The awakening I've experienced to the soulfulness in nature began one day when I was driving home with a friend. He said to me, "I'm glad to see they're starting to build on that empty lot. I hate to see a good piece of land go to waste." Intuitively, I felt that the plants, soil, and rocks in that lot were not so "empty" or "wasted," yet I doubted if there was any way to communicate this to my friend.
Comments such as his come from our culture's deeply ingrained world view supporting the assumption that nature is of little value unless useful to humans. Many of today's best thinkers are saying that this outdated world view keeps us destroying the earth despite our best intentions. But what if we knew that the natural things in that piece of land had a significant life of their own? How would this change our attitudes?
Today there are some amazing new discoveries in science that shed light on such questions. These discoveries could bring about an awakening to a new world view that is more spiritual and respectful of the earth. That is why it is so important to consider the astonishing evidence coming from the New Science.
To do so, it is helpful to begin with a brief look at the Old Science.
According to Newtonian physics, the universe works like a machine. Atoms are inert lifeless objects that must follow fixed laws. They fit together like parts of a clock to make something such as a tree or an animal, but the organism itself is composed of inert lifeless matter.
Religion in our culture has been able to accommodate to the Old Science by deciding that the capabilities associated with the soul, like thoughts and feelings, are not of this physical realm. They are injected from outside this universe by God and given solely to humans. The rest of the "soulless" world is considered to have little value other than to serve the well being of humans.
The New Science tells a different story. It comes mainly from the recent quantum physics (the dynamics of atoms), biology (especially biochemistry and ecology), and astrophysics (the so called "Big Bang" theory and how the universe came into being).
Quantum physics tells us that atoms do not really work like a machine. They have many qualities that make them more like a living being than like a machine.
To begin with, leading scientists such as Einstein and Bohr found that an atom is not really an object.[1] It is not made of solid matter in the usual sense, but rather of tiny energy packages called particles. (The amount of energy in the particles is measured in units called quanta.) As these energy packages move about, they create patterns that we perceive as solid matter even though they are just energy. It's like the perceptual illusion in which a paper circle has a series of broken circular lines drawn on it. When you spin it fast enough, the lines look solid even though they aren't.
Within the atom, the many subatomic particles do not follow fixed laws in the way they move. They seem to turn and twist, come and go in a spontaneous dance-like movement. Atoms are not predictable as a machine would be. Their variability and freedom of movement reveal a much more dynamic universe than the mechanistic view suggests.
Furthermore, the nature of particles is filled with unresolvable mystery. For example, a particle has the ability to take the form of either a wave or a specific particle depending on how we observe it. This seems contradictory because a wave is spread out over space like a magnetic field, but a particle exists in a certain point. Yet particles take both forms simultaneously and never exclusively exist as one form or the other.
Another mystery of particle nature is that we cannot measure the particle's exact location. All we can ever do is find an approximate location. When we try to measure one aspect of a rapidly moving particle (momentum), another aspect of its location (position) becomes more approximate. This uncertainty is due not to poor measuring techniques but rather to the nature of particles. Hence, particle location remains forever a part of the mysterious variability of matter.
Also, unlike machines, particles are sensitive to their environment and capable of responding to it. For example, it can be shown that particles sense light by picking up some electrical charge as it passes through them. They sense changes in gravity by changing velocity and position. They respond to how they are being observed by moving about in different patterns. This sensitivity and responsiveness reveals an almost life-like quality that exists at the subatomic level.
As we can see, atoms relate with their environment. The particles within the atom are also interrelational. Each subatomic particle depends on the other aspects of the atom to maintain its own pattern of activity. For example, electrons depend on neutrons and protons (other particles) to maintain their movement patterns. Neutrons and protons depend on a special force called the "strong force" to remain in their tight pattern, and so forth. Thus, atomic nature is relational, not individualistic like the machine. This interdependency parallels what we find in the ecological view of interdependency among species. Interrelatedness seems to be the true underlying nature of the universe.
