Universal Theory of Evolution
Julian Huxley and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin formulated universal evolution, the rise of cognition that explains the gradual development of the universe from subatomic particles to human society. Vernadsky and Teilhard formulated a very similar theory, describing the development of the universe from subatomic particles to human society. According to Teilhard, universal evolution integrates the evolution of Christianity and Darwin’s evolution.
On the other hand, Vernadsky wrote more purely from a scientific perspective. There are three levels of classic universal evolution described. The formation of inanimate matter culminates in the hydrosphere, atmosphere, and lithosphere, or collectively the geosphere. Mechanical laws and structures govern progress, and the matter is primarily non-conscious following biogenesis. The origin of life has a higher level of consciousness and complexity, comes into play, and development and progress are the results of Darwin’s mechanism of evolution.
In the last stage, human evolution and emergence, to a deeper leap in development, and interior consciousness resulted in the birth of the noosphere. Just as the biosphere is changing the geosphere, so human intervention is changing the biosphere. Communicative, informational, economic, and psychological processes govern the evolution of society or socialization. For Teilhard, there is a further stage, one of spiritual evolution, the baptism of the collective noosphere, where humanity meets in a single divinity which he calls the omega point.
Humanism and Naturalism
Huxley believed that in a broad sense evolution leads to progress in organizations. However, he rejected classical Aristotelian teleology. According to him, ordinary humans always want to find a purpose in the evolutionary process but believe such reasons are completely wrong. By coining the phrase “progress” aimlessly, he sums up his case in evolution. The modern synthesis that evolutionary progress is an increase in higher levels of biological efficiency he defines as environmental independence and increased control.
In evolution in action, he wrote that natural selection with time produces biological improvements. “Repair” is not yet a technical term that biology recognizes. However, evolution improves living things. In his case with Darwin, he said Darwin was not afraid to use the word for the results of natural selection in general. However, he believes that improvement can be one of the key concepts in evolutionary biology. Improvements in biological machinery and technology are improvements beyond the microscopic eye of early life forms.
Over the entire evolutionary period, people have seen general progress as one example of the improvement in all the major characteristics of life. Thus, “advance” is a useful term for long-term improvements in the general properties of life. On the other hand, improvements are not universal. The lower form manages to stick together with the higher one. Huxley’s view of progressive evolution is similar to that of Rensch and Stebbins. They challenged Huxly’s views in the late 20th century with objections from Cladists. It is, among other things, any suggestion that one group can scientifically describe as “advancing.” Dawkins and Nitecki have surveyed such views through modern assessments.
In general, many people, philosophers, and scientists accept the mechanism of evolution as natural selection. By producing a survival-of-the-fittest, neo-Darwinian theory of evolution has extended Darwin’s concept of natural selection to include modern genetics. Natural selection proposes that individual variants must fight for resources in a finite environment. The individual manifests superior adaptive fitness to his victorious environment in the struggle for reproduction and survival.
The offspring of the winner inherits the winning gene, enriching the species with an increased frequency of the most suitable gene. Reproductive success equates to fitness, or “being the fittest.” Such iteration of the process from generation to generation eventually leads to a genotype, optimally adapted, for the sake of species in a given environment. People expect the species to develop optimal uniformity in a stable environment. Selection of survival-of-the-fittest in a new environment generates a new species and restarts the optimization process.
Regardless, the organism’s microbiome and genes are somatically acquired after birth. It does not depend on the reproduction of the host eukaryote genome to a significant degree. As a result, inheritance of eukaryotic genes alone cannot provide holobiont offspring with holobiont progenitor phenotypic fitness. If no individual is genetically independent, producing individuals, the reproductive success of individual eukaryotes alone cannot be responsible for genetic progress.
Returning to Huxley’s point of view, he writes that there is no separate supernatural realm. All phenomena are part of one natural process of evolution. There is no fundamental separation between religion and science. A drastic reorganization of human religious thought patterns became necessary, from a God-centered pattern to an evolution-centered pattern. The majority of people believe that the proper label for the view is religious naturalism.
In addition, many people also state that ignoring the God hypothesis means abandoning all moral and religious sanctions. However, it means, that once the relief of humans in throwing out outdated ideological furniture is over, then humans must build other things to replace it. In short, Huxley’s humanism stems from his appreciation that human beings are responsible for their destiny. It increases the need for ethical systems and directions. His grandfather T. H. Huxley promoted agnosticism when faced with a similar problem.
However, Julian chose humanism as providing more of an ethical basis. Broadly speaking, Julian’s thinking follows a critical point in human evolution. Human evolution is when humans acquire the use of language. Human development has the potential to open up because it has developed new evolutionary methods. For the most part, the transmission of organized experience by traditional means overrides the automatic process of natural selection as an agent of change. Both Huxley and his grandfather provide a possible link between ethics and evolution. It is possible that Huxley’s view of God can be described as an atheist agnostic view.
By showing the relationship between God and agnostic views in society, Huxley re-emphasized a view in Teilhard’s doctrine. In such a case, an American scholar experienced in Catholic theology named Wolfgang Smith devoted his entire book to criticizing Teilhard’s doctrine. He considered the doctrine to be unscientific. For Teilhard, evolution is not just a scientific theory. However, it is an indisputable truth or is immune from the following contradictions by experience.
It is the basis for his doctrine. Matter becomes spirit, humanity moves towards superhumanity thanks to the brain, scientific research, socialization, and complexification. The explosion of the first atomic bomb became one of the milestones, the vitalization of matter with the creation of super-molecules, the remodeling of the human organism through hormones, and the control of heredity and sex by manipulation of chromosomal genes.
In addition, Teilhard also argues that the human spirit comes from a material, becoming more and more complex until it produces life, consciousness, and being conscious. Believing that the immaterial could emerge from matter, he supported at the same time the idea of an embryonic existence of consciousness from the origin of the universe. Logically, each individual forces themselves to regard existence as a soul that spreads infinitely in the smallest particles.
The Matter of Evolution
From a theological point of view, God created humans evolutionarily. However, Teilhard also denies the Book of Genesis. It’s not just because it proves that God created man. However, he created man in His image. Thus, man becomes complete and perfect. Humans then fall, saying the opposite of evolution is ascending. What is metaphysically and theologically speaking symbolically becomes for Teilhard ahead and is yet to come.
God too, who according to him is neither eternal nor perfect, evolved in symbiosis with the world. Teilhard was a steadfast pantheist, venerated as equal to the Divine. As for Christ, not only is he in place to activate the wheels of progress. He completes an evolutionary ascent but evolves himself. When he writes to his cousin, he says that what dominates his interest is the attempt to build within himself. He defined the place around him as a new religion.
Elsewhere, Christianity can manifest a second time in material spiritual energy. The more Teilhard perfected his theory, the more he freed himself from established Christian doctrine. A “religion on Earth” must replace a “religion in heaven.” With the belief that every human being, materialists, Darwinists, Marxists, and Christians of all kinds will eventually merge around the same pinnacle which is the omega point of Christ.