What do you think?
Rate this book
Evolutionaries: Unlocking the Spiritual and Cultural Potential of Science's Greatest Idea
When it comes to evolution, we’ve all heard about fossils and fruit flies, Darwin and Dawkins. But the idea of evolution is far more profound—and far-reaching. Today, a movement of visionary scientists, philosophers, and spiritual thinkers is forging a new understanding of evolution that honors science, reframes culture, and radically updates spirituality. Carter Phipps calls them Evolutionaries. His groundbreaking book provides the first popular guide to these exciting minds who are illuminating the secrets of our past and expanding the vistas of our future.
What They're Saying:
“Carter Phipps brilliantly expands our understanding of evolution by showing us that a new science is emerging—one that will holistically integrate our understanding of consciousness, cosmology, and evolution.” -Deepak Chopra, Author of How to Know God
“This beautifully written book is a splendid survey of evolutionary thought and a significant contribution to the increasingly important conversation between the natural sciences and our spiritual traditions.” -John F. Haught, Senior Fellow at Georgetown’s Woodstock Theological Center
“As we search for a new orientation that will serve us for the next millennium, it would be hard to find a better guide than Carter Phipps.” -Brian Swimme Ph.D., California Institute of Integral Studies, author of The Universe Story
“A profound and profoundly important new work… absolutely indispensable for lay and professional. The very highest recommendation!” -Ken Wilber, Author of The Integral Vision
“Essential reading for anyone who cares about humanity’s future and our role in creating a better one. Evolutionaries, is a brilliant, accessibly written, and eye-opening book.” -Barbara Marx Hubbard, Author of Heal Your Life
“A rare book, equally delightful and deep, Phipps explores how our growing knowledge about the evolutionary process catalyzes nothing less than a revolutionary understanding of our selves.” -Elizabeth Debold, Author of Mother Daughter Revolution: From Good Girls to Great Women
What They're Saying:
“Carter Phipps brilliantly expands our understanding of evolution by showing us that a new science is emerging—one that will holistically integrate our understanding of consciousness, cosmology, and evolution.” -Deepak Chopra, Author of How to Know God
“This beautifully written book is a splendid survey of evolutionary thought and a significant contribution to the increasingly important conversation between the natural sciences and our spiritual traditions.” -John F. Haught, Senior Fellow at Georgetown’s Woodstock Theological Center
“As we search for a new orientation that will serve us for the next millennium, it would be hard to find a better guide than Carter Phipps.” -Brian Swimme Ph.D., California Institute of Integral Studies, author of The Universe Story
“A profound and profoundly important new work… absolutely indispensable for lay and professional. The very highest recommendation!” -Ken Wilber, Author of The Integral Vision
“Essential reading for anyone who cares about humanity’s future and our role in creating a better one. Evolutionaries, is a brilliant, accessibly written, and eye-opening book.” -Barbara Marx Hubbard, Author of Heal Your Life
“A rare book, equally delightful and deep, Phipps explores how our growing knowledge about the evolutionary process catalyzes nothing less than a revolutionary understanding of our selves.” -Elizabeth Debold, Author of Mother Daughter Revolution: From Good Girls to Great Women
416 pages, Kindle Edition
First published June 26, 2012
65 people are currently reading
300 people want to read
About the author
Carter Phipps
8 books6 followersCarter Phipps is an author, journalist, and leading voice in the emerging field of Evolutionary Spirituality. For the past decade, as executive editor of EnlightenNext magazine, he has been at the forefront of contemporary spiritual, philosophical, and cultural discourse, and his writings have played a key role in making important new thinking accessible to a wider audience. His first book, Evolutionaries: Unlocking the Spiritual and Cultural Potential of Science’s Greatest Idea, was published by Harper Perennial in June 2012. Phipps’s areas of interest and expertise range from metaphysics to politics to science and technology, and his writings combine the careful rigor of investigative journalism and a passionate personal concern for the development of human culture. In 2009, his feature article A Theologian of Renewal was awarded a Gold Award for Editorial Excellence from Folio, the leading magazine industry awards. Phipps regularly presents at conferences; has spoken at educational institutions including Brown University, JFK University, and the Institute for Transpersonal Psychology; and participates in leadership gatherings, including Deepak Chopra’s Evolutionary Leaders Forum, the invitation-only Assembly of Leaders prior to the 2004 Parliament of the World’s Religions, and the 2008 Edinburgh Festival of Spirituality and Peace. He has appeared on BBC Radio’s “Reporting Religion” and New Dimensions radio, and is a regular guest on Deepak Chopra’s Wellness Radio on Sirius. He is a board member at EnlightenNext and the Open Future Institute. With the publication of “Evolutionaries”, Phipps is poised to become the go-to expert on evolutionary spirituality and the broader evolutionary worldview out of which this potent and relevant new vision is emerging.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
July 10, 2012
The main argument of the book: Up until the scientific revolution, some half a century ago, religion reigned supreme in the realm of belief and understanding. Since that time, though--and especially since the introduction of the theory of evolution in 1859--science has increasingly challenged religion as the chief source of how we understand the world and our place in it. Science's increasing influence can be seen in the growing trend towards secularism in the past 200 years, and particularly in the last century, as church and state have been increasingly separated, and a growing percentage of the population has moved away from the world's religions.
Still, though, religion is not going down without a fight. What's more, even many who have turned away from religion question science's ability to provide the kinds of understandings that truly satisfy the human psyche. The problem, many believe, is that science, with its materialist explanations, fails to accommodate our deeper spiritual and moral nature. According to the author Carter Phipps, though, while science and spirituality may seem diametrically opposed, the latest developments in evolutionary theory are actually upsetting this notion.
This is the case because the theory of evolution, which was once confined to the realm of biology, has now spread to envelop every other domain of human inquiry, such that it has become the key paradigm in understanding the natural (and meta-natural) world, from biology to psychology to morality to culture to spirit to god to the unfolding of the universe. The result is that evolution can now be turned to in order to answer virtually all of our deepest and most profound existential questions, and in a unified and coherent way that does in fact satisfy our deepest spiritual longings.
More than providing just a way of understanding the world, though, Phipps argues that an evolutionary worldview provides us with a moral guide in terms of how to act, and what to strive for in life. This is the case because, to begin with, such a worldview allows us to see that human agency is possible in the truest sense of the word, and that it does indeed have an important impact. When it comes to using our agency, an evolutionary worldview prescribes working towards the good and the continued evolution of our own species, the planet, and even the entire universe. While the specifics of this enterprise remain to be worked out, Phipps hints at the idea that this project should include a system of global cooperation that features pan-governance with ecological sustainability at its heart.
At least in the near term. In the long-term, as evolution continues to proceed (perhaps at an accelerating rate), Phipps flirts with idea that the role of human agency in forwarding the evolutionary project may stretch beyond the borders of our own planet and extend even to the edges of the universe (or multiverse).
When I say that this is Phipps' argument, it is true that the author is very much a proponent of the evolutionary worldview. However, rather than focusing on his own particular views in the book, Phipps centers his attention on the theories that the leading thinkers have advanced in the field. This includes not only current theorists, but all of the major theorists that have been involved with the worldview since its inception some 200 years ago (beginning with Georg Hegel--whom Phipps identifies as the first explicitly evolutionary philosopher).