What is it that keeps all these atomic particles and forces organized? According to quantum physics, the atom has information within itself that allows it to be self-organized. It works very much like the flame of a candle. The wick, the air, and the heat are organized by a process in the flame itself. In the same way, an atom maintains its own processes and patterns of energy activity just by its inherent nature.
The ability of an atom to be self-organized means that it operates much in the same way as a living being. This is why, from the tiniest atoms to the largest bodies in space, all things in the universe operate more like living beings with creative abilities than like inert machines.
If we review what we've learned from quantum physics so far, the findings are simply amazing. An atom, be it from a rock, a piece of soil, or a plant or animal, is composed of packages of energy, dancing about, always changing forms mysteriously, always uncertain in their location, sensitive and responsive to their environment, interdependent with their own components, and gifted with an internal formula for self-organization.
So the principles of the New Physics are not like the old ones. They reveal atomic systems that are extremely dynamic, relational, and mysterious. Thus, scientists are now recognizing that pure logical reasoning is no longer adequate--that it is essential to use intuitive, metaphorical, and mystical processes in order to fully grasp the wondrous workings of the universe.
The New Physics does not totally nullify the old Newtonian physics. The Old Physics still applies, within certain limits, to objects of ordinary sizes. But quantum physics is the larger reality that encompasses any sized object and therefore explains more. With this background, let's move on into the New Science in biology.
After a detailed study of simple life forms such as bacteria, biologists are saying that the line between the living and the non-living is blurred. The complex protein molecules that make up bacteria can be found separately outside bacteria. And yet within these non-living protein molecules is an interrelatedness and self-organizing interaction that is not unlike the action found in the living bacterial cell.
This has led biologists such as Charles Birch and John Cobb to reject the idea of a "radical difference" between the animate and the inanimate, and to assert that biochemicals which are so interactive are unlikely to have come from matter which is not.[2] This New Science suggests a continuum between the living and the non-living that is unbroken and consistent. In other words, rocks and soil have a lot in common with living beings.
Finally, let's consider the vast new discoveries in the field of astronomy (or astro-physics). About twenty billion years ago, the universe flared forth from the void as an expanding cloud of particles. It then progressed through a series of epic stages. First it organized itself into huge galactic clouds of hydrogen and helium. Then its atoms condensed into stars whose process of genesis produced all the basic chemical elements. Then, coalescing from these chemicals, planets formed and began their process of development.
In order to do all this, the universe had to have the same capabilities we discovered in the atom. It had to have energy capable of responding to other complex forms of energy. It had to have the ability to interact with its environment, and the ability to self-organize. Thus, like an atom or a living being, the universe itself had to be filled with these life-like qualities on the same continuum.
Because we can now trace the origin of life (including human life) back in one continuous line all the way to the original flaring forth, we can realize that the potential for our most valued human qualities was inherent in the universe from the beginning. When we gaze at the stars now, we might be able to feel a marvelous new sense of wonder created by this awareness. Thomas Berry and Brian Swimme have said, "This new story of an emergent universe...is really an enhancement of all that humans have ever experienced previously in their perceptions of the universe."[3]
In these ways, the New Science reveals that whether we look at the behavior of subatomic particles or of bacterial molecules or of the unfolding stars and galaxies, everything appears to be more life-like than we once thought. This awareness can awaken in us a new world view which is sometimes called a "new cosmology".
Interpreting the New Science
Having reviewed evidence from the New Science, we are now faced with some challenging questions of interpretation. If atomic particles can dance and create novel responses as well as sense and respond, do they have some form of thought or feeling or life? Furthermore, if they are so interdependent and bonded, do they have some form of love?
We are used to science teaching us that matter is inert and objective. This makes it very hard for us to believe that matter could have subjective qualities like intelligence and sentience.
Clearly, atoms do not think and feel in the same way as humans. But the amazing responsiveness of atomic particles seems to imply some sort of rudimentary form of thought and feeling. Just as we have seen how the animate and inanimate are on one continuum, perhaps the same principle may be applied to thoughts and feelings. The difference in both cases is that the continuum now is much larger than we had ever before imagined.
