Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

From P2P Foundation Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search



Contextual Quote

"Teilhard was one of the first scientists to realize that the human and the universe are inseparable. The only universe we know about is the universe that brought forth the human. Teilhard understood this. He understood that the human story and the universe story identified with each other. The immersion into the deep creative powers of the universe is the most direct contact a human can have with the divine. Such is the spirituality that Teilhard makes available to us. A spirituality that is rooted not in the spatial cosmos of Ptolemy, but in the time-developmental universe that the scientists have detected."

- Thomas Berry, geologian [1]


Bio

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin May 1, 1881 – April 10, 1955 was a Jesuit Priest and a member of the Society of Jesus, trained as a paleontologist and a philosopher, and was present at the discovery of Peking Man. Teilhard de Chardin conceived such ideas as the Omega Point and the Noosphere, which many suggest predicted the internet or something like it.


Publications

1.

"De Chardin was a Jesuit priest and Paleontologist who was involved with the discovery of 'Peking Man' in China. In an essay called Homonization he wrote in 1925 (and published in his work The Vision of the Past, 1966), de Chardin introduced the term Noosphere "for the Earth's thinking envelope" based "on the model of Suess's Biosphere." Although de Chardin finished The Phenomenon of Man on the brink of the second World War it was not published until after his death decades later. The Heart of Matter was written in 1950. In that essay, which he wrote towards the end of his life, he "tried to describe in a sort of autobiography the general process and the principal stages of 'the emergence of the picture'" sketched out in The Phenomenon of Man."

(http://ahistoryofthepresentananthology.blogspot.com/search/label/De%20Chardin)


2. From the Wikipedia:

"Teilhard de Chardin wrote two comprehensive works, The Phenomenon of Man and The Divine Milieu.

His posthumously published book, The Phenomenon of Man, set forth a sweeping account of the unfolding of the cosmos and the evolution of matter to humanity, to ultimately a reunion with Christ. In the book, Teilhard abandoned literal interpretations of creation in the Book of Genesis in favor of allegorical and theological interpretations. The unfolding of the material cosmos is described from primordial particles to the development of life, human beings and the noosphere, and finally to his vision of the Omega Point in the future, which is "pulling" all creation towards it. He was a leading proponent of orthogenesis, the idea that evolution occurs in a directional, goal-driven way. Teilhard argued in Darwinian terms with respect to biology, and supported the synthetic model of evolution, but argued in Lamarckian terms for the development of culture, primarily through the vehicle of education. Teilhard made a total commitment to the evolutionary process in the 1920s as the core of his spirituality, at a time when other religious thinkers felt evolutionary thinking challenged the structure of conventional Christian faith. He committed himself to what the evidence showed.

Teilhard made sense of the universe by assuming it had a vitalist evolutionary process. He interprets complexity as the axis of evolution of matter into a geosphere, a biosphere, into consciousness (in man), and then to supreme consciousness (the Omega Point). Jean Houston's story of meeting Teilhard illustrates this point.

Teilhard's unique relationship to both paleontology and Catholicism allowed him to develop a highly progressive, cosmic theology which took into account his evolutionary studies. Teilhard recognized the importance of bringing the Church into the modern world, and approached evolution as a way of providing ontological meaning for Christianity, particularly creation theology. For Teilhard, evolution was "the natural landscape where the history of salvation is situated."

Teilhard's cosmic theology is largely predicated on his interpretation of Pauline scripture, particularly Colossians 1:15-17 (especially verse 1:17b) and 1 Corinthians 15:28. He drew on the Christo-centrism of these two Pauline passages to construct a cosmic theology which recognizes the absolute primacy of Christ. He understood creation to be "a teleological process towards union with the Godhead, effected through the incarnation and redemption of Christ, 'in whom all things hold together' (Col. 1:17)." He further posited that creation would not be complete until each "participated being is totally united with God through Christ in the Pleroma, when God will be 'all in all' (1Cor. 15:28)."

Teilhard's life work was predicated on his conviction that human spiritual development is moved by the same universal laws as material development. He wrote, "...everything is the sum of the past" and "...nothing is comprehensible except through its history. 'Nature' is the equivalent of 'becoming', self-creation: this is the view to which experience irresistibly leads us. ... There is nothing, not even the human soul, the highest spiritual manifestation we know of, that does not come within this universal law." The Phenomenon of Man represents Teilhard's attempt at reconciling his religious faith with his academic interests as a paleontologist. One particularly poignant observation in Teilhard's book entails the notion that evolution is becoming an increasingly optional process. Teilhard points to the societal problems of isolation and marginalization as huge inhibitors of evolution, especially since evolution requires a unification of consciousness. He states that "no evolutionary future awaits anyone except in association with everyone else."[25] Teilhard argued that the human condition necessarily leads to the psychic unity of humankind, though he stressed that this unity can only be voluntary; this voluntary psychic unity he termed "unanimization". Teilhard also states that "evolution is an ascent toward consciousness", giving encephalization as an example of early stages, and therefore, signifies a continuous upsurge toward the Omega Point which, for all intents and purposes, is God.

