|
|
|
The Eonic Effect
We make assumptions
about random evolution in deep time, but world history itself shows a remarkable
pattern of non-random 'evolution'. The explosive growth of
archaeological knowledge beginning in the nineteenth century rivals that of the
discovery of the fossil record in deep time, and has led to a series of
remarkable discoveries. The first is a mysterious drumbeat rhythm of
development, the way in which world history shows a very simple overall
structure of turning points or transitions at equally spaced intervals. The
second related to the first is that of the so-called Axial Age, the synchronous
effect of classical antiquity.
- Synchronous Emergence The Axial Age shows a
sudden, and brief, interval of creative renewal and innovation all across
Eurasia in a spectrum of civilizations. This period contains the clue to the
Old Testament, is especially clear in the case of Archaic/Classical Greece,
and operates via all categories of culture, art, religion, philosophy and
science. This is strong evidence of a global process at work, since all the
independent sourcing points could not be due to antecedent causal factors.
Looking at this Axial
phenomenon we are forced to consider that it is really a step in a sequence, and
moving backwards and forwards we suddenly discover the full pattern.
- Three turning
points or transitions The birth of civilization, the Axial interval and
the rise of the modern world suddenly fall into place as connected
phenomenon, the eonic effect. We can see that this pattern probably extends
into the Neolithic, but we will take only the fragment that we can document.
This pattern is almost
visible to the naked eye, but stands out if we apply careful periodization. Why
do we speak of the 'rise of the modern', the 'Middle Ages', the 'Age of
Revelation', the 'Greek Miracle'? We instinctively take into account this 'eonic
effect', a combined set of key turning points, with intervals between them of a
different character. Our sense of history is based on the onset of the great
classical traditions, but now the picture is expanding, leaving these
'beginnings' in the middle of the emergence of world civilization. These relative
beginnings hold the key. Our perspective is broadening, and we suspect
frequency phenomenon at work. The result is a picture of intermittent stages, a
drumbeat effect. We have stumbled on a paradox of high and low levels to world
history. But this paradox shows precisely the long missing macro factor. Once
detected our views of evolution must change, but the mere existence of such a
pattern forces a reality check. The pattern we have found can be described at a
high level very simply, but is also so complex that we must zoom in repeatedly
and at different areas. We will describe the basic properties of the eonic
pattern in a simple model, and then connect it with the idea of evolution, then
with the philosophy of history.
- Enigma of the
Axial Age There are two ways to look at the eonic
effect. We can look at a series in time, or at the Axial Age as an isolated
phenomenon in itself, showing synchronous parallelism. The idea of the Axial Age was proposed by Karl Jaspers and
summarizes a growing body of observations starting in the nineteenth century.
Like a flash of
lightening a period of creative advance occurs independently in five separate
civilizations. We are confronted with
something very remarkable, the global character of cultural evolution, and its
ability to transcend individual civilizations in brief intervals of rapid
change. The scale of the phenomenon, with its synchronous timing, and direct
action on the totality of culture. is almost mindboggling. The sudden
waning of this period is almost as remarkable.
- An Unexpected
Challenge to Darwinism We have stumbled on
something very remarkable hiding behind the obvious facts of world history. It
is unsettling. The one record of closely tracked data that we have shows
non-random patterning. The
only name we can give to this phenomenon is the word 'evolution', a 'rolling
out' in the emergence of civilization. There is a hidden factor of intermittent
driving evolution behind the surface of world history, It is strange to use the
term 'evolution' in this way, and we need to clarify its usage, which is
actually a better one than the purely genetic. What is the meaning of
'evolution' We are confronted with hard evidence of what real evolution is
like: an unmistakable yet unseen macro process can remorph whole cultures
in isolated hotspots in short bursts over a period of about three
centuries.
- Evolution,
religion, morality Darwinian explanations are clearly contradicted by
the Axial data: we see two religions appear in concert, along with much
else. The idea of religion as some form of adaptation in a scenario of
natural selection is superfluous. No use searching for
the 'gene' for religion, if we see a macro factor involved in the emergence
of religions. This phenomenon is by no mean simple, and, if anything, the
'evolution' of religion requires us to stand back with a secular viewpoint
of some kind to assess the macro factor involved in emergent religion.
- Purposive Evolution? Our evidence gives us grounds
for reopening the issue of purposive evolution. We must however be careful
not to make claims about universal eras. We see strong evidence of
directionality in the eonic pattern. We can use this kind of directionality
to explore teleological questions, being careful not to make hard claims
beyond our pattern Also, as with the Oedipus effect, issues of teleology
tend to become incoherent as they generalize from the past, to the future of
the observer's present.
- The need for a model This data is a golden
opportunity to construct a special type of model, a so-called discrete
continuous model. This model will use the idea of eonic sequence (frequency
hypothesis), eonic transition (relative transforms, stream and
sequence), sequential dependency (diffusion, oikoumene generation),
synchrony, and a crucial distinction of system and individual called 'eonic
determination and free action'.