Phipps does do a very good job of outlining the theories of these major thinkers, and, through this, providing a broad overview of the evolutionary worldview. When I say broad overview, I really mean it: Phipps very much sticks to a general and theoretical exploration of the evolutionary worldview. In one sense, this is an advantage, as it allows the reader to gain a broad picture of such a worldview (to see the forest as a whole, rather than just the trees, as it were). However, the devil is in the details, as they say, and I did find that the lack of details in some cases compromised the believability of the theories (which are, in some cases, highly speculative).
Also, Phipps does well to show how evolutionary views have spilled out of science and into more meta-natural domains, such as spirituality and conceptions of god (theology). While this is no doubt interesting, it presents a problem. The approach of scientific evolutionism to spirituality and god is entirely different from an evolutionarily-informed spirituality and theology (indeed, scientific evolutionism thinks of the phenomena of 'spirit' and 'god' as products [if not bi-products] of our evolved brain, and hence ultimately illusory--or at least not 'real' in any sense like spiritual/theistically-inclined people think they are).
Given that this is the case, as evolutionary theory is pushed beyond the boundaries of science, it necessarily splits into opposing sects. This is a major problem for any supposedly whole and coherent evolutionary worldview. Phipps glosses over this issue by saying that subjective experience is every bit as important as objective reality (thus showing where he stands on the issue). While this may well be true, it is unlikely to convince any staunch scientific evolutionist that 'spirit' and 'god' are proper subjects of evolutionary theory--much less that we should be exploring and/or embracing an evolutionarily-informed spirituality and theology. As it stands, this issue is left unresolved in the book, and in fact seems completely insoluble, thus forcing us to question how viable a unified and coherent evolutionary worldview (that includes spirituality) really is.
Still, though, religion is not going down without a fight. What's more, even many who have turned away from religion question science's ability to provide the kinds of understandings that truly satisfy the human psyche. The problem, many believe, is that science, with its materialist explanations, fails to accommodate our deeper spiritual and moral nature. According to the author Carter Phipps, though, while science and spirituality may seem diametrically opposed, the latest developments in evolutionary theory are actually upsetting this notion.
This is the case because the theory of evolution, which was once confined to the realm of biology, has now spread to envelop every other domain of human inquiry, such that it has become the key paradigm in understanding the natural (and meta-natural) world, from biology to psychology to morality to culture to spirit to god to the unfolding of the universe. The result is that evolution can now be turned to in order to answer virtually all of our deepest and most profound existential questions, and in a unified and coherent way that does in fact satisfy our deepest spiritual longings.
More than providing just a way of understanding the world, though, Phipps argues that an evolutionary worldview provides us with a moral guide in terms of how to act, and what to strive for in life. This is the case because, to begin with, such a worldview allows us to see that human agency is possible in the truest sense of the word, and that it does indeed have an important impact. When it comes to using our agency, an evolutionary worldview prescribes working towards the good and the continued evolution of our own species, the planet, and even the entire universe. While the specifics of this enterprise remain to be worked out, Phipps hints at the idea that this project should include a system of global cooperation that features pan-governance with ecological sustainability at its heart.
At least in the near term. In the long-term, as evolution continues to proceed (perhaps at an accelerating rate), Phipps flirts with idea that the role of human agency in forwarding the evolutionary project may stretch beyond the borders of our own planet and extend even to the edges of the universe (or multiverse).
When I say that this is Phipps' argument, it is true that the author is very much a proponent of the evolutionary worldview. However, rather than focusing on his own particular views in the book, Phipps centers his attention on the theories that the leading thinkers have advanced in the field. This includes not only current theorists, but all of the major theorists that have been involved with the worldview since its inception some 200 years ago (beginning with Georg Hegel--whom Phipps identifies as the first explicitly evolutionary philosopher).
Phipps does do a very good job of outlining the theories of these major thinkers, and, through this, providing a broad overview of the evolutionary worldview. When I say broad overview, I really mean it: Phipps very much sticks to a general and theoretical exploration of the evolutionary worldview. In one sense, this is an advantage, as it allows the reader to gain a broad picture of such a worldview (to see the forest as a whole, rather than just the trees, as it were). However, the devil is in the details, as they say, and I did find that the lack of details in some cases compromised the believability of the theories (which are, in some cases, highly speculative).
Also, Phipps does well to show how evolutionary views have spilled out of science and into more meta-natural domains, such as spirituality and conceptions of god (theology). While this is no doubt interesting, it presents a problem. The approach of scientific evolutionism to spirituality and god is entirely different from an evolutionarily-informed spirituality and theology (indeed, scientific evolutionism thinks of the phenomena of 'spirit' and 'god' as products [if not bi-products] of our evolved brain, and hence ultimately illusory--or at least not 'real' in any sense like spiritual/theistically-inclined people think they are).
Given that this is the case, as evolutionary theory is pushed beyond the boundaries of science, it necessarily splits into opposing sects. This is a major problem for any supposedly whole and coherent evolutionary worldview. Phipps glosses over this issue by saying that subjective experience is every bit as important as objective reality (thus showing where he stands on the issue). While this may well be true, it is unlikely to convince any staunch scientific evolutionist that 'spirit' and 'god' are proper subjects of evolutionary theory--much less that we should be exploring and/or embracing an evolutionarily-informed spirituality and theology. As it stands, this issue is left unresolved in the book, and in fact seems completely insoluble, thus forcing us to question how viable a unified and coherent evolutionary worldview (that includes spirituality) really is.
March 7, 2020
A combination of fringe science, cultural marxism/cultural materialism, identitarianism, social justice, environmentalism, climate change, evolutionary biology, a variety of new-age discourses and too many other ism to go into.
The first section of the book was interesting examining the different ways evolutionary thought is at work in the world today.
Phipps begins to stumble with futurism and collapse into new age utopianism, though centrist in nature, by the end of the book.
The book is uneven. There is enough here to amuse and a lot to annoy. In the end, it might be described as a hippy-dippy triple into the fringes of thought. If you are a fan of Ken Wilber you'll like this book. If not, you can safely pass it over.
Rating: 3 out of 5 Stars.
The first section of the book was interesting examining the different ways evolutionary thought is at work in the world today.
Phipps begins to stumble with futurism and collapse into new age utopianism, though centrist in nature, by the end of the book.
The book is uneven. There is enough here to amuse and a lot to annoy. In the end, it might be described as a hippy-dippy triple into the fringes of thought. If you are a fan of Ken Wilber you'll like this book. If not, you can safely pass it over.
Rating: 3 out of 5 Stars.
