Cosmic Evolutionary Philosophy
Definition
Cadell Last:
"Cosmic evolutionary philosophy is a useful worldview for grounding an understanding of the potential nature of this futures event. In the cosmic evolutionary philosophy, reality is conceptualized locally as a universal dynamic of emergent evolving relations. This universal dynamic is structured by a singular astrophysical origin and an organizational progress from sub-atomic particles to global civilization mediated by qualitative phase transitions. ... The cosmic evolutionary worldview attempts to build a philosophy that can approach an integrated holistic view of totality as opposed to the fragmented reductionist view. Thus, in contrast to the approaches of reduction and fragmentation the cosmic evolutionary approach focuses on a holistic integration of all phenomenon as unified in which totality is analyzed from the beginning of known processual dynamics to the present moment. ... In this evolutionary philosophy human beings (and life and mind in general) can be meaningfully situated within the totality of cosmic processes of a multi-level hierarchal interaction, as opposed to being de-centered by multiple perspectival shifts (i.e., Copernicus, Darwin, Freud) internal to reductionist and fragmented science. ... In the cosmic evolutionary worldview the astrophysical singularity origin of the universe which gave rise to matter-energy and spacetime is not only an event that can be framed and resolved by quantum cosmology [57], but also an event that can and may need to be connected historically through dynamic processes of change that are giving rise to an emergent global civilization in the 21st Century. ... These processes of change can be conceptualized in terms of a chain of rising complexity that generates qualitatively novel regimes of emergent order. This is perhaps a more productive way to understand totality as opposed to classical conceptualization between different epistemological fields of study; or even between different ontologies of nature-culture, materialism-idealism. These regimes of emergent order can in turn be studied structurally from the simple origin of fundamental sub-atomic particles mediated by the forces of nature to the modern world of complex cognitive and social interactions mediated by the forces of ideation. The logical next step would be to understand the nature of the rise of complexity and its ontological ordering consequences in relation to contemporary civilizational dynamics."
(https://www.mdpi.com/2078-2489/9/4/78)
Discussion
C.E.P. and Complexity
Cadell Last:
"Complexity refers to phenomena that are fundamentally interconnected, enmeshed, and/or entangled in organizational networks of cause and effect [60]. The level of complex phenomena can be measured systematically by identifying the nature of the distinctions (meaningful differences) and connections (linked nodes) that define the organization from the lowest levels of physical order (strings, quarks, neutrinos, etc.) to the highest levels of social ideational order (languages, cities, cultures, etc.) Here we can say that a distinction introduces a division into being, whereas a connection introduces a unity into being. Thus, the analytical use of complexity in the cosmic evolutionary worldview allows for the situation of a clear and unified narrative frame of relational phenomena on all scales or levels from the sub-atomic to the social. Consequently, general theorists can use this frame to identify an increase or decrease in complexity when there is a change in the nature of the differentiated distinctions (divisions) and integrated connections (unities) that produce and characterize the qualities and intensities of the systemic organization.
...
The power of cosmic evolution to produce emergent qualities and intensities through connections (unities) and distinctions (divisions) is perhaps its most paradigmatic aspect. The general trend in this complexity increase reveals a distinct arrow of time (from past to future via the present). This arrow is revealed because the mechanisms utilized by emergent phenomena to order itself are irreversible (future directed, from past to present). We may say that the temporal asymmetry of emergent phenomena is one of if not the most important distinctions between cosmic evolutionary philosophy and reductionist physical philosophy which presupposes the existence of temporally reversible eternal laws. Consequently, the arrow of time can be described as an irreversible work driven by energy flows of particular dense and ordered configurations of material phenomena. These complex ordering phenomena are capable of overcoming the probabilistic statistical tendency of the universe towards greater levels of disorder or randomness .
In other words, because there are more ways for phenomena to be disordered than ordered (probabilistically), in the absence of local work energy directed towards more ordered states, phenomena will tend towards maximal disorder. Thus when we look out at the history of an interconnected hierarchical universe and see galaxies, life, and mind in ordered configurations (instead of random organizations), we are looking at emergent patterns that evolved due to inherent internal tendencies to maintain order against a background that tends to void.
