Historical Evolution of the Concept of Space

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search

= "The work of conquering and colonizing the planet is over. The work of caring and nurturing must begin in earnest". [1]


Discussion

Jennifer Gidley on Cosmic Kinship, A Micro-Macro View of Space:

Introduction — Interrogating the Space of Space

- "Our planet requires polycentric thought that can aim at a universalism that is not abstract but conscious of the unity/diversity of the human condition; a polycentric thought nourished by the cultures of the world." (Morin, 2001a, p. 52)

"As far as we know, or can determine at this point in our global knowledge capabilities, the earth is the only-born child of her kind in the cosmos. In spite of our common biological ancestry with other mammals, we humans appear to be the most biologically suitable species to play an active role in earth’s nurturing care. Yet the imbalance that has arisen from the over-extension of the egoistic aspects of mental-rational consciousness has led to the polar opposite of care for our only planetary home. The imminent possibility of a major planetary catastrophe, and a climate increasingly inhospitable for human habitation—already correlated with mass extinction of species—demands an urgent reframing of human relationships with nature and the cosmos. The insights that have arisen from the narratives of Steiner, Gebser and Wilber may throw new light on concepts of cosmos and space—aligned as they are to Morin’s notion of polycentric thought. Gebser (1949/1985) claimed that as the mental-rational mode of thinking took hold, particularly in Europe, it facilitated a new spatial awareness that gradually turned into an overemphasis on space and spatiality that increased with every century since 1500 (p. 22). This led to the victories and horrors of the Age of Discovery — which as Edgar Morin indicates was the beginning of the Planetary Age. In the last few decades—once the geographic exploration of the earth was exhausted—this developed into a new obsession with scientific explorations in outer space. My interest in this brief appendix is to interrogate some of the taken-for-granted assumptions of modernist notions of space. Such an interrogation is already underway in several contemporary discourses, such as postmodern philosophy (Benko & Strohmayer, 1997; Foucault,1986); feminist geography (Aiken, Brigham, Marston, & Waterhouse, 1988; Ainley & Ainley,1998); queer theory (Brown, 2000; Cruz-Malave & Manalansan, 2002); postcolonial perspectives of cultural theory (Cruz-Malave & Manalansan, 2002; Mathani, 2001); and emergent integral explorations of liminal conceptual space (Hampson, 2007). These reformulations of space focus primarily on the opening up of cultural and social space, and thus also conceptual/noospheric space. I am particularly interested in pointing to how the modernist worldview based on scientific materialism has colonized the noosphere with respect to our concepts of planetary space and outer space—by way of its physicalist metaphors drawn from classical physics.

I propose that a new look at relevant concepts from a postformal, integral-planetary lens could re-introduce other notions such as inner space to complement outer space, cosmosophy to complement cosmology, soul/spiritual space to complement physical space, and planetization to complement globalization. These other components of space have become marginalized by the one-sided emphasis of scientism. I have drawn quite strongly here on the pioneering spiritual evolutionary theories of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (Teilhard de Chardin, 1959/2002,1959/2004) and the ecological philosophy of Edgar Morin (Morin, 2001a, 2005a; Morin & Kern,1999). They have both contributed enormously to a spiritual reconfiguration of humanity’s place—and responsibility—in nature and cosmos. Additional literature is incorporated where relevant. This appendix is a work in progress. It is not conclusive, but rather points to some new areas for integral research and to some additional resources that also point to a renewal of spatial metaphors.