December 1, 2021
This book by Carter Phipps is an outstanding work of intellectual journalism. That is, it’s intended for a general audience. It provides basic explanations of key terms and examines thinkers within its field with enough depth to whet the appetite of the curious. (Like yours truly.) The book explores the wider implications of the theory of evolution. Of course, the theory was grounded in the biological insights of Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace, but the concept of development, of change through time in response to changing circumstances, including the course of the history of humankind, came before the two biologists. This new way of thinking is most widely known through the writings of the early nineteenth-century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. (The full name just seems so appropriate.) Thus, while evolution is best known in the sphere of biology, it’s branched off into other fields, including psychology, sociology, politics, philosophy, and spirituality. Some argue that this is a bastardization of the theory of evolution and that it's fraught with problems (it can be and has been; see Darwinism, Social). But the primary idea of change through time that more often than not reveals a pattern of increasing complexity and sophistication, provides a tonic for thinking in other fields, too. Centering his reporting on (more or less) contemporary figures (with a few backward glances I’ll mention later), Phipps shares how this core concept ignited new and important trains of thought in many fields.
Before diving in further, I should share Phipps’s definition of evolution:
Evolution, as an idea, transcends biology. It is better thought of as a broad set of principles and patterns that generate novelty, change, and development over time.
Phipps, Carter. Evolutionaries (p. 27). Harper Perennial. Kindle Edition.
With this perspective, Phipps goes on to provide his first take on what defines an evolutionary: “Evolutionaries are those who have woken up, looked around, and realized: We are moving.” Id. p. 38. The “moving” here is not so much physical (although it certainly includes physical movement), but it primarily addresses behaviors, actions, ideas, and culture. To borrow from the Buddhists, all is impermanence. But impermanence with an attitude, as it were. And this includes not only all the diverse species of life, but also individual humans, their societies and cultures, and even the Universe as a whole. We’re all dancing a dance to rhythms that only whisper to us and that bring us together and then apart in new, unexpected patterns. But let us return to Phipps’s descriptions of his subject matter:
Clearly there is much overlap between Evolutionaries and evolutionists. But as I implied in chapter 1, I intend for Evolutionary to mean more than that. Evolutionary is a play on the word “revolutionary,” and I mean it to convey something of the revolutionary nature of evolution as an idea. Evolutionaries are revolutionaries, with all the personal and philosophical commitment that word implies. They are not merely curious bystanders to the evolutionary process, passive believers in the established sciences of evolution, though all certainly value those insights. They are committed activists and advocates—often passionate ones—for the importance of evolution at a cultural level. They are positive agents of change who subscribe to the underappreciated truth that evolution, comprehensively understood, implicates the individual. Indeed, an Evolutionary is someone who has internalized evolution, who appreciates it not only intellectually but also viscerally. Evolutionaries recognize the vast process we are embedded within but also the urgent need for our own culture to evolve and for each of us to play a positive role in that outcome.
He continues:
With that in mind, I would like to outline three critical characteristics common to Evolutionaries. This is hardly an exhaustive list, but I hope it manages to capture the essential spirit of this designation. First, Evolutionaries are cross-disciplinary generalists. Second, Evolutionaries are developing the capacity to cognize the vast timescales of our evolutionary history. Third, Evolutionaries embody a new spirit of optimism.
Id. p. 40.
It is this final characteristic that makes these Evolutionaries so important: optimism. I’ll shock no one in opining that there's a dearth of hope these days. We humans, as a species, are lighting our own funeral pyre. Even rudimentary issues that shouldn’t create division or fear do so. If we can find legitimate grounds for optimism, we should grab firmly ahold of them. My opinion is that we’re headed for some remarkable and in some (perhaps many) ways severe changes, but can we as a species come out ahead on the other side? Maybe, but any predictions aside, we should set our course for the best possible outcome, and many of the thinkers given voice in his book provide suggestions along these lines. Carter provides a concise description of what he’s asserting:
Evolutionaries are deep optimists. I’m not talking about a naïve optimism, a forced optimism, a superficial optimism, or even a hopeful optimism but an informed confidence in the knowledge that evolution is at work in the processes of consciousness and culture, and that we can place our own hands on the levers of those processes and make a positive impact. It is a subtle but powerful current of conviction that lifts the sails of the psyche and propels it forward into the future. Evolutionaries don’t just believe that the future can be better than the past; somehow they know it—like a great leader knows that she can make a difference; like a great athlete knows that he can compete and win. I would suggest that the unique flavor of this evolutionary optimism cannot be attributed to a mere personal feeling, inspiration, or belief. It runs deeper than that. Evolutionaries evince a confidence that is different from the brashness and bluster that flows out of the personal ego. It carries with it a conviction that reaches beyond any quality found only within the boundaries of the personality. And they transmit that confidence to others. We tend to transmit to others how we feel about life at a fundamental level. When one spends time with a great mystic or saint, there is a quality to the personality that is recognizable, whatever the particular tradition of that individual or belief system—a quality of ease, of deep peace, and of transcendent being that we experience in the company of those whose source of confidence lies far deeper than the individual psyche.
Id. p. 51.
But lest you conclude that Phipps’s Evolutionraries are simply a bunch of Pollyannas, he quickly disabuses the reader of any such conclusion:
It is important to note here that the evolutionary optimism I am speaking about does not equate to a conviction in an inevitable positive outcome, or a belief in a miraculous “shift” that is just about to happen. We see this kind of thinking all too often in spiritual-but-not-religious circles—whether it be a Mayan prophecy, the Harmonic Convergence, or some sort of “Earth Change” that will pave the way to the future. Such ideas are often held by individuals with the best of motives, who look out at a world of climate change, terrorism, corruption, overpopulation, and financial disaster, where billions live in poverty, and conclude that things are not getting better at all. Or if they are, they aren’t improving fast enough. And then they pray, hope, meditate—for some event; some change of consciousness; some immanent convergence, emergence, or resurgence of love, light, peace, and compassion to deliver us from the darkness and ignorance that has a hold on our collective soul. And too often, they invoke the term “evolution” to describe this shift in consciousness. Such thinking has nothing to do with evolution as I understand it. In fact, I would suggest that it is not a faith in evolution that leads one to embrace such naïve or exaggerated hopes but, in fact, a lack of faith. It is an insufficient appreciation of the power of evolution and a failure to understand how it works, at a cultural level, that leads some to start reaching for super-historical forces to emerge and save the day. When we begin to appreciate the true dimensions of the vast evolutionary process that we are a part of, our optimism becomes grounded in the slow but demonstrable reality of actual development.
Id. p. 52.
One should note that no one, Evolutionary or other, can predict the future with any accuracy. Imagine a variety of futures? Yes. But predict accurately? No. But then the outcome of any process arises in part--and perhaps in large part--from the vision of those who act to influence it. (And by "act," I would include imagining a future.)
Following these introductory remarks, Phipps takes his reader through a gallery of Evolutionaries, some via personal interviews and some through explication of their works. Whatever the medium, his tour is a who’s-who of key figures that includes biologists Lynn Margulis, David Sloan Wilson (all-too-briefly in my opinion, but then Wilson has done a lot even since 2014), Simon Conway-Morris, and Rupert Sheldrake; generalists (a term that Carter uses to define Evolutionaries) Robert Wright and Howard Bloom; complexity theorist Stuart Kaufmann; techno-futurists and transhumanists Ray Kurzweil and Kevin Kelly; economist and complexity theorist W. Brian Arthur; lawyer-turned-integral theorist Steve McIntosh and integral theorist Ken Wilber; philosopher and social theorist Jurgen Habermas; Gary Lachman, historian of Western thought; Don Beck of Spiral Dynamics fame; Michael Dowd, fundamentalist preacher-turned-evolutionary teacher; Thomas Berry, Catholic monastic and cultural historian; cosmologist Brian Swimme; and process theologian Phillip Clayton. I've listed only those with whom I had some prior acquaintance (some fleeting; some extensive) and who are contemporary (I think only Thomas Berry (1914-2009) on this list is deceased). And this is only a partial list of contemporaries! Phipps does his homework and pounds the pavement to get his stories.
