes
2
9. hold. This is a traditional worldview, or ethnocentric, where identity is with the
4
[ tribe,andthereisanewinnerawarenessofalarger,richerworldofthesoul.Here
y
b manstepsintothetwo-dimensionworldofthecircle,definedbythecyclicaland
d
e repeatingcadenceofthecyclesofnature,suchaswinter/summer,day/night,and
d
a theorbitsoftheplanets.Thefourthstageofthementalorrationalisalsoknown
o
nl asthemoderniststagethatwastrulybirthedduringtheEnlightenment,although
w
o Gebserspeculatesthatitsearlieststructuresappearedaround1225BCE(Gebser,
D
1984,p.75).Thinkingorthoughtformsinthewayweknowofthemtodayarethe
characteristicofthisstage,inthatthereisanunambiguous“I”doingthethinking.
Humansstepoutofnatureandoutofthecircleofcongruitywiththeirworldinto
thethree-dimensionalspaceepitomizedbytheEuropeanEnlightenmentandthe
scientificrevolutionthatfollowedit.Thislevelisalsocalledworld-centric,where
identityiswithhumanityatlarge.
ForGebsertheintegralstagewasjustemerginginhistime(Gebser,1984,pp.
289–292, pp. 545–547). It represented a new worldview, a new way of integrat-
ing in consciousness all the historical stages of development that preceded it. It
alsoheraldsanewrelationshiptospaceandtime.Hereidentityisseenascosmo-
centric,whereidentityiswithnature,themanifestworldandoneness.Intheinte-
gralstage,originbecomesperceivable,thespiritualbecomesconcretized,andthe
uncreatedlightbecomesmanifest.
432 NIKOSYIANGOU
Witheachdegreeofevolutiontheperspectiveissaidtoadvancebytranscend-
ingandincludingthedegreebeforeit,becomingincreasinglyexpansiveandcapa-
ble of comprehending a wider and deeper perspective. As noted earlier, these
samestagesareappliedequallytochildhooddevelopment,thusstagedevelopment
describesboththeinteriorasindividualstructures,andtheexteriorasworldviews
thatareappliedtotheculture.
Gebser’sideaswerefurtherexpandedintheSpiralDynamicsmodeldeveloped
byClareGravesandDonBeckinordertoaccountforculturaldevelopmentsthat
emergedinthe1960s,particularlybyidentifyingthepostmodernstagethatwas
inserted between the rational/modern stage and the integral stage, plus an addi-
tional holistic stage after the integral stage that is yet to emerge, arriving at a
totalofeightstages(Roemischer,2002).Thesestagesaredescribedasworldviews
7 butalsoasvaluesystems,andaresaidtoinformthebasicstructuresofpsychol-
1
0 ogyandsociology.Thestagesmakeupanascendingevolutionaryspiralthrough
2
r whichindividualsandculturespassastheydevelop—psychologically,culturally,
e
ob morally,spiritually.
ct These values, moreover, can be seen at play in our world today, and Spiral
O
7 Dynamicsemphasizesthepracticalimportanceofunderstandinghowthesestruc-
2
5 tures exist as stable organizing systems for cultures around the world. There is
3
6: someresearchtodemonstratethatthreeworldviewsarecurrentlyactive,atleast
at 0 in the West, those of traditionalism, modernism, and postmodernism. They sub-
] sistside-by-side,andwecanobservethesedynamicswithinourculture.AsPhipps
0
4 (2012)wrylynotes,thinkofBillyGraham,BillGates,andOprah,orOpusDei,
5.
2 IBM, and Greenpeace (p. 217). These are broad generalizations, but they make
2
8. apoint,andcanbehelpfultoolsinunderstandingtheculturewarsofconflicting
4
2 worldviewsthatweseedailyinthemedia.