The Great Explosion
All at once we are
confronted with the strange fact that what we are seeing in the eonic effect
must apply somehow to earlier stages in the descent of man. And in fact we are
suspicious of the so-called Great Explosion, the period at the emergence of homo
sapiens ca. 50000 showing a sudden crossing of a threshold producing man as man. We
won't speculate here, but we won't take for granted Darwinian assumptions. We
can see that something far more complex than natural selection is involved in
history, what then of earlier evolution.
- A photo finish
argument Darwinian thinking flunks a photo finish test. We can't deal
with the eonic effect in one way for world history, and adopt a separate
theory for the descent of man. The two must jibe.
The eonic effect shows us something totally unexpected: a high-speed
evolutionary process that can act over a whole continent, induce creative
renewal in short bursts on the order of centuries, and operate at the highest
level of culture.
Observing
Evolution
The
defense of Darwinism by its proponents can be overwhelming for a non-expert. But
there is an easy way to draw the bottom line to the discussion: theories of
evolution are never the result of proper scientific observation. Thus a
violation of correct methodology haunts the first step.
It is
unsettling therefore that the one exception is the record of world history since the invention
of writing. This is the only closely tracked record of history/evolution that we
have, at the level of centuries. The phenomenon of the Axial Age, which we will
explore, shows us an example of something operating at short range, at the level
of centuries.
The
problem here is the sheer immensity of observational data required to show the
actual sequence of Mechanism X producing Phenomenon Y. Imagine a cinematic
record of species formation, specific as to the where and when over thousands of
years! A rigorous science of evolution based on scientific observation is
difficult to come by. We retreat to inference, and the probability is there that
we might miss the way evolution actually occurs. This difficulty of observation
forces us to project speculations on unseen times and places. In Darwin's
formulation a kind of 'law of evolution' takes form as a theory about random
mutation and natural selection. But it is highly doubtful if this is sufficient
as a theory of evolution. Darwin really formulated a theory about
microevolution. Some missing macro factor has always been suspected, but this is
difficult to discover. We can detect its existence indirectly by looking at
history.
-
Detecting
evolution: The hurricane argument: Consider a hurricane, ultra-simple
by comparison with long range evolution, as a global 'system evolution' on
the surface of a planet. We know a hurricane when we see one, but its
dynamics, mechanism, and full progression require incremental 'closing' on
degrees of evidence and observation, a task not fully accomplished until the
advent of satellites able to map global coordinates. In the same way we know
evolution when we see it, roughly speaking given the fossil evidence, but
its dynamics, mechanism and full progression require incremental 'closing'
on degrees of evidence and observation, a task not indeed fully
accomplished, not at all!! Note the analogy suggests global positioning
satellites over the entire planet over millions of years, to observe
drifting species and their changes!
-
Historical
verification Note the standard adopted by historians: All events require
continuous chronicles to determine what happened! The point is obvious. Historians thus find it
difficult to generalize about historical forces because they see the
complexity directly. This requirement is ignored by Darwinists when they
speak of evolution. The science of evolution is claimed with little
evidence, while a science of history falls by the wayside due to the
inability to apply 'laws of history' to its data. We can resolve (but not
solve!) the key issues in the classic philosophy of history.
- Beyond natural
selection We can invoke the many critiques of natural selection,
but already we see a new set of objections to the claims for this process.
History is obviously following a different set of processes. We see evidence in the eonic effect contradicting
selectionist explanations. We see processes that defy the logic of
continuity and proceed along a developmental mainline.
We will continue to pursue the way in which natural selection influences
historical theory, and will 'deconstruct flat history' with a set of
critiques of conflict theories, the economic interpretation of history,
dialectic, and much else.
History and Evolution: The Great Transition
We need to make formal the relationship of history and evolution. That is
easily done by constructing an 'evolution of freedom' argument based on the
question, When does evolution stop and history begin? We can see from this
artificial question that it must be a matter of degrees, and occur perhaps in a
series of transitions bridging the two. And that is what we see in history. We
can define our own form of evolution as 'eonic evolution'.
-
From
evolution to history We can make the evidence of the type seen in the
eonic effect
explicit grounds for defining both the unity of and a
distinction between evolution and history. We could call history the
record of free activity rising in the wake of the passive evolution of
volition. At what point has relative free action
emerged for man to create culture as a free agent? This
definition includes the possibility that this has not yet occurred.
-
The
‘eonic evolution’ of civilization We can call the evidence of our
three turning points the ‘eonic’ or intermittent evolution of
civilization, as some form of ‘macroevolution’ turning into history.
Then we can keep rough track of the two levels of history we detect in the
eonic effect
. This will create a puzzle of two distinct forms of action, one inside the
eonic pattern, one outside. We will say that system action shows ‘eonic
determination’ while behavior outside of it is simply ‘free action’.
-
The
Great Transition Armed with
these distinctions we can call the passage from evolution to history The
Great Transition
, with a possible echo (or not) of The Great Explosion.
