BEYOND THE BLOG

I've moved to anthonynorth.com

  • Introduction

    I've now moved to a new website and blog. Click 'Anthony North', below.
  • Stats:

    • 711,475 hits
  • Meta

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Calendar

    December 2008
    M T W T F S S
    1234567
    891011121314
    15161718192021
    22232425262728
    293031  

THE PLANET GOD

Posted by anthonynorth on December 11, 2008

Have you tried my current affairs? Stay informed.
Also, fiction and poetry.

alpha-man We are so infatuated by individuality and materialism in the west that we rarely question whether the concept is correct. Yet, alongside this, we retain a popular interest in mysteries and the unexplained. This seems to be a contradiction.
Such mysteries usually find explanation in things beyond the material or individual. Yet, their popularity offers the possibility that there is an intuitive knowing that we are wrong to merely think of the material and individual.

earth-over-moon This ‘knowing’ could be important.

It suggests that it would be so easy to expand our horizons if proper ideas were put forward that would give a purpose to such ‘knowing’. After all, without intellectual direction, those things unseen become mere belief or superstition.
In what direction should we look for a deeper understanding of impulses above the material and individual? Well, arguably such an impulse would be ‘higher’ than us. And the obvious place to look is the planet itself. After all, we DO exist within its system.

Some philosophers have thought deeply about this.

Many are aware of Lovelock’s Gaia Hypothesis where the planet seems to coordinate itself through a form of natural balance. But some thinkers previously thought of this as an evolutionary process.
Typical were Bergson and Teilhard de Chardin who devised the ‘elan vital’ and ‘noo-genesis’ respectively. Both these ideas see evolution having a higher principle above man, and spreading out to the planet and universe.

galaxy We don’t understand such concepts today.

The upshot of materialism and individuality is that we only accept those things in the world that can be seen or theorized, and have obvious value to us.
The metaphysical – those things that are more difficult to grasp – are ignored. This is due to specialization and reductionism. Yet, there is another way of thinking, in the holistic – an understanding that things can be ‘whole’.

I’ve tried to grasp this concept in recent essays.

And I’ve tried to grasp it in terms of man being just part of a ‘whole’ in planetary terms. Typical is the way electromagnetic impulses are known to affect brain chemistry, to the point of producing hallucinatory phenomena and mystical experiences.
I noted how changes in weather patterns due to global warming involve changes in electromagnetism, thus arguing that the planet could be regulating us in terms of ‘rapture’ – making us more spiritually minded and ecological.
If such concepts could be seen to be rational, then it removes man from the primary role within the planetary environment. Rather, it shows that we can be ‘changed’. And in many ways this makes absolute sense.
Evolution says that we adapt to changes in an environment. Hence, that environment itself becomes primary in what we are, and what we become. And this is a process ABOVE our sense of individuality.
The biggest ‘environment’ we know of is the planet itself. So maybe it is time to realize that impulses DO exist above our individuality, and things not yet grasped by materialism can have existence AND effects.
Perhaps even to the point that the planet is really a god.

© Anthony North, December 2008

18 Responses to “THE PLANET GOD”

  1. I’ve thought about this most of my life. The universe that is. How everything is so perfect. How did that happen? I don’t know exactly. There’s science and then there’s religion. It seems to me that some higher power put all this in place.

    I think we are ego filled (most are anyway) to think we are superior to all of this. We are part of it, but I’ve always thought of us humans as mere ants in a colony.

    Have a terrific day Anthony. 🙂

  2. Hi Sandee,
    You express feelings that many feel, yet science tends to disregard it. It is maybe right for them to do so – they deal in hard ‘facts’ – but there should be some credible and rational system of thought to consider it.
    We could be missing out on so much knowledge by not having such a system.

  3. Twilight said

    I think that one reason the metaphysical tends to be ignored by most people nowadays is that, as you say it’s hard to grasp – but connected to this there’s the fact that those who do understand it lack the ability to describe and teach it in clear, straightforward language. They like to make it hard to access for “the man in the street”. They like to feel superior, and to make certain they hang on to what they see as their higher status, they wrap what they know in layers and layers of superfluous garbled, high-flown…..well, rubbish! This is my opinion, AN, after having tried on many occasions to read books on the topic, and in all cases I push them aside after a few chapters.

    Perhaps it is that people with the ability to understand metaphysical matters do not have the ability to translate them into plain English (or plain other language). The two things are probably fundmentally incompatible.