49. Sowepassindividuallyandcollectivelythroughthesewavesofdevelopment,
[
y which should be thought of as “not rigid levels but flowing waves, with much
b
d overlap and interweaving” (Wilber, 2001, p. 7). They are significant generaliza-
e
d tions that help us orient our understanding of the human experience. Equally,
a
o there are both healthy and unhealthy expressions of each wave of development.
nl
w Developmentbringsnewpotentialitiesbutitcanalsobringnewpathologiesand
o
D excesses, as we see in our postmodern society where individual truths are hon-
oredandrespected,minorityrightsareprotected,andsoon,butitsweaknesscan
beseenintheindividualisticmanifestationsofnarcissism,theresistancetohier-
archies, the over-romanticizing of premodern societies, and political impotence.
Additionally,onehastoguardagainstinappropriatevaluejudgmentsofonestage
over another, which could lead to alarming conclusions about cultural or racial
superiority.Gebserhimselfdidnotconsideranystructureofconsciousnesssupe-
riortoanyother.
INTEGRALTHEORY
No discussion of the field of Integral Theory can be complete without a nod to
Ken Wilber (2000), one of the most influential contemporary philosophers. He
hasattemptedwhatessentiallyamountstoatheoryofeverything,aneffortto
ISANEWCONSCIOUSNESSEMERGING? 433
…trytocreateavocabularyforamoreconstructivephilosophy.Beyondplural-
isticrelativismisuniversalintegralism. …Isoughtanintegralphilosophy,one
thatwouldbelievablyweavetogetherthemanypluralisticcontextsofscience,
morals,aesthetics,EasternaswellasWesternphilosophyandtheworld’sgreat
wisdomtraditions.Notonthelevelofdetails–thatisfinitelyimpossible;buton
theleveloforientinggeneralizations:awaytosuggestthattheworldreallyis
one,undivided,whole,andrelatedtoitselfineveryway…(p.xii)
He has drawn on the ideas and philosophies of many integral and evolution-
ary thinkers, and painstakingly mapped hundreds of developmental and knowl-
edgesystemsintoaunifiedepistemology.Accordingtohim,everyphenomenon,
event or idea can be mapped to an integral epistemological model that posits
7 that all knowledge falls into one of four quadrants, each of which represents a
1
0 perspective—theindividualinterior(the“I”orsubjectiveperspective),thecollec-
2
r tiveinterior(the“we”orinter-subjectiveperspective),theindividualexterior(the
e
ob “it”orexteriorbodilyperspective)andthecollectiveexterior(the“its”orexterior
ct systemsperspective).
O
7 Asanexample,wecansaythatIhaveanindividualinteriorexperience,such
2
5 as my thoughts and feelings; I also have an interior collective perspective, such
3
6: as the cultural beliefs and values that I share with others that contextualize that
at 0 experience;and,Ihaveanexteriorindividualdimension,suchasmybrain,body,
] andphysiology;finallyIalsohaveanexteriorcollectiveperspective,suchasthe
0
4 economic,social,andpoliticalsystemsthatIparticipatein.
5.
2 AccordingtoWilber,notonlydoesthisepistemologycoverallpossiblekinds
2
8. ofknowledge,butalsothatevolutionhappenswithineachofthefourquadrants.
4
2 Asanexample,asthehumanbraindeveloped,correspondingdevelopmentscan
9.
4 bemappedtotheinteriordevelopmentofconsciousnessaswellasdevelopments
[
y inculturalorganizationandvalues,andofcoursepolitical,economicandtrading
b
d systems. It’s less certain if one can say that any one of the quadrants leads the
e
d evolutionary thrust, but what does seem appropriate is to view this model as a
a
o “webofconnection,amatrixofinterconnectedstructures”(Phipps,2012,p.241),
nl
w whereaneventinanyonequadrantresonates,shiftingthewholedynamicmatrix.
o
D Wilberalsocollapsestheright-handquadrantsofItandItstoasinglequadrant,
resultinginwhathecallstheBig3:inadditiontotheperspectivesofI,We,and
It/s,heoverlaysthethree-nessoftheperspectivesofConsciousness,Culture,and
Nature,aswellastheBeautiful,theGood,andtheTrue(Wilber,2011,p.180).