Teilhard also used his perceived correlation between spiritual and material to describe Christ, arguing that Christ not only has a mystical dimension but also takes on a physical dimension as he becomes the organizing principle of the universe — that is, the one who "holds together" the universe (Col. 1:17b). For Teilhard, Christ forms not only the eschatological end toward which his mystical/ecclesial body is oriented, but he also "operates physically in order to regulate all things"[26] becoming "the one from whom all creation receives its stability." In other words, as the one who holds all things together, "Christ exercises a supremacy over the universe which is physical, not simply juridical. He is the unifying center of the universe and its goal. The function of holding all things together indicates that Christ is not only man and God; he also possesses a third aspect—indeed, a third nature—which is cosmic." In this way, the Pauline description of the Body of Christ is not simply a mystical or ecclesial concept for Teilhard; it is cosmic. This cosmic Body of Christ "extend[s] throughout the universe and comprises all things that attain their fulfillment in Christ [so that] ... the Body of Christ is the one single thing that is being made in creation." Teilhard describes this cosmic amassing of Christ as "Christo-genesis". According to Teilhard, the universe is engaged in Christogenesis as it evolves toward its full realization at Omega, a point which coincides with the fully realized Christ. It is at this point that God will be "all in all" (1Cor. 15:28c)."

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Teilhard_de_Chardin)

Discussion

Teilhard de Chardin on Consciousness and Cosmic Depth

Ilia Delio:

" if we follow Teilhard, consciousness is the more universal of the two: from the smallest particle onward, matter has a within, and even at that depth consciousness is present, in the faintest imaginable degree. It is the light present at every level of the cosmos, growing more intense as matter grows more complex—which is the whole point of naming his law “complexity-consciousness” rather than letting consciousness arrive late. Interiority is the form that light takes. If consciousness is the light, interiority is the aperture through which it shines: the inward dimension of a thing, its degree of self-presence, how far it has become an inside for itself. And the aperture is a lens, not a slit in a shade—as interiority deepens it does not merely admit more of a fixed glow but gathers and concentrates the light toward a center, until in us it bends all the way back upon its own beam. That is self-consciousness: interiority become interior to itself. When I speak of consciousness increasing through evolution, therefore, I do not mean a light switched on partway through a dark universe. I mean the light present from the beginning, focused and intensified as interiority deepens—from the barely-open within of matter, through the widening aperture of sentient life, to the reflexive interiority that, in us, turns to know its own source.

Here is Teilhard’s central claim. Evolution is not only the outward expansion of complexity. It is also the inward intensification of experience. Every genuine advance in organization is accompanied by a corresponding deepening of interiority. The universe does not merely become more complex; it becomes more inward. This is his law of complexity-consciousness: the two trajectories—complexification without, interiorization within—are a single trajectory, seen from two sides.

Why insist on this? Because if complexity alone were the engine of cosmic development, consciousness would remain an inexplicable anomaly—a fortunate accident somehow emerging from otherwise unconscious matter. Teilhard offered a different possibility. The appearance of reflective thought becomes intelligible only because the universe has possessed an interior dimension from the very beginning. Reflection is not the arrival of interiority; it is interiority becoming deep enough to know itself."

(https://iliadelio.substack.com/p/intelligence-was-never-the-point)


Pierre de Chardin as a Mystic

Ursula King (Earthlight):

"PIERRE TEILHARD DE CHARDIN'S vision was one of consuming fire, kindled by the radiant powers of love. It was a mystical vision, deeply Christian in origin and orientation. Yet it broke through the boundaries of traditional orthodoxies -- whether those of science or religion -- and grew into a vision which is global in intent.


His deepest desire was to see the essence of things, to find their heart, and probe into the mystery of life, its origin and goal. In the rhythm of life and its evolution, at the center of the cosmos and the world, Teilhard believed, is a divine center, a living heart beating with the fiery energy of love and compassion. Now, the heart is really a fleshly reality But the image of this very flesh, this concentration of living, breathing matter, came to symbolize for Teilhard the very core of the spirit.


His entire outlook on life was profoundly mystical, yet his mysticism was firmly grounded in contemporary scientific research. For Teilhard the mystic, seer, and believer, the immense research efforts and advances of contemporary science, despite their negative side effects and the new ethical problems they cause, ultimately lead to the adoration and worship of something greater than ourselves, to the celebration of and surrender to divinity, to the heart and soul of the world.