But in addition to those with whom he spoke or who are still active among us, Phipps discusses key figures from the past: Hegel; James Mark Baldwin, Henri Bergson; Charles Saunders Pierce; Alfred North Whitehead; Charles Hartshorne (1897-2000!); Jean Gebser; and others. And among the others are two figures who seem to be the guiding minds of the Evolutionary brigade: the Indian independence activist, philosopher, and mystic, Sri Aurobindo (1972-1950), and the Jesuit paleontologist Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955). Indeed, if we were to be compelled to identify one guiding spirit in the train of evolutionary thought, it would have to be that of Teilhard, followed closely by Aurobindo. (Alas, I must confess that I’ve not read the original texts of either of these two giants, even as Aurobindo was recommended to me by a young Iranian-Spanish-Irish chest master at a meditation retreat; and I’ve known of Teilhard since my undergrad years. Perhaps having enjoyed Phipps’s treatment of them, this will be the year!)
I would be remiss, I think, not to note that much of Phipps’s work with this book was in connection with the periodicals What Is Enlightenment, later re-named EnlightenNext, for which he served as executive editor from 1999-2010. (I was a frequent reader of those periodicals and will attest to the quality of their product.) The periodical was associated with the teachings of Andrew Cohen, an American spiritual teacher, whom Phipps describes as his “friend and mentor.” Phipps discusses Cohen and his relationship with him in the book. However, the book was copyrighted in 2012. In 2013 Cohen withdrew from public teaching amid criticisms from students (followers) who accused him of abusive and authoritarian behavior, and he issued a public apology for his actions in 2015. (In distinction from many self-styled “enlightened” teachers, these allegations didn’t involve sexual misconduct so far as I can tell.) However, having noted all this, I don’t believe that it negates the arguments Phipps makes in this book. And while I suspect that Cohen's fall may have had caused some personal consternation for Phipps, his work has continued to prosper. He went on to become the co-founder and Managing Director of the Institute for Cultural Evolution, a nonprofit social policy think-tank based in Boulder, Colorado inspired by the insights of Integral Philosophy. And via The Institute for Cultural Evolution, he became associated with the Post-Progressive Alliance, an off-shoot of the Institute for Cultural Evolution (and of which I am a member). The Post-Progressive Alliance seeks a path out of our current “culture wars” and its attendant political dysfunction via a better understanding and appreciation of current world views and envisioning new sets of values that incorporate the best of existing values with new perspectives. (For a complete consideration of the thinking that prompted the Post-Progressive Alliance, see Steve McIntosh's Developmental Politics: How American Can Grow into a Better Version of Itself.) Also, in 2020 Phipps and co-authors Steve McIntosh and John Mackey published Conscious Leadership: Elevating Humanity Through Business. So whatever disruption Phipps may have suffered from the downfall of Cohen, he seems to have come out ahead.
Before closing, I should also note that Phipps steps from behind the authorial curtain on many occasions, all to my delight. His comments and revelations (of personal experiences and beliefs) allow the reader to better know their guide, where’s he’s been and where he might be headed. His questions, doubts, and experiences enhance the narrative and serve as a contrast and commentary upon the ideas considered in the book (valuable as they are). For instance, Phipps notes his change in demeanor during Sooner football games while discussing Don Beck and Spiral Dynamics:
[W]hen I watch football, especially University of Oklahoma football, I undergo a rather startling personality change. Temporarily, I leave behind my mild-mannered exterior and a whole subpersonality comes to the forefront of my consciousness. It’s as if I’m getting in touch with my tribal roots, with warriorlike values of power, will, and domination that are not so prominent in my everyday personality. A whole new attitude emerges in my consciousness, which I suspect is more related to ancient tribal wars than anything I’m engaged with currently.
Id. p. 202
As someone whose wife fears for her safety because of my sometimes wild gesticulations and verbal outbursts during Hawkeye games, I can relate. His report impresses me with a point about Spiral Dynamics that's more visceral (and therefore more memorable) than it otherwise would have been.
The only shortcoming of the book is that it ends, in a manner of speaking, in 2012. What's gone on with Evolutionaries since 2012? Who has joined the ranks? What new developments are there? Have the ideas of Evolutionaries gained wider acceptance in academia and other fields? And how do the Evolutionaries see themselves in relation to other contemporary trains of thought? Of course, every book must end and all knowledge arises over time. We can't blame an author for an inability to escape the constraints of time. But that being said, it does provoke in me a desire to further explore the thinking of those that Phipps has identified and to consider who, present or past, may have a place in this pantheon of exploratory thinkers. An intriguing project to consider!
Before diving in further, I should share Phipps’s definition of evolution:
Evolution, as an idea, transcends biology. It is better thought of as a broad set of principles and patterns that generate novelty, change, and development over time.
Phipps, Carter. Evolutionaries (p. 27). Harper Perennial. Kindle Edition.
With this perspective, Phipps goes on to provide his first take on what defines an evolutionary: “Evolutionaries are those who have woken up, looked around, and realized: We are moving.” Id. p. 38. The “moving” here is not so much physical (although it certainly includes physical movement), but it primarily addresses behaviors, actions, ideas, and culture. To borrow from the Buddhists, all is impermanence. But impermanence with an attitude, as it were. And this includes not only all the diverse species of life, but also individual humans, their societies and cultures, and even the Universe as a whole. We’re all dancing a dance to rhythms that only whisper to us and that bring us together and then apart in new, unexpected patterns. But let us return to Phipps’s descriptions of his subject matter:
Clearly there is much overlap between Evolutionaries and evolutionists. But as I implied in chapter 1, I intend for Evolutionary to mean more than that. Evolutionary is a play on the word “revolutionary,” and I mean it to convey something of the revolutionary nature of evolution as an idea. Evolutionaries are revolutionaries, with all the personal and philosophical commitment that word implies. They are not merely curious bystanders to the evolutionary process, passive believers in the established sciences of evolution, though all certainly value those insights. They are committed activists and advocates—often passionate ones—for the importance of evolution at a cultural level. They are positive agents of change who subscribe to the underappreciated truth that evolution, comprehensively understood, implicates the individual. Indeed, an Evolutionary is someone who has internalized evolution, who appreciates it not only intellectually but also viscerally. Evolutionaries recognize the vast process we are embedded within but also the urgent need for our own culture to evolve and for each of us to play a positive role in that outcome.
He continues:
With that in mind, I would like to outline three critical characteristics common to Evolutionaries. This is hardly an exhaustive list, but I hope it manages to capture the essential spirit of this designation. First, Evolutionaries are cross-disciplinary generalists. Second, Evolutionaries are developing the capacity to cognize the vast timescales of our evolutionary history. Third, Evolutionaries embody a new spirit of optimism.