However, we are immersed in this transition, and may or may not have reached
the end of its clearly intermittent action, seen as a series of individual transitions.
We are confronted with the classic theme of so-called 'historicism' as
defined by Popper where predictive laws of history are the focus for accounts of
universal history. We must adopt Popper's critique, but at the same time we see
that the eonic effect shows the existence of a true process of universal
history, given empirically. We will approach it without the claim for historical
laws. Popper's critique is of 'Big History', but we have suddenly produced the
evidence for such. So, on the one hand we will accept Popper's critique of
historical laws, and on the other we will resume with new grounds for such the
claims for Big History.
- If we give up predictive historical laws, we need a new
type of model. Our look at the Oedipus Effect shows the way the observer's
present requires special handling. We can solve both these problems with a
new type of model.
- The basic issue is the relationship of a system and the
free action that makes it up. It is like an economy: we see free agents, but
their economies show structure, a dynamic of some kind.
- We need to distinguish 'free action' and 'free will'. We
can do that by looking at the intermediate state of 'self-consciousness'.
We have therefore an emerging model of the emergence of man in
a Great Transition, proceeding from passive evolution to active history, as an
evolution of freedom. We see the connection of world history to the earlier
stages of man's appearance even though we don't have the actual data for these
earlier periods. It is enough to caution automatic Darwinian assumptions.
- Resolving the contradiction: self-consciousness There
is an easy way to resolve the contradiction of freedom and necessity by
looking at the factor of 'self-consciousness'. We can invoke the factor
of 'will', if any, in the power of attention. Self-consciousness is defined
in terms of this power of attention, and clearly fluctuates. Much of the
driving 'force' of the eonic effect is this self-consciousness in
fluctuation. Thus we could speak of 'will' without claiming 'free will', but
it is more useful to call this 'sclf-consciousness'. We see a way in
which a system can show large-scale 'determination', determinism or not, yet
operate via human consciousness, whether that show 'free will' or not.
Man Makes Himself
To continue
the issues of freedom and necessity, the title of a famous work of Gordon Childe
can be turned into a question, Does Man Make Himself? We can see that there is a
concealed evolutionary driver behind the emergence of civilization.
We need to learn to
distinguish the simultaneous operation of a system and the free activity of
the individuals inside it. Consider an ocean liner and the relative free
action of the individuals inside it. The terms for this in the actual
study of history will be 'eonic determination' and 'free action'.
- Eonic determination and 'free action' The terms for
this in the book are 'eonic determination', the 'system action', and 'free
action', the relative degree of 'free' activity inside the structure shown
by the eonic system. Free action is not the same as free will.
- Economies and free action We make this distinction
all the time with economic systems. The economic free agent has options
inside the economy, but is at the same time subject to the dynamics of the
economy.
- Evolution, Freedom, Volition We have reached the
point of defining an 'evolution of freedom', and this is significant, with
or without proofs of 'free will', using the rubric of
'self-consciousness'.
Huxley and Social Darwinism
- Note: We have made use of the idea of the Oedipus
Effect, but its formal introduction into the development of the eonic model
is here.
One of the critics of Social Darwinism was, ironically, T. H.
Huxley himself who observed that we tend to contradict the effects of natural
selection in practice. We are 'evolving' by some other process, apparently. This
'evolution #2' is a problem for Darwin. But we have already found this
'evolution #2" in historical terms.
- Ideology and Theory: The Oedipus Effect All the
confusion arises from the way in which a theory of evolution tries to mimic
a law of physics as a universal generalization true at all times. As the
assumed effect of natural selection is brought into our present as an
unconscious influence on our action, we have paradox of the theorist
interacting with his own theory.
- A New Type of Theory We must devise a new type of
theory where the domain of theory is in the past, with a boundary between
past and future. The eonic model will provide this.
Theories and Action Scripts
As we examine the eonic effect, we see that something strange
has happened. The categories of theory and ideology are braided together, and
the 'outputs of the system' are these very social categories. Look at the Axial
Age. We see, for example, that philosophy and science show 'eonic
determination', and that makes us wonder what we mean by objectivity. Theories
themselves show historical dependency. Clearly standard theories won't
work.
We will speak of 'action scripts' as the outcomes of 'eonic
evolution'. That means that at each stage our evidence shows fully committed
projects of action appearing in concert with the evolutionary process being
examined. The rise of science is itself an 'action script' in this sense.
We need a way to mediate this ambiguity of 'theories' and
'scripts', and one way to do that is to look at the evolution of the idea of
freedom itself. We will see that 'freedom shows eonic determination' is a
definable statement, and we can hybridize our model with the philosophy of
history.
Art, Evolution, and the Tragic Genre
A subtheme of our discourse can be the history of the tragic
genre. We notice that Greek tragedy shows eonic determination, that it is in
essence a reflection of our 'evolution of freedom', and its place inside the
eonic pattern is remarkable indeed. We see that our 'evolution of some kind'
does art, and art at the highest level.
|
|