[Teilhard's] ideas were developed in direct living contact with the world, especially the Earth, the stuff of the Earth. As a scientist in the fields of geology and paleontology, he was in constant contact with the world of rocks and stones, fossils and bones, plants and animals. But he also was in touch with many different places and peoples. All of these were, for Teilhard, the tangible concrete stuff of the universe.


While he worked on his scientific papers in his laboratory and office, he created most of his religious and philosophical writings in an unusual setting different from most academics, far removed from any library. His first essays were written in the trenches of the First World War, in woods and farmhouses, whenever there was respite from battle. In later years, he often composed the final version of his essays on the long boat journeys between Asia, America, and Europe, or during vacation time in his family home in the old land.


As he wrote in his 1918 essay "My Universe": "It seems to me that every effort I have made, even when directed to a purely natural object, has always been a religious effort. Substantially, it has been one single effort. At all times, in all I've done, I'm conscious that my aim has been to obtain the absolute. I would never, I believe, have had the courage to busy myself for the sake of any other end. Science, which means all form of human activity, and religion have always been one and the same thing for me. Both have been, so far as I am concerned, the pursuit of one and the same object.

...


THE SYMBOLISM OF FIRE was to occur in his writings again and again in the years to come. Nowhere is this vision more radiant and empowering than in the description of his mystical experiences. They truly express a vision of fire which filled him with wonder and amazement, ecstasy and joy, and made him see the world burst into flames. It is this fire which he wanted to pass on and kindle in others. His vision of fire was one of spiritual transformation drawn from the insides of both science and religion. The universe in evolution, studied in great detail in his scientific work, stimulated his zest for being. His Christian faith made him see the universal presence of Christ in all things.


Teilhard loved the Earth and its peoples. He loved his church and his order. And he was filled with the fire of love for the ever-great Christ. For him, the symbol of fire meant the warmth and radiance of love and light, the energy to fuse and transform everything. But fire is, of course, ambivalent. I t can destroy as well as transform. In Teilhard's understanding, it is the transforming power of the energies of love which alone can create a truly human community and provide it with its strongest points. Thus, the fire of love may be the only energy capable of extinguishing the threat of another fire, namely that of universal conflagration and destruction.


He considered the phenomenon of religion as central to human evolution, and the phenomenon of spirituality as the key element in religion. At the center of spirituality he perceived the phenomenon of mysticism, which he distinguished into different types. The core of mysticism, the most important and energizing type, was mysticism centered on love, a mysticism of action, which radiated outward and helped to transform and build up the spirit of the world.


Science, religion, and mysticism are always closely intertwined in Teilhard¹s thought, for his science is of central significance to a new mysticism of action and a new understanding of the world. This mysticism of action is the mysticism of unification, of bringing everything, all the diverse elements (the cosmic, human, and divine) together. It's a mysticism of transformation and of sanctification, where holiness is understood as wholeness.


Just a few days before his death, Teilhard wrote his last six pages, which are entitled "Research, Work, and Adoration." One might consider this text his last intellectual testament. In it, he speaks of the conflict between science and religion -- and its solution. He refers to the fire of a new faith in the human, to be combined with religious faith.


Teilhard endeavored to seek an ultimate coherence for our manyfold experiences and quests, and tried to convey a vision greater than what either traditional religion or science alone can offer us. From this perspective, religion and mysticism are part of the human search for union -- or communion -- with God via the evolutionary process of the growth and unification of the world. All human efforts, whether scientific or religious, whether action or contemplation, must finally lead to worship, adoration, and ultimately greater unity.


If mysticism, especially the mysticism of love, is the very heart of religion, it must provide us with the deepest springs of energy for both action and interaction with others. It cannot be a mere spirit duality, but must stand for spirit-in-and-through-matter mentality. Spiritual development and religious experience are best seen as closely interrelated with and inseparable from our human experience in general. F. C. Happold has remarked that for Teilhard, human activity in all its forms was capable of divinization. And therefore he described Teilhard's mysticism "as a mysticism of action, action springing from the inspiration of a universe seen as moved and com-penetrated by God in the totality of its evolution...this is a new type of mysticism, the result of a profound, lifelong reconciling meditation on religious and scientific truth, and it is thus of immense relevance and significance for a scientific age such as ours." (Mysticism. Pelican Books, London, 1978, p. 395.)"