Wilber’sintegralevolutionarymodelisperhapsthemostcomprehensiveexam-
ple of the emerging integral perspective, signaling a paradigm shift in that it
embracestheunityandinterdependenceofallthingsthatisnotjustthetranscen-
dentunityofsometraditionalperspectives,butaveryrealandall-encompassing
integral unity of everything, accommodating the discoveries of the modern sci-
ences and humanities. As more and more people travel down this path of unity,
the integral stage of evolution is saidtostarttaking shape. The initialoutline of
the structures of any stage are at first thread-like with the barest of shapes. As
the paths are more traveled they start to become better formed and more evi-
dent within the culture, like a dirt road that starts out smooth and featureless
434 NIKOSYIANGOU
but over time becomes rutted with use and more easily recognizable as a path
orroadway.Wilbersaysthisdoesnotprecludethegreatearlierpioneersandreal-
izedbeingsofearlierhistoricalperiodsfromexploringandrealizingthesehigher
potentials,butthattheseintegralevolutionarystructuresareasyetlightlyformed.
Wilber (2012) refers to our current time as the “frothy, chaotic, wildly creative
leading-edge of consciousness unfolding and evolution, still rough and ready in
itsnewlysettlingcontours,stillfarfromsettledhabit”(p.23).Fullyrealizingthe
potentialoftheeradependsonmorehumanstravelingthepathuntilitbecomes
establishedasstructure.
This highlights an important point that what we do individually and collec-
tivelytrulymatters.Wearenotindividualsresidinginastaticpre-createduniverse;
insteadweareactuallyparticipantscontributingtotheprocessofevolution.Not
7 onlyarewecreatedbeingsbutalsoco-creators.Thusthereisamoraldimension
1
0 tothenewlyemergingconsciousness,whatWilbercallsan“evolutionaryimper-
2
r ative,” as humanity awakens to the new dimensions of the truths of our internal
e
ob andexternaluniverse.Weareinescapablytiedtotheeraastheinnerworldofpsy-
ct che and consciousness develops and transformsinconcert withthelarger world
O
7 ofculturalinfluencesandevolvingworldviews.
2
5 Whilearguingforapostmodernre-interpretationofwisdomspirituality,Wilber
3
6: neverthelessholdsthatkeyprinciplesofthenondualwisdomtraditionsholdtrue;
at 0 beforeevolutioncanoccur,involutionortheemanationofSpirit,mustoccur.The
] higherlevelsappeartoemergeoutofthelowerduringevolution—orderappears
0
4 toemergeoutofchaos,lifeappearstoemergeoutofbasematter—becausethey
5.
2 were already deposited there by involution. The higher order has to be already
2
8. thereinpotentialforittoemerge(Wilber,2011,p.216).
4
2
9.
4
[
y
b EVOLUTIONARYPANENTHEISM
d
e
d MichaelMurphy,theiconicfounderoftheEsalenInstituteandanastutecontem-
a
o poraryobserverandcommentatoronculturaltrends,alsosuggeststhattheseideas
nl
w inevolutionarythinkingconstituteanewworldview,afreshwayoflookingatthe
o
D currenthumanconditionandthetrajectoryofourpotentialgrowthintothefuture.