    You are way ahead on this – you do write in straightforward language, and you can get your message over to anyone who is even partially interested. Your readers are very appreciative of this, I feel sure. This one is! 🙂

  4. Hi Twilight,
    Thanks so much for that. I always try my best to simplify concepts to their bare minimum, and I often share your views on some of the books on the subject.
    I’ll put my straightforwardness down to my Yorkshire roots 😉

  5. Chris said

    Hi Anthony,
    I doubt very much that there are such things as ‘hard’ facts, for example, the “Loop Quantum Cosmology” theory versus the “String” theory. Which is ‘right’ I wonder, one, the other or both? Thats the problem with specialization and reductionism, we have so narrowly focused our ‘vision’ that we are starving ourselves of our spirituality and thats probably why ‘Gaia’ is ‘stepping in’ to regulate ‘things’.
    From an earlier discussion, remembering that we are the ‘primary apex predator’, we play a crucial role in the ‘ecological management’ of the planet, so maybe ‘she’ has no ‘choice’ but to step in.
    Another thought provoking one Anthony, good work! 🙂

  6. Hi Chris,
    Many thanks. What science often forgets is that, on the fringe, it is all theoretical, and I’m sure that, here, our knowledge reflects our ‘idea’ of what we are as much, if not more so, than what can be revealed by experiment. Which is, of course, a criticism that can be laid at the door of religion, which also reflects the ‘idea’ of ourselves.
    Both are involved in the ‘story’ – a criticism which can also be directed at me, which I fully accept. Indeed, I’m so sure of it that I try to develop ideas on a ‘story’ that is the most inclusive for all 😉

  7. John Ryan said

    As you so artfully describe, on the one hand we are “infatuated” with individuality and materialism; on the other hand, we take an interest in the mysterious and the unexplained. So then, what about all the stuff in the middle? Suppose we as western society refocus our attention and education on what makes us human. Schools should be teaching Shakespeare instead of Toni Morrison, for example. The masses are no longer taught ‘reason’, but recitation. Few have heard of Bergson and de Chardin, let alone the Gaia Hypothesis. Our ‘knowing’ needs to originate from the Trivium. From there we can formulate a reasoned response to who we are in the universe, even while maintaining our enthusiasm for the Mysterious. Once again, much food for thought. Thanks, Anthony!

  8. Seems to me holistic thinking requires letting the ego take a back seat or just leaving it off on the side of the road. That’s a tough job.

  9. Hi John,
    Part of the problem here is, I think, the way education has been reformulated away from learning for learning’s sake, to preparing little cogs for the workplace.
    The principle of higher meaning still exists, but it is worship of celebrity and the consumer culture.

    Hi Sandy,
    I like the way you put that. And yes, it is tough.

  10. gus said

    Comedy Plus Says:
    “The universe, how everything is so perfect. How did that happen?”
    Well, one possibility why everything seems to fit so perfectly, might be this: the universe might be so big (in size and in time) that all possible ‘universes’ can / have been / will exist. Some of these universes might not be perfect and will collapse and desintegrate, out of which a new one will be born. Out of trial and error a ‘perfect’ universe will be born, one that allows planets to exist and life to emerge from it. Life that than can evolve to a certain point where it can study and look at the universe; thinking why ‘it is so perfect’…

  11. Hi Gus,
    Thanks for that comment. It is, indeed, one possibility.

  12. God is BIZARRE!

  13. raginggenius said

    I think it is amazing that we “think” we “know” anything. We are a creature looking at a vast universe through dime sized eyes and yet we think we have answers to “how we got here”. Science makes me laugh, especially secular science. 🙂

  14. Hi Showcase,
    Well, it’s an opinion.

    Hi Raginggenius,
    To do science is all very well. My problem with them comes when they decide they ‘know’. I don’t see how that can possibly BE scientific.

  15. bundleocontradictions said

    As a bull-headed agnostic raised in the materialistic 80’s, I appreciate this post. Perhaps the best way for me to find my faith is to do what I’ve been doing all along: appreciating the beauty & diversity of the planet on which I exist.

  16. Hi Bundleocontradictions,
    To me spirituality is best explained as a bonding – man to mankind, and mankind to nature. I guess we all fit in somewhere.

  17. jesus mcdisney said

    science CAN “know”. the point is that when i say ” when i do A then B i get C under these conditions, & if you do too, then you will get C.” which is NOT the same as “C” is “true”. if i could scientifically test the gia hypothosis would it then be untrue by your definition?
    ” if the moon is not a word then stop calling it a moon”
    science, religion, gia, true, the’re just words, when they loose utility abandon them like any beliefe sytem that wont hold up to the paradox of reality.

  18. Hi Jesus,
    I would argue that it is a particular perception that causes many ‘facts’ to exist. Perception, if accepted, creates consensus, and if you belong to a particular consensus, you are educated in it, and it becomes ‘normal’.
    Things may well ‘work’, but that doesn’t mean our perceptions cannot hide the reasons why.

Leave a comment