(https://earthlight.org/essay39_king.html)


Pierre Teilhard de Chardin as a Phenomenologist

Ilia Delio:

" My own work follows closely the vision of Teilhard de Chardin, whose great work is best known in English as The Phenomenon of Man. His translator, Sarah Appleton-Weber, insisted that the truer title is The Human Phenomenon, because his subject was not “man” as one species among others but the ever-evolving human phenomenon as it develops in and around us at this very moment—a unique biological, collective, and global phenomenon whose past, present, and future are intimately bound up with the formation, life, and ultimate transformation of the earth. The magnitude of the human phenomenon is on the level of matter’s first forming of the planet; it represents a new zone in the universe, independent, yet somehow born of the entire maturation of the earth. Humanity is the earth—we can even say nature—”hominized.”

In the opening pages Teilhard states: “Nothing but the phenomenon. Do not look in these pages for an explanation of the world, but only an introduction to an explanation.” The purpose of the work is not to discover a system of ontological and causal relations among the elements of the universe but to recognize the whole in movement—something neither science alone nor philosophy or theology alone can explain. The whole is an irreducible presence, relational and contingent yet distinct; collective reality is more than the sum of its parts, and each part is itself a whole. As Teilhard put it, the more we cleave and pulverize matter, the more we can see its fundamental unity: “there are no isolated things in the world. There are only elements of a whole in process.”

Teilhard’s method requires the capacity to see, “to develop a homogenous and coherent perspective of our general experience as it extends to the human being; that is, to see a whole that unfolds.” Those who see have the sense of the world as a unified whole in movement, linked organically and psychically with all that surrounds us. Those who do not see, do not see beyond the multiple—they perceive the world as fragmented and ultimately absurd. Albert Einstein captured the same insight when he wrote:

A human being is a spatially and temporally limited piece of the whole, what we call the “Universe.” He experiences himself and his feelings as separate from the rest, an optical illusion of his consciousness. The quest for liberation from this bondage [or illusion] is the only object of true religion.

The human person, therefore, cannot be a settled question, because the human is fundamentally an open one. We are the universe become self-conscious—the thinking portion of the whole. From the beginning of spacetime until now, consciousness and matter have been forming together; we are the newest outflow of this complexifying process. And life continues to be born through us.

In his 1950 essay “The Heart of Matter” Teilhard recognized that what had seemed three separate domains—cosmos, human, and divine—actually form one continuous reality, an insight won not by metaphysical speculation but through decades in the fossil record. Evolution, on his reading, is not the blind mechanism of random mutation and selection alone but tends throughout toward consciousness: matter is the matrix of consciousness, and consciousness, born of matter, advances toward what he called the Ultra-Human. The universe in its evolutionary development is alive, infused with divine presence at every level—not as poetic metaphor but as what Teilhard called theogenesis, a way of speaking of God as depth and future rather than as static being. “God has become too small,” he lamented, “to nourish in us the desire to go on living and to live on a higher plane.” What is needed, he thought, is a religion of evolution.

The Jesuit scientist conceived a new evolutionary layer, a thinking layer he called the noosphere—from the Greek nous, mind—as the next evolutionary stage: a planetary envelope of thought, arising from the biosphere yet distinct from it, in which human inventiveness rather than natural selection increasingly directs evolution. He saw it converging—the advent of computer technology drawing minds together into an ever more reflective collective, a “planetization” of linked minds tending toward ultrahumanity. Crucially, he insisted that this convergence differentiates rather than dissolves. “Union differentiates,” he wrote; the more persons unite, the more each becomes itself, so that “the only way we can find our person is by uniting with one another.” The future universal “cannot be anything else but the hyperpersonal.” He anticipated the age of the internet and artificial intelligence—the noosphere thickening into a global network of mind. But technology alone, Teilhard warned, cannot supply the point of convergence: science can group the world’s elements, but it can never give each its final value within an organized whole. A computerized global brain must also be, in his strange vocabulary, “super-centered” and “super-amorizing”—centered in love—if it is to carry humanity toward a more meaningful planetary existence rather than a thinner one."

(https://iliadelio.substack.com/p/why-ai-feels-like-grief)

More information

  • This book by a fellow Jesuit and long-time friend who had access to private and unpublished papers is considered one of the best explanations of Teilhard's religious views: . Henri de Lubac. The religion of Teilhard de Chardin, trans. Rene Hague, (New York: Desclee Co., 1967).

* Article: Zwart, H. (2022). The symbolic order and the noosphere: Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and Jacques Lacan on technoscience and the future of the planet. International Journal of Philosophy and Theology, 83(1–3), 117–145. doi [2]: "Whereas Teilhard argues that technoscience and self-directed evolution are about to culminate in what he refers to as point Omega, Lacan rather stresses the hazards involved in this optimistic desire towards all-encompassing synthesis, unification and fulfilment."

Retrieved from "https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/index.php?title=Pierre_Teilhard_de_Chardin&oldid=149769"