The challenge we face is to expand our concept of subjective qualities. We can think of it like our concept of art. A child's scribble with a crayon on paper is not generally considered fine art in the same sense as DaVinci's Mona Lisa or Monet's Lilly Ponds. Yet, the scribble has all the rudiments of fine art-form, content, creativity, and meaning. It may not be fine art, but it is on the same continuum--it is a form of art.
In the same way, atomic particles--with their dancing, uncertainty, variability, responsiveness, interdependence, and self-organizing abilities--possess the rudiments of thought, feeling, and life. They are on the same continuum with these subjective qualities, and in some sense, they actually have some form of subjectivity.
We can think of atomic particles as we do an infant. An infant has subjective qualities like adults, only in rudimentary form. Just as important, infants have the potential to develop into adults. Likewise, atomic particles have rudimentary forms of life-like qualities and, when combined with other energies of the universe, the potential to develop and become living planets like the earth. This then, is the expanded sense of how we can think of every particle in the universe.
Not only is it hard for us to grasp this because of needing to expand our concept of subjectivity, but also because of our language itself. Some writers like Birch and Cobb,[2] being reluctant to refer to matter as having consciousness, have said that it is capable of experience. Or instead of using the word love, say that it has attraction. Yet experience and attraction are simpler aspects of consciousness and love. Therefore, the use of these words is not inclusive of the full meaning of our expanded view of the subjective continuum.
Hence, I would like to try out some new language here just for our experimentation. I'd like to suggest that we attach the prefix "ona" before a subjective quality that is in a rudimentary form. ( I choose "ona" because our continuum for subjective qualities needs to be expanded "on and on.") So we might say that the feelings of a star are ona-feelings. The thoughts of a rock are ona-thoughts. The ona-love of plants may be for soil and for sunlight. And so forth.
Maybe if we had language such as this, it would be easier for us to accept how matter has intelligence, feeling, life, and soul in rudimentary but potentially complete form.
We value human beings mostly because of our subjective qualities. Yet these qualities are also in rocks and soil and stars (not to mention plants and animals as well). So if we can treat a baby as precious because of its rudimentary abilities and potentials, can we not treat matter in a similar way because of its potentials?
Having insight into the life-like qualities of matter can change how we feel about the natural world around us--including what we call natural resources. It changes how I feel about places such as so-called empty lots, which are really filled with the lives of plants and animals, and the ona-lives of soil, rocks, and other such beings. This awareness has truly become an awakening experience for me.
Spiritual and Political Implications
As we have seen, the New Science can lead us to revise our views about the subjectivity of the natural world. In addition, some mystical aspects of spirituality or soulfulness can be addressed.
Evidence from quantum physics suggests that we may no longer need to look outside the natural universe to explain experiences such as telepathic communication, prayer, visions, or materialization of objects.
For example, quantum physics has discovered an explanation for how one object could instantly communicate with another object that is far away or could even cause a change in the other object (called non-local effects). The way this may work is that every particle has an equal and opposite particle in the form of anti-matter. (Anti-matter is negative energy particles that exist in a kind of virtual state within the void.) Each particle also has what is called spin. If one particle has a positive spin, its equal and opposite half in anti-matter will have a negative spin.
According to quantum physics, you could separate one half of the particle anywhere in the universe, and if you shifted the spin of this half from positive to negative, the other would instantly shift also. This reveals a capacity for non-local communication or causation. It also shows the extent of interrelatedness that exists within the universe as a whole.
We may find that other extraordinary events can be explained by quantum physics as well. For example, quantum physics has shown how particles can literally materialize out of nothingness. It turns out that empty space, or the void, is not really empty. It is filled with energy forms such as electromagnetic fields and anti-matter. Particles simply burst forth out of this substantial void because energy exists within it.