Id. p. 40.
It is this final characteristic that makes these Evolutionaries so important: optimism. I’ll shock no one in opining that there's a dearth of hope these days. We humans, as a species, are lighting our own funeral pyre. Even rudimentary issues that shouldn’t create division or fear do so. If we can find legitimate grounds for optimism, we should grab firmly ahold of them. My opinion is that we’re headed for some remarkable and in some (perhaps many) ways severe changes, but can we as a species come out ahead on the other side? Maybe, but any predictions aside, we should set our course for the best possible outcome, and many of the thinkers given voice in his book provide suggestions along these lines. Carter provides a concise description of what he’s asserting:
Evolutionaries are deep optimists. I’m not talking about a naïve optimism, a forced optimism, a superficial optimism, or even a hopeful optimism but an informed confidence in the knowledge that evolution is at work in the processes of consciousness and culture, and that we can place our own hands on the levers of those processes and make a positive impact. It is a subtle but powerful current of conviction that lifts the sails of the psyche and propels it forward into the future. Evolutionaries don’t just believe that the future can be better than the past; somehow they know it—like a great leader knows that she can make a difference; like a great athlete knows that he can compete and win. I would suggest that the unique flavor of this evolutionary optimism cannot be attributed to a mere personal feeling, inspiration, or belief. It runs deeper than that. Evolutionaries evince a confidence that is different from the brashness and bluster that flows out of the personal ego. It carries with it a conviction that reaches beyond any quality found only within the boundaries of the personality. And they transmit that confidence to others. We tend to transmit to others how we feel about life at a fundamental level. When one spends time with a great mystic or saint, there is a quality to the personality that is recognizable, whatever the particular tradition of that individual or belief system—a quality of ease, of deep peace, and of transcendent being that we experience in the company of those whose source of confidence lies far deeper than the individual psyche.
Id. p. 51.
But lest you conclude that Phipps’s Evolutionraries are simply a bunch of Pollyannas, he quickly disabuses the reader of any such conclusion:
It is important to note here that the evolutionary optimism I am speaking about does not equate to a conviction in an inevitable positive outcome, or a belief in a miraculous “shift” that is just about to happen. We see this kind of thinking all too often in spiritual-but-not-religious circles—whether it be a Mayan prophecy, the Harmonic Convergence, or some sort of “Earth Change” that will pave the way to the future. Such ideas are often held by individuals with the best of motives, who look out at a world of climate change, terrorism, corruption, overpopulation, and financial disaster, where billions live in poverty, and conclude that things are not getting better at all. Or if they are, they aren’t improving fast enough. And then they pray, hope, meditate—for some event; some change of consciousness; some immanent convergence, emergence, or resurgence of love, light, peace, and compassion to deliver us from the darkness and ignorance that has a hold on our collective soul. And too often, they invoke the term “evolution” to describe this shift in consciousness. Such thinking has nothing to do with evolution as I understand it. In fact, I would suggest that it is not a faith in evolution that leads one to embrace such naïve or exaggerated hopes but, in fact, a lack of faith. It is an insufficient appreciation of the power of evolution and a failure to understand how it works, at a cultural level, that leads some to start reaching for super-historical forces to emerge and save the day. When we begin to appreciate the true dimensions of the vast evolutionary process that we are a part of, our optimism becomes grounded in the slow but demonstrable reality of actual development.
Id. p. 52.
One should note that no one, Evolutionary or other, can predict the future with any accuracy. Imagine a variety of futures? Yes. But predict accurately? No. But then the outcome of any process arises in part--and perhaps in large part--from the vision of those who act to influence it. (And by "act," I would include imagining a future.)
Following these introductory remarks, Phipps takes his reader through a gallery of Evolutionaries, some via personal interviews and some through explication of their works. Whatever the medium, his tour is a who’s-who of key figures that includes biologists Lynn Margulis, David Sloan Wilson (all-too-briefly in my opinion, but then Wilson has done a lot even since 2014), Simon Conway-Morris, and Rupert Sheldrake; generalists (a term that Carter uses to define Evolutionaries) Robert Wright and Howard Bloom; complexity theorist Stuart Kaufmann; techno-futurists and transhumanists Ray Kurzweil and Kevin Kelly; economist and complexity theorist W. Brian Arthur; lawyer-turned-integral theorist Steve McIntosh and integral theorist Ken Wilber; philosopher and social theorist Jurgen Habermas; Gary Lachman, historian of Western thought; Don Beck of Spiral Dynamics fame; Michael Dowd, fundamentalist preacher-turned-evolutionary teacher; Thomas Berry, Catholic monastic and cultural historian; cosmologist Brian Swimme; and process theologian Phillip Clayton. I've listed only those with whom I had some prior acquaintance (some fleeting; some extensive) and who are contemporary (I think only Thomas Berry (1914-2009) on this list is deceased). And this is only a partial list of contemporaries! Phipps does his homework and pounds the pavement to get his stories.
But in addition to those with whom he spoke or who are still active among us, Phipps discusses key figures from the past: Hegel; James Mark Baldwin, Henri Bergson; Charles Saunders Pierce; Alfred North Whitehead; Charles Hartshorne (1897-2000!); Jean Gebser; and others. And among the others are two figures who seem to be the guiding minds of the Evolutionary brigade: the Indian independence activist, philosopher, and mystic, Sri Aurobindo (1972-1950), and the Jesuit paleontologist Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955). Indeed, if we were to be compelled to identify one guiding spirit in the train of evolutionary thought, it would have to be that of Teilhard, followed closely by Aurobindo. (Alas, I must confess that I’ve not read the original texts of either of these two giants, even as Aurobindo was recommended to me by a young Iranian-Spanish-Irish chest master at a meditation retreat; and I’ve known of Teilhard since my undergrad years. Perhaps having enjoyed Phipps’s treatment of them, this will be the year!)
I would be remiss, I think, not to note that much of Phipps’s work with this book was in connection with the periodicals What Is Enlightenment, later re-named EnlightenNext, for which he served as executive editor from 1999-2010. (I was a frequent reader of those periodicals and will attest to the quality of their product.) The periodical was associated with the teachings of Andrew Cohen, an American spiritual teacher, whom Phipps describes as his “friend and mentor.” Phipps discusses Cohen and his relationship with him in the book. However, the book was copyrighted in 2012. In 2013 Cohen withdrew from public teaching amid criticisms from students (followers) who accused him of abusive and authoritarian behavior, and he issued a public apology for his actions in 2015. (In distinction from many self-styled “enlightened” teachers, these allegations didn’t involve sexual misconduct so far as I can tell.) However, having noted all this, I don’t believe that it negates the arguments Phipps makes in this book. And while I suspect that Cohen's fall may have had caused some personal consternation for Phipps, his work has continued to prosper. He went on to become the co-founder and Managing Director of the Institute for Cultural Evolution, a nonprofit social policy think-tank based in Boulder, Colorado inspired by the insights of Integral Philosophy. And via The Institute for Cultural Evolution, he became associated with the Post-Progressive Alliance, an off-shoot of the Institute for Cultural Evolution (and of which I am a member). The Post-Progressive Alliance seeks a path out of our current “culture wars” and its attendant political dysfunction via a better understanding and appreciation of current world views and envisioning new sets of values that incorporate the best of existing values with new perspectives. (For a complete consideration of the thinking that prompted the Post-Progressive Alliance, see Steve McIntosh's Developmental Politics: How American Can Grow into a Better Version of Itself.) Also, in 2020 Phipps and co-authors Steve McIntosh and John Mackey published Conscious Leadership: Elevating Humanity Through Business. So whatever disruption Phipps may have suffered from the downfall of Cohen, he seems to have come out ahead.
