Why We Can't Go Back

            In reaction to our current ecological crisis I have come across people who say the only way to get ourselves out of the whole mess is to "go back" technologically.  The line of logic is that man-made technology is the cause of the destruction of the environment and the only solution lies in humanity renouncing the use of our most modern technologies.

            I would argue that this is not the answer.  Not only because it is impractical and won't happen, but also because this answer goes against our nature as evolving beings.

 

"... one is hardly conscious of the extent to which "nature" acts not only as a driving force but as a helper - in other words, how much instinct insists that the higher level of consciousness be attained.  This urge to a higher and more comprehensive consciousness fosters civilization and culture, but must fall short of the goal unless man voluntarily places himself in its serve" - Carl Jung  (Jung, 1996). 

            This "driving force", or "helper" quality of nature, seems to be synonymous with syntropy - the tendency in the universe for things to become more complicated, more whole.  In relation to animals (including the human), it is the general force of evolution.  Beings are always becoming more and more complex while adapting to their environment.

            Carl is saying here that the natural instincts within us are always pushing us toward higher levels of complexity.  He states that "civilization and culture", which must inherently include the technology that has come about because of them, has been a result of this tendency.  However, the key is when he says our syntropic tendency "... must fall short of the goal unless man voluntarily places himself in its serve".  Although our ever-evolving nature has driven us to create all of the technology we have, this nature is still "falling short" as we are not yet fully acknowledging it.  What exactly does this mean?

            I would say, because man is a product of nature, and technology is a product of man, ultimately technology is a product of nature even if that technology is harmful to nature.  Our current technologies, and the modern mind which relates to them, is just as valid a part of humanity's syntropic evolution as any other stage.  However it is time to recognize that the syntropic tendency of our world, of our environment, is calling humanity to evolve to another level. 
 

            Evolution happens when changes in the environment cause the way of being of a species to become obsolete in the context of the newly emerging environment.  The species in question must then develop a new way of functioning which is appropriate within the environmental context.  If the species does not, then it will inevitably die out.  However, if the species evolves and adapts to the environment, it will continue life in a new form. 

            It is clear that currently our environment is being changed by the way humanity is functioning.  But the environment is being changed in a way which will demand change of our way of being.  The wide-spread adoption of a lifestyle which consumes so much has resulted in well-known environmental consequences.  These consequences demonstrate that humanity's current way of being is not appropriate in the context of our environment.  This demands that we change the way we function, or we die out.

            I believe the "instinct" Carl says we must voluntarily place ourselves in service of is the part of our instinct connected to the environment.  Although we have survival instincts to keep ourselves alive, which utilize our ego, I would argue there is a more intuitive instinct within us that connects us with our context - with our environment.  Most modern humans have lost touch with this instinct as it has been so long since we needed it.  But I would imagine this instinct has its roots in the same instincts animals tune into when they predict a major storm and are naturally driven to find safety.  There are also records of modern indigenous peoples who's senses are keenly attuned to the natural world.  Reconnecting with these kinds of instincts could give us an intuitive understanding of our urgent need to evolve.  Recognizing our connection to our environmental context and acknowledging the messages our environment is sending us would force us to begin changing our lifestyle - changing our way of functioning.

          It seems to me that the message syntropy is trying to give us is that over-using our rational, logically-oriented parts of the mind leads to behavior which is insensitive to the overall context, to our environment.  The over-development of these parts of the psyche has led to an enormous technological capacity without nearly enough responsibility to use it.  These functions of the psyche are best used in conjunction with the more intuitive instincts inside ourselves that, in the modern world, we hardly realize need acknowledgement and development.  All in all it is most important that we change our behavior - our way of functioning - so that we save ourselves from environmental catastrophe.  But for a true syntropic step of evolution I believe a change in the way we use our consciousness must also occur.

            As I stated before I do not believe the change in functioning we are being called to would be a renunciation of human technology.  In fact, I would say the development of new technology would play a very major role in our evolution.  There is much promise held in sustainable technology efforts currently being made.  The fact that we have come as far as we have with technology - and with culture at large - shows us that the syntropic forces of our universe made the possibility of developing these inherit in the human being.  This seems to be evidence enough of their validity.  The question is whether or not humanity will recognize it's need to evolve - it's need to use technology and culture in a responsible and appropriate way within the context of the natural world.  And ultimately, whether or not we will develop the intuitive sensitivity needed to fully recognize our responsibility as highly-evolved beings in the natural world.

 

References

 Jung, C.G. (1996).  The practice of psychotherapy. In RFC Hull (Trans.), Collected works of C.   G. Jung (Vol. 16).  Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.