This is true whether order manifests itself
- via the attractive force of physical gravitation which builds the reality of solar systems,
- the attractive force of biological fitness which builds the reality of ecosystems, or
- the attractive force of ideational desire which builds the reality of historical symbolic-systems.
When contemplating the reality of physical solar systems, biological ecosystems, or historical symbolic systems we can thus think of all as part of the same cosmic evolutionary ordering force.
...
The central remarkable aspect of the rise of complexity throughout cosmic evolution is that far-from-equilibrium organizational manifestations (i.e., changing order) tend to preserve themselves against the tendency to thermal-energetic equilibrium (i.e., maximal disorder). These organizational manifestations appear to achieve this feat through the evolution of increasingly sophisticated mechanisms of processing information which enable higher possibility spaces for actual development. In this sense we could conceptualize the arrow of time as concentrating itself multi-locally throughout the universe."
(https://www.mdpi.com/2078-2489/9/4/78)
Thermodynamic vs Teleodynamic View of the Evolution of the Universe
Cadell Last:
"The Thermodynamics view of the cosmos: from primordial order to final disorder:
The thermodynamics view of the cosmos gives the picture of a universe with particular low-entropy, highly ordered or supersymmetrical initial state of being (non-random motion). This initial state drifts towards higher-entropy, global disorder (random motion) over time via symmetry breaking events (divisions) and feedback loops (unities) which generates a motion that we understand as an arrow of time. Consequently, in the context of the universe as a whole (considering the whole of space and the whole of time) the most common state space for matter is general disorganization (thermal equilibrium) due to low material interaction rates, which suggests that the currently observed state of the universe is ultimately unstable. The multi-local material order that does self-organize into persistent temporal form (galaxies, stars, life, mind) occurs due to gravitational attraction acting on heterogeneous distributions of organization which enables higher material interaction rates. In our current understanding of the universe there is no complete theory that explains the fundamental consequence of the emergence of such multi-local order, and reductionist perspectives tend to regard such phenomena as epiphenomenal. In other words, reductionist perspectives identify a fundamental objectivity (unity) framed a priori by a subjectivity (division), but cannot think a framed a priori subjectivity (division) that constitutes an emergent fundamental objectivity (unity).
The Teleodynamic view of the (local) cosmos: from primordial disorder to final order:
The above representation attempts to capture the cosmic evolutionary worldview that is characterized by far-from-equilibrium or non-equilibrium systems that operate on self-organizing principles dynamically balanced between chaos and order. In the teleodynamic conception we get an image of the world that presents us with an immanent ‘immortal heat’ where highly ordered far-from equilibrium systems curve their being to a state of supersymmetrical unity (a cosmic-transcendental monism). Such a state would likely annihilate the dualistic distinctions between subject-object, concept-world, observer-observed, material-ideal without resorting to a pre-linguistic ‘biophysical grounding’ that ignores the emergence and consequences of conceptual distinctions (i.e., ‘distinction-division dynamics’). In this representation the totality of process is conceived of as starting with the emergence of a field composed of ideationally constituted social unites (bands/tribes) whose ground is self-consciousness developing in language. Throughout the historical process bands/tribes become progressively ‘synthesized’ into higher level social unities which has the effect of reducing the number of different unified groups (i.e., fewer unities) but increasing the spatial scale of the unified groups (i.e., the difference between Europe pre-and-post Roman Empire, or the Asia pre-and-post Chinese Empire, etc.). In this progressive trend to unification the level of individuation also progressively increases meaning that there are emergent degrees of freedom for the particular elements of the higher level social unities. This paradox between higher social unity and higher individuation continues to the present day where we see the dominance of a ‘multiplicity of ideals’ which are nonetheless all expressing ideality within one universal technological medium. The combination of these two trends make it difficult for philosophy to make sense of totality. In this view in order to approach totality we must include the radical divisions characteristic of individuation into the higher unity of totality, thus creating a unity inclusive of division."