In another interesting example, quantum physics establishes that a solid object has the potential to move through a solid wall and not disturb either object. Although much more needs to be learned in order to fully understand such events, these possibilities are all a part of the New Science and they further support the idea that spiritual or soulful experiences, in a mystical sense, can come from within the universe itself.
Today we have various prevailing views about the ultimate nature of everything, and most of them would be modified by a clearer understanding of the New Science. To those who believe that everything works like a machine, the New Science would reveal how the dynamics of the universe work more like subjective qualities. To those who hold that God or Spirit are separate entities from matter, the New Science suggests how God or Spirit can be found as a process that exists within the energy patterns of the universe. And to those who believe that physical reality is an illusion and that true reality is in the nothingness, the New Science can show how the nothingness is not really empty and co-exists within the world of everything.
By creating the belief that the natural world has no subjectivity or soulfulness, the Old Science gave us permission to damage nature without remorse. This is the reason that changing our world view is so crucial.
In the new world view, spirit and subjectivity are no longer separated from matter. They are interconnected, inseparable, and on the same continuum. Thus, the natural world is both richly endowed with subjectivity and infused with a spirit or soul that is intrinsic to itself.
Once we believe that nature has thoughts and feelings of its own, no matter how rudimentary, we can usually start to empathize with it. If we have empathy for something, we naturally feel a moral obligation to it. This adds further impetus to achieving the understanding that nature is soulful.
With these changes in thinking, nature would gain heightened legal and political standing. Also, people would have sufficient spiritual and moral justification to comply with political decisions that protect the environment. The shift in our scientific paradigm which sees the universe as inherently soulful would become the basis in truth that supports the actions required to protect all life on earth.
If we can keep in mind that the soil, trees, and rocks around us are energy patterns with a rudimentary intelligence and sentience of their own, we may start to sense a different feel to the world. As this awakened feeling grows in us, it will change our old assumptions that say, for example, that a piece of land is wasted unless it is used by humans.
Instead, we can deeply feel in our hearts that a piece of land (or any so-called natural resource) not only is interconnected with us, but also has an enormous life and meaning of its own.
I had an experience not long ago that helped me realize how much these sentiments can grow. A news report told of a tanker truck that had turned over and spilled its load of diesel in a ditch. The driver wasn't hurt, but I knew that in this ditch were many plants, wild flowers, frogs, insects, soil beings, mineral beings, and untold other ona beings. I began to feel in my heart a real sense of sadness for the ditch.
The news report however, did not mention any concerns for the ditch, only for the driver, the diesel, and the truck. While our concern for humans is essential, we need to add a concern for nature as well. My response was made possible by an awakening to the subjectivity and soulfulness in nature. Such sentiments are supported by the New Science and can lead us toward a more sustainable future.
Furthermore, as we begin to feel sentiments even for a lowly ditch, how much more enhanced will our feelings be for a wondrous forest or other spectacular natural settings? Recently I went for a hike through an ancient forest to a beautiful look-out. As I sat there gazing over the scene before me and sensing the vast ona-life all around, I felt a profound sense of belonging--to the universe, to nature, and to life. It was a belonging unlike any I've ever felt before. This feeling can come to us from our new understanding of the universe: that we are made of it and by it, and that, like us, everything is filled with soulfulness.
Having this new consciousness of the universe can help sustain us in these difficult times. Just knowing that solutions evolve from new world views offers reassurance that we will have more time for life in the New Millennium.
__________
[1] Capra, Fritjof, The Tao of Physics (pp. 62-80), Shambala Publications, 1991.
[2] Birch, Charles, and Cobb, John, The Liberation of Life (pp.130-131), Cambridge University Press, 1981.
[3] Swimme, Brian and Berry, Thomas, The Universe Story (p. 246), Harper-SanFrancisco, 1994.
Andrew Seal is an activist on land-use issues and earth-based spirituality, and an area coordinator for the Northwest Earth Institute. He lives in McMinnville, Oregon.
©1999 Talking Leaves
Winter 2000
Volume 9, Number 3
Human Time, Natural Time