The Hermetic Science of Unitive Space — As Above so Below

That which is Below corresponds to that which is Above, and that which is Above, corresponds to that which is Below, to accomplish the miracles of the One Thing. Up to and including the mythic structure of consciousness, according to Gebser (1949/1985), humans lived within an undifferentiated sense of space, “as a simple inherence within the security of the maternal womb” (p. 10). Oases appeared and disappeared; river valleys flooded and baked; and rambling farming settlements began to evolve into cities, along the Nile, Tigris-Euphrates, Indus and Huang He valleys. In the civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia, with their clear desert skies, and their pictorial imaginations, the people felt a special relationship with the sparkling stars in the celestial dome overhead. The Egyptian astronomer-priests directed the placement of buildings according to astronomical orientations, while the pyramidal buildings of these times reached up to the sky. The Hermetic sciences were profoundly unitive sciences based on a perceived intimate relationship between the macrocosm and the microcosm. Yet this ancient wisdom was held within a mythic consciousness. The Hermetic notion of the sacredness of the relationship between human, earth and cosmos—including the mathematico-geometric proportions therein — continued to inspire human aspirations for thousands of years. It is most notably articulated in sacred geometry (Lawlor,1982) as expressed in temple, mosque and cathedral architecture, which seeks to mediate the rift between the human on earth and the divinity of the cosmos. This Hermetic integration of science, art and spirit continued to inspire leading-edge scientific thinkers such as Kepler and Sir Isaac Newton during the transition to modern science—and this realization is leading to some dramatically new ideas on their other marginalized writings (Watson, 2005). Gradually the mental-rational consciousness became more established in Europe through the Copernican revolution in cosmology; Cartesian dualism in thinking; the Kantian barrier between our interpretive thoughts and the thing in itself (Tarnas, 1991); and a materialistic form of scientific empiricism. Synchronously, the Hermetic-scientific sense of an ensouled cosmos — or anima mundi — slipped slowly out of sight.


The Materialistic Rationalization and Colonization of Space : The Emergence of Planetary Space in the 15th Century

In 1492, these small, young nations [Spain, Portugal, Britain] set out to conquer the globe, and their adventures of war and death brought the five continents into communication and opened the planetary era, for better or for worse. (Morin, 2001a, p. 53)The mythic sense of interwovenness between earth and cosmos—and between inner soulspace and external physical space—continued in Europe until the 14th century. This is difficult for us to imagine today with our taken-for-granted understanding of the physical territory of the earth—gained through the discipline of geography; and our exponentially expanding notions of the extent of the cosmological universe—as taught to us by the sciences of astronomy and physical cosmology. Gebser points to the exact moment in global history—in the early 14th century—when someone saw, for the first time, the physical landscape of the earth, from an objective mental perspective, rather than a dream-like inner-soul response. In the same way that medieval humans were afraid to sail too far out from shore so as not to fall off the flat earth, humans were also, collectively—according to Gebser—afraid to climb mountains, which we believed were the homes of the Gods. In 1336, Petrarch climbed Mount Ventoux, near Avignon in the French Alps, breaking a cultural taboo, and reaching into the wonder of the new world of the explorers. For Gebser (1949/1985) this represented a fundamental shift into spatial awareness, not just for Petrarch but also for humanity. For his time, his description is an epochal event and signifies no less than the discovery of landscape: the first dawning of an awareness of space that resulted in a fundamental alteration of European . . . attitude in and toward the world. (p. 12) Gebser emphasized his point by quoting the final words of Petrarch’s letter of confession about his discoveries. Petrarch stated: “So much perspiration and effort just to bring the body a little closer to heaven; the soul, when approaching God, must be similarly terrified” (p. 14). This reflects the spiritual reverence that was embedded in this discovery that marked a turning point in European consciousness about the land. Less than a century later, throughout the 15th century, the Portuguese and Spanish explorers set sail to find new lands, marking the beginnings of the physical expression of what Morin refers to as the planetary era. Morin’s view is coherent with Steiner’s and Gebser’s claims that the new consciousness began to emerge in the 15th century. This new Age of Discovery laid the first physical foundations for what we now see arising in the noosphere as postformal-integral-planetary consciousness.


Socio-cultural Space—Colonization > Globalization > Planetization

Human history began with a planetary diaspora across all the continents and in modern times entered the planetary era of communication between fragments of the human diaspora. (Morin, 2001a, p. 53) Colonization first arose on a grand, planetary, and destructive, scale from the 16th century, asa result of the European expansion into the new world . Indigenous cultures around the planet have been—and are still being—devastated, particularly in the three Americas (north, central and south), Australia, China and many parts of South-east Asia. Colonization—and its associated ideology—colonialism, resulted in “irremediable catastrophic cultural destruction and terrible enslavement” (Morin, 2001a, p. 53). A UNESCO research project on this issue currently describes the situation as follows. The cultures of indigenous peoples are in danger of dying out . . . These populations number some 350 million individuals in more than 70 countries in the world and represent more than 5000 languages and cultures. Today many of them live on the fringes of society and are deprived of basic human rights, particularly cultural rights.