Before closing, I should also note that Phipps steps from behind the authorial curtain on many occasions, all to my delight. His comments and revelations (of personal experiences and beliefs) allow the reader to better know their guide, where’s he’s been and where he might be headed. His questions, doubts, and experiences enhance the narrative and serve as a contrast and commentary upon the ideas considered in the book (valuable as they are). For instance, Phipps notes his change in demeanor during Sooner football games while discussing Don Beck and Spiral Dynamics:
[W]hen I watch football, especially University of Oklahoma football, I undergo a rather startling personality change. Temporarily, I leave behind my mild-mannered exterior and a whole subpersonality comes to the forefront of my consciousness. It’s as if I’m getting in touch with my tribal roots, with warriorlike values of power, will, and domination that are not so prominent in my everyday personality. A whole new attitude emerges in my consciousness, which I suspect is more related to ancient tribal wars than anything I’m engaged with currently.
Id. p. 202
As someone whose wife fears for her safety because of my sometimes wild gesticulations and verbal outbursts during Hawkeye games, I can relate. His report impresses me with a point about Spiral Dynamics that's more visceral (and therefore more memorable) than it otherwise would have been.
The only shortcoming of the book is that it ends, in a manner of speaking, in 2012. What's gone on with Evolutionaries since 2012? Who has joined the ranks? What new developments are there? Have the ideas of Evolutionaries gained wider acceptance in academia and other fields? And how do the Evolutionaries see themselves in relation to other contemporary trains of thought? Of course, every book must end and all knowledge arises over time. We can't blame an author for an inability to escape the constraints of time. But that being said, it does provoke in me a desire to further explore the thinking of those that Phipps has identified and to consider who, present or past, may have a place in this pantheon of exploratory thinkers. An intriguing project to consider!
April 29, 2014
I hardly know where to begin this review. Let's start with genre. I could never determine what this book wanted to be. Was it a philosophical treatise? Not really, because it never offered a consistent, clear system of suppositions and logical conclusions that a person might engage and critique. While Phipps does discuss (in relatively shallow detail) several philosophies, he does not advance one of his own. Was it a history to date of the concept of evolutionary philosophy? Not entirely. It does offer backgrounds and sketches of influential thinkers in the field and their philosophies, but the relentlessly credulous tone and the reluctance to reference materials outside of the evolutionary philosophy circle make the work dubious as a piece of research. It has its best claim as an extended essay, a piece of creative non-fiction, in which one need not offer proof of the arguments but rather present them in an interesting light. Phipps generally succeeds here. He populates the book with fascinating people and tantalizing (if vague, unproven, and post-hoc) concepts.
Phipps has clearly invested a great deal of his life and his energy to the beliefs that he now tries to describe, but he provides few points of access for people not already inclined to agree. He exacerbates this problem by implying that anyone who can't see the truth of these theories and connections has not yet reached the level of enlightenment and transcendence achieved by the people who concocted them. This heavy-handed treatment reminded me so strongly of "The Emperor's New Clothes" that I became excessively dismissive of the arguments.
In terms of the writer's craft, I have many complaints. The book does not follow a clear progression from start to finish, often circling back or digressing. The frequent use of convoluted metaphors tends to muddy the picture instead of clarifying it, which is a shame, because concrete metaphors can often do a great deal to elucidate abstract theories. The gushing prose often leaves the reader exhausted at the end of successively nested dependent or independent clauses and wondering what the original topic of the sentence was. Finally and most damning, Phipps does not provide a clear bibliography for those who would like to pursue these philosophies straight from the horses' mouths.
If you were considering reading this book, I would say instead to skim through it for the key names and then just read books by or about them individually. It might take more time, but it would almost certainly yield clearer results. Conversely, you could get someone else to read it for you and then tell you about it. Like I said, the ideas and people merit consideration, just not in this form.
Phipps has clearly invested a great deal of his life and his energy to the beliefs that he now tries to describe, but he provides few points of access for people not already inclined to agree. He exacerbates this problem by implying that anyone who can't see the truth of these theories and connections has not yet reached the level of enlightenment and transcendence achieved by the people who concocted them. This heavy-handed treatment reminded me so strongly of "The Emperor's New Clothes" that I became excessively dismissive of the arguments.
In terms of the writer's craft, I have many complaints. The book does not follow a clear progression from start to finish, often circling back or digressing. The frequent use of convoluted metaphors tends to muddy the picture instead of clarifying it, which is a shame, because concrete metaphors can often do a great deal to elucidate abstract theories. The gushing prose often leaves the reader exhausted at the end of successively nested dependent or independent clauses and wondering what the original topic of the sentence was. Finally and most damning, Phipps does not provide a clear bibliography for those who would like to pursue these philosophies straight from the horses' mouths.
If you were considering reading this book, I would say instead to skim through it for the key names and then just read books by or about them individually. It might take more time, but it would almost certainly yield clearer results. Conversely, you could get someone else to read it for you and then tell you about it. Like I said, the ideas and people merit consideration, just not in this form.
June 8, 2015
“The Spaghetti Monster” is my son’s imaginary entity for the existence of the unprovable and what is not scientifically falsifiable. He uses it as a synonym for God but it has other applications. There is an entire list of mysteries in the world of science which are ‘monstrous’ puzzles, incongruous pieces that do not fit together in our current paradigm of an evolutionary worldview. “The greatest mystery of evolution,” admits Carter Phipps, “is consciousness itself.”[1]
The problem is how do we explain self-awareness in a pre-biotic soup and the subsequent mysterious creation of a multi-cellular organism with live DNA from single-celled organisms (bacteria) that have neither a distinct nucleus with a membrane nor other specialized structures capable of the processes necessary to evolve into complex life forms, as man.
God or an intelligent designer is for a believer the obvious explanation, but for the atheist, evolutionary theory must come up with another explanation.
Elizabet Sahtouris, evolutionary biologist and self-described bio-philosopher, suggests a cooperative effort within a community of differing bacteria with specialized functionality or purpose. She refers to the symbiotic (cooperative) state of early prokaryotes bacteria as living in “complex bacterial colonies” having a “collective intelligence.. …to turn aggregate action into intelligent behavior.” Phipps is awestruck, agreeably calling it “off the charts.”[2]
The problem with this idea, that of a symbiotic relationship among complex bacterial colonies, is that it proposes a process counter to Darwin’s original theory of survival of the fittest. Life evolves by war in Darwin’s mind, not peaceful co-existence. Sahtouris was rewriting the script but it was based in part on an astute observation that symbiotic relationships do work in nature—even man is a beneficiary. The evolutionary process this way can even create ‘friendships.’