With the advent of the theory of evolution he contends that many philosophers
began toreframetheir mostfundamental questions regarding therelationshipof
ourevolvingworldtoGod,totheroleofhumankindintheadvanceoftheworld,
andwhetherhumannatureitselfcouldevolveandifsotowhatend.Murphypoints
totheGermanidealistssuchasFichteandSchellingwhopositedthatthedivin-
ity,whileremainingtranscendenttoitscreation,emanatedorprojecteditselfinto
the world and that the process of evolution is itself the process or manner for
theunfoldingofthehiddendivinity.Evolutionfollowsinvolution—involutionas
thedescentofthedivineintotheworldfromtranscendencethroughthelayersof
existencetotheworldofmatter,andevolutionasthemeanderingyetseemingly
inexorableemergenceofnewformsofexistencefrombasemattertoourcurrent
humanspecies,andintothefuturetotheformsthatareyettobeevolved.Thisidea
hecallsevolutionarypanentheism(Murphy,2013).Wenotethatpanentheismis
ISANEWCONSCIOUSNESSEMERGING? 435
the doctrine that the divine is both immanent and transcendent to the universe,
unlikepantheism,whichstatesthatnatureisidenticalwithGod.
Murphypositsthatonereasonwhytheideaofevolutionarypanentheismhas
attractedmanypeoplefromdifferentbackgroundsandtemperamentsisthatitis
based on just two fundamental principles—first, the fact of evolution and sec-
ond,thattheuniversearisesfromatranscendentprinciplebeitcalledGod,Allah,
Brahman,Tao,orwhatevernameisgiventoit.Giventhewiderangeofexpres-
sionsthatmanycontemporarywritersandthinkershavegiventothismovement,
Murphy suggests that it may be more accurate to call evolutionary panentheism
anemergentworldvieworvisionratherthanaphilosophyperse.
Withthewiderangeofspirituallytransformativepracticesthathaveenteredthe
culturalmainstreaminthelast50yearsorsoandtheirpropensitytochallengeand
7 stretchtheboundariesoflimitingbeliefsanddogmas,Murphybelievesthatthis
1
0 shiftinconsciousnesscallsforaworldvieworconceptualframeworktoconnect
2
r thediversityandcomplexitythatthisexpansionreveals,andwhichmorereadily
e
ob embraces adramatic vision of the future potential of a world and of humankind
ct thatisentirelyunprecedented.
O
7
2
5
3 THEANTHROPOCENTRICQUESTION
6:
at 0 Thisshortsummaryofthesenewconceptualframeworksrevealssomepowerful
] toolsforunderstandingwherewehavebeen,wherewearenow,andhowwegot
0
4 here.Thegreatquestionsoflifearebeingre-framed,includingtheparticularsig-
5.
2 nificanceoftheemergenceofhumankind.
2
8. Placing humankind at the center of evolutionary theory makes some thinkers
4
2 uncomfortable,notwantingtoprivilegeananthropocentricperspectiveinapro-
9.
4 cess that, while purposeful in its emergence, in the minds of some may or may
[
y not assume a directionality or orchestration of evolution towards an emergence
b
d ofHumankind.Intheareaofdeepecology,forexample,humanbeingsareseen
e
d asthescourgeoftheplanet,whichwouldbefarbetteroffwithoutthem.Richard
a
o Dawkinshimselfconcedesdirectionalityintheevolutionaryprocess,butnotatthe
nl
w expenseofmakinganyassumptionsaboutahumanendproduct(Dawkins,2005).
o
D Equally,manyevolutionarythinkersfeelthesamewayabouttheideaofGod:
what need is there for the traditional notion of a creator God in an evolutionary
context?Orindeed,canonesimplysayassomeneo-AtheistssuchasSamHarris
do, that since science has now displaced religion we can dispense with ideas of
transcendencesincesurelyconsciousnesssimplyemergesorevolvesfrommatter
asanattributeofmind,withoutneedingtoascribeanydivinepurposeordesign
toitsemergence(Harris,2015)?
Atsomepointinourevolution,therewasahugeleapforwardinconsciousness
and the interior universe of the self-reflective human mind was born. This step
forward has been likened to the third big bang—the first being the birth of the
cosmos,thesecondbeingtheexplosionoflifeonourplanetbillionsofyearslater.
Theemergenceofhumanautonomyandagencyinthisthirdbigbangbecamethe
hallmarkofthebiologicallifeformcalledMan,andincreasinglythisemergence
transitioned from being the consequence of an evolutionary process determined