Globalization is arguably a complex politico-economic and socio-cultural phenomenon, yet its primary expression is through a politico-economic movement of large multinational corporations purportedly contributing to a trickle-down effect in global wealth distribution while competing for market share (Deardorff, 2002). There is a secondary transmission of cultural values, which is highly contested. From the perspective of many postcolonial scholars it is a weapon of mass destruction of cultural identity and diversity—and has been referred to as the McDonaldization of the world (Alfino, Caputo, & Wynyard, 1998; Gidley, 2001d; M. Jain & S.Jain, 2003). Furthermore, the enthusiasm and idealism that pervaded the early geographical exploration of the earth’s surface, seems to have deteriorated over centuries to a stale, disenchanted attitude to the as-yet-untamed parts of the earth. Not only are the remaining forests and oceans considered to be simply material resources for the wealthy and powerful to use and abuse, but the endangered and disappearing cultures are, at worst, a cheap resource to exploit in the name of economic progress or, at best, a cultural artifact to exploit for tourism purposes(Hunter, 2006).By contrast, planetization, as conceived by Teilhard de Chardin—and others inspired by his work—may provide a counterbalance to the hegemonic excesses of globalization. The notion of planetization involves not domination but awareness and respect for the richness of cultural diversity. Teilhard de Chardin (1959/2002) refers to planetization as a mega-synthesis through which “the outcome of the world, the gates of the future . . . will only open to an advance of all together , in a direction in which all together can join and find completion in a spiritual renovation of the earth” (pp. 243-245). He emphasized that this cannot by achieved merely by the pressure of external forces—such as totalizing governments—but needs to unfold from within human hearts “directly, centre to centre, through internal attraction . . . through unanimity in a common spirit” (p. 112). He identified several postformal features in the planetization process—increasing complexity; the reflexion of the Noosphere upon itself; the closing of the spherical, thinking circuit ; and the rebounding of evolution upon itself—a type of complex recursion.


Cosmic Space: Tellurianization of the Kosmos in the 20th Century

The overemphasis on space and spatiality that increases with every century since 1500 is at once the greatness as well as the weakness of perspectival man. (Gebser, 1949/1985, p. 22)After five centuries of exploration and colonization of the planet, the ego-drive to conquer space eventually led to such advanced technology that we began to extend our reach, beyond our home planet into outer space. Interestingly, the early space explorations were attended by a similar sense of reverence for the divine, to that felt by Petrarch, over 600 years earlier. Edgar Mitchell one of the astronauts on Apollo 14—the third mission to land on the moon — had the following experience on his voyage home. The following text is an extract from The Noetic Sciences Institute website. Sitting in the cramped cabin of the space capsule, he saw planet Earth floating freely in the vastness of space. He was engulfed by a profound sense of universal connectedness — an epiphany. In Mitchell's own words: "The presence of divinity became almost palpable, and I knew that life in the universe was not just an accident based on random processes. . . .The knowledge came to me directly." It seems that each new development has begun with reverence and humility, but later is taken over by greed for ego-accomplishment. As part of this colonization of outer space, we have imposed materialistic-earthly-metaphors from classical physics on the cosmos—which previously was regarded as the source of the Divine. While quantum physics has shaken the foundations of scientific theories at the micro level, the full implications of it for theories at the macro level are yet to be adequately explored. Perhaps we could ask ourselves: Is it really appropriate to be spending such massive resources on trying to ascertain whether there is life on Mars, at the very time in planetary history when the human species is at the tipping point of destroying life on Earth? A critical approach to economic theory including global wealth distribution is also required (Eisler, 2007). It is imperative in our current planetary crisis, that we de-familiarize this privileging of outer space, particularly when it is so out of balance with our sense of inner space (Kelly, 2007). This obsession with conquering and colonizing outer space is an eloquent expression of an overextension of the ego-mental faculties. For the duration of two millennia these thinking powers have tamed and transformed the earth through architecture, road, sea and air infrastructure, and technology. Arguably, these processes of development can be justified as long as they are sustainable, but this is no longer the case. The work of conquering and colonizing the planet is over. The work of caring and nurturing must begin in earnest."

(https://www.academia.edu/197841/The_Evolution_of_Consciousness_as_a_Planetary_Imperative_An_Integration_of_Integral_Views)


More information