“We are just beginning to appreciate how the human urge toward friendship, toward connection and camaraderie, toward deep solidarity and true companionship, toward working together in more and more profound ways has a real and demonstrative evolutionary precedent….”[3]
We are no longer talking “random selection” “blind selection in nature’s laws” or survival of the fittest. Dawkin’s “selfish-gene” has turned cooperative. Evolution is now thought to be by design after all and all life is progressing forward. The evolutionary process is ‘directional’ and ‘predictable.’ In a word the evolutionary worldview must be ‘teleological.’
Such optimism that accompanies this new brand of evolutionary thought has contradicted the second law of thermodynamics that all things are in a process of decay—not getting better because of a cooperative effort among difference forms of life.
We know that the christian argument does not see history this way but prophesies of the final end to all things by fire. On top of this, some scientists are in agreement with the late Stephen Jay Gould who saw [the teleological idea] as ‘untestable…’”[4]
“..a teleological view…is one that sees [a] process as having a particular purpose or direction,” explains Phipps, who “sees it [evolution] as going somewhere”[5] Phipps is giving consciousness to the evolutionary process and to mother nature, herself, and then adds,
“…any sort of identifiable, recognizable directional trajectory in evolution smacks of purpose, [and] purpose smacks of intelligence….”[6]
This explanation according to die-hard Darwinians is not science but “nonscientific speculations.”
Evolutionists who subscribe to this new approach are closet evolutionists. “Scottish physiologist, J. S. Haldane wryly remarked that ‘teleology is a mistress without whom no biologist can live, but with whom none wished to be seen in public.’”[7]
Some like Howard Bloom, a publicist who calls himself a ‘stone-cold atheist,’ envision in the evolutionary process the “design in the universe” as “deeper layers of science—fundamental ordering principles that might account for the surprisingly non-random character of the cosmos.”[8]
But when asked by Phipps, “How does a godless universe create? So what is the source of creativity in the universe?”
Phipps admitted “For once he doesn’t tell me a story…. He answers simply… ‘I don’t know.’”[9]
Such honesty is commendable but it doesn’t answer what has come to be known as “the god-problem.’ For that we needed a new theology.
John Haught, a Roman Catholic theologian and Senior Research Fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, is, to use Phipp’s term, an ‘evolutionary’ who offers direction.
“Writing as a theologian…” Haught expounds,
Our understanding of God is considerably diminished by failing to reflect fully on the fact of novelty [creativity] in nature. The concept of ‘design’ [intelligent design] is too stiff to accommodate the complexity of nature.”[10]
And Phipps agreeably adds,
“Creativity and novelty are not simply curious sidebars in the evolutionary script… fortuitous flourishes of a designer God. They are written into the very cosmic narrative itself.”[11]
At the foot of the San Gabriel Mountains in California the Claremont School of Theology is teaching a ‘contemporary’ or ‘evolutionary’ theology in which the theological world is coming out of its postmodern depression “incorporating God into the picture of an evolving universe.”[12] This has also been referred to as “process theology…the evolution of divinity … an evolutionary worldview… forged in the rekindled theological furnaces of faith.”[13]
Clergy who subscribe to this evolutionary worldview, that is again, who optimistically see the world in evolutionary time moving forward toward a utopian state or perfect harmony and well-being—but never actually arriving. It is directional but not goal oriented—had to somehow define God’s role in all of this.
“…The challenge for theologians and all those who care about the fate of deity in a scientific age is to explain what the intrinsic and transcendent perfection of God’s being has to do with the very imperfect, incomplete world of becoming that we all share.”[14]
They needed to explain God’s part in an independently evolving cosmos. Sadly, as they see it,
“Our knowledge of the richness and wondrous beauty of nature seems to increase every day whereas our connection with a transcendent theistic presence seems to simultaneously grow more ephemeral and theoretical.”[15]
This translates into a prayer-less religion. A knowledge of God’s existence comes from a relationship that is kept thriving by regular communication with Him—prayer!
It is a life without prayer that must ask: “How can a world where God is immanent be full of strife and suffering?” In evolutionary terms: suffering has to be a symptom of a world evolving or progressing toward health. Suffering is in evolutionary time ever so slowly in a cultural as well as biolgical sense becoming extinct. This new kind of progress theology is said to be panentheistic.
Panentheism sees God as both immanent and transcendent. We have not stepped down into a fallen world of spiritual depravity, as once believed. We are ”moving forward into a new dimension of divinity.” God, in an immanent sense, too, is evolving. “Suffering is simply the absence of God.” He transcends it.
This is all very philosophical and I want to employ here Phipps’ terms ‘ephemeral’ and ‘theoretical.’
Phipps theologizes that “the fulness of the divine experience” is being realized through the evolutionary process. He calls it “an evolutionary spirituality”[16] Imperfection is only a creative becoming. “When that which is perfect is come” speaks of the final stage of the evolutionary process which will never be reached.
This changes the christian notion of a salvation that is a deliverance from sin to making us a part of a “work of renewing and extending God’s creation.”[17] There is no shame here in our imperfections. There is no sin in it.
Phipps thinks with Teilhard that this theological worldview is a matter of evolutionary survival. And in a very poetic way describes the core idea of this new evolutionary theology:
“God is not up above, He’s up ahead.”[18]

[1] Phipps, Carter. Evolutionaries: Unlocking the Spiritual and Cultural Potential of Science’s Greatest Idea. p. 71.
[2] ibid. p. 53.
[3] ibid. p. 64.
[4] ibid. p. 75.
[5] ibid. p. 71.
[6] ibid. p. 75.
[7] ibid.
[8] ibid. p. 108.
[9] ibid. p. 111.
[10] ibid. p. 122.
[11] ibid. p. 124.
[12] ibid. pp. 340-343.
[13] ibid. pp. 344-345.
[14] ibid. p. 369.
[15] ibid.
[16] ibid. p. 381.
[17] ibid.
[18] ibid. p. 383.
The problem is how do we explain self-awareness in a pre-biotic soup and the subsequent mysterious creation of a multi-cellular organism with live DNA from single-celled organisms (bacteria) that have neither a distinct nucleus with a membrane nor other specialized structures capable of the processes necessary to evolve into complex life forms, as man.
God or an intelligent designer is for a believer the obvious explanation, but for the atheist, evolutionary theory must come up with another explanation.
Elizabet Sahtouris, evolutionary biologist and self-described bio-philosopher, suggests a cooperative effort within a community of differing bacteria with specialized functionality or purpose. She refers to the symbiotic (cooperative) state of early prokaryotes bacteria as living in “complex bacterial colonies” having a “collective intelligence.. …to turn aggregate action into intelligent behavior.” Phipps is awestruck, agreeably calling it “off the charts.”[2]
The problem with this idea, that of a symbiotic relationship among complex bacterial colonies, is that it proposes a process counter to Darwin’s original theory of survival of the fittest. Life evolves by war in Darwin’s mind, not peaceful co-existence. Sahtouris was rewriting the script but it was based in part on an astute observation that symbiotic relationships do work in nature—even man is a beneficiary. The evolutionary process this way can even create ‘friendships.’
“We are just beginning to appreciate how the human urge toward friendship, toward connection and camaraderie, toward deep solidarity and true companionship, toward working together in more and more profound ways has a real and demonstrative evolutionary precedent….”[3]
We are no longer talking “random selection” “blind selection in nature’s laws” or survival of the fittest. Dawkin’s “selfish-gene” has turned cooperative. Evolution is now thought to be by design after all and all life is progressing forward. The evolutionary process is ‘directional’ and ‘predictable.’ In a word the evolutionary worldview must be ‘teleological.’
Such optimism that accompanies this new brand of evolutionary thought has contradicted the second law of thermodynamics that all things are in a process of decay—not getting better because of a cooperative effort among difference forms of life.
We know that the christian argument does not see history this way but prophesies of the final end to all things by fire. On top of this, some scientists are in agreement with the late Stephen Jay Gould who saw [the teleological idea] as ‘untestable…’”[4]
“..a teleological view…is one that sees [a] process as having a particular purpose or direction,” explains Phipps, who “sees it [evolution] as going somewhere”[5] Phipps is giving consciousness to the evolutionary process and to mother nature, herself, and then adds,
“…any sort of identifiable, recognizable directional trajectory in evolution smacks of purpose, [and] purpose smacks of intelligence….”[6]
This explanation according to die-hard Darwinians is not science but “nonscientific speculations.”
Evolutionists who subscribe to this new approach are closet evolutionists. “Scottish physiologist, J. S. Haldane wryly remarked that ‘teleology is a mistress without whom no biologist can live, but with whom none wished to be seen in public.’”[7]
Some like Howard Bloom, a publicist who calls himself a ‘stone-cold atheist,’ envision in the evolutionary process the “design in the universe” as “deeper layers of science—fundamental ordering principles that might account for the surprisingly non-random character of the cosmos.”[8]
But when asked by Phipps, “How does a godless universe create? So what is the source of creativity in the universe?”
Phipps admitted “For once he doesn’t tell me a story…. He answers simply… ‘I don’t know.’”[9]
Such honesty is commendable but it doesn’t answer what has come to be known as “the god-problem.’ For that we needed a new theology.
John Haught, a Roman Catholic theologian and Senior Research Fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, is, to use Phipp’s term, an ‘evolutionary’ who offers direction.
“Writing as a theologian…” Haught expounds,
Our understanding of God is considerably diminished by failing to reflect fully on the fact of novelty [creativity] in nature. The concept of ‘design’ [intelligent design] is too stiff to accommodate the complexity of nature.”[10]
And Phipps agreeably adds,
“Creativity and novelty are not simply curious sidebars in the evolutionary script… fortuitous flourishes of a designer God. They are written into the very cosmic narrative itself.”[11]
At the foot of the San Gabriel Mountains in California the Claremont School of Theology is teaching a ‘contemporary’ or ‘evolutionary’ theology in which the theological world is coming out of its postmodern depression “incorporating God into the picture of an evolving universe.”[12] This has also been referred to as “process theology…the evolution of divinity … an evolutionary worldview… forged in the rekindled theological furnaces of faith.”[13]
Clergy who subscribe to this evolutionary worldview, that is again, who optimistically see the world in evolutionary time moving forward toward a utopian state or perfect harmony and well-being—but never actually arriving. It is directional but not goal oriented—had to somehow define God’s role in all of this.
“…The challenge for theologians and all those who care about the fate of deity in a scientific age is to explain what the intrinsic and transcendent perfection of God’s being has to do with the very imperfect, incomplete world of becoming that we all share.”[14]
They needed to explain God’s part in an independently evolving cosmos. Sadly, as they see it,
“Our knowledge of the richness and wondrous beauty of nature seems to increase every day whereas our connection with a transcendent theistic presence seems to simultaneously grow more ephemeral and theoretical.”[15]
This translates into a prayer-less religion. A knowledge of God’s existence comes from a relationship that is kept thriving by regular communication with Him—prayer!
It is a life without prayer that must ask: “How can a world where God is immanent be full of strife and suffering?” In evolutionary terms: suffering has to be a symptom of a world evolving or progressing toward health. Suffering is in evolutionary time ever so slowly in a cultural as well as biolgical sense becoming extinct. This new kind of progress theology is said to be panentheistic.
Panentheism sees God as both immanent and transcendent. We have not stepped down into a fallen world of spiritual depravity, as once believed. We are ”moving forward into a new dimension of divinity.” God, in an immanent sense, too, is evolving. “Suffering is simply the absence of God.” He transcends it.
This is all very philosophical and I want to employ here Phipps’ terms ‘ephemeral’ and ‘theoretical.’
Phipps theologizes that “the fulness of the divine experience” is being realized through the evolutionary process. He calls it “an evolutionary spirituality”[16] Imperfection is only a creative becoming. “When that which is perfect is come” speaks of the final stage of the evolutionary process which will never be reached.
This changes the christian notion of a salvation that is a deliverance from sin to making us a part of a “work of renewing and extending God’s creation.”[17] There is no shame here in our imperfections. There is no sin in it.
Phipps thinks with Teilhard that this theological worldview is a matter of evolutionary survival. And in a very poetic way describes the core idea of this new evolutionary theology:
“God is not up above, He’s up ahead.”[18]

[1] Phipps, Carter. Evolutionaries: Unlocking the Spiritual and Cultural Potential of Science’s Greatest Idea. p. 71.
[2] ibid. p. 53.
[3] ibid. p. 64.
[4] ibid. p. 75.
[5] ibid. p. 71.
[6] ibid. p. 75.
[7] ibid.
[8] ibid. p. 108.
[9] ibid. p. 111.
[10] ibid. p. 122.
[11] ibid. p. 124.
[12] ibid. pp. 340-343.
[13] ibid. pp. 344-345.
[14] ibid. p. 369.
[15] ibid.
[16] ibid. p. 381.
[17] ibid.
[18] ibid. p. 383.
April 5, 2018
This book is a fascinating survey of the thinkers Carter Phipps identifies as "Evolutionaries," among them Teilhard de Chardin, Alfred North Whitehead, Sri Aurobindo, Andrew Cohen, and many others. Given the pervasive evidence for evolution, how do we account for religious explanations that no longer fit the evidence? One answer is to realize that everything is in motion, is changing, all the time. Does that change have a direction? Evolution would suggest it does, and now that humans are beginning to understand that and how evolution works, the next level is to begin understanding our place in it, which many of the "evolutionaries" describe with terms such as conscious evolution. Of course, this has implications most of all to those who are religious, who want to "fit God in" to the scientific account they are realizing best fits the evidence of the universe we observe. There's a lot to chew over in this one. It's well worth a read and a lot of thinking.
July 10, 2012
The main argument of the book: Up until the scientific revolution, some half a century ago, religion reigned supreme in the realm of belief and understanding. Since that time, though--and especially since the introduction of the theory of evolution in 1859--science has increasingly challenged religion as the chief source of how we understand the world and our place in it. Science's increasing influence can be seen in the growing trend towards secularism in the past 200 years, and particularly in the last century, as church and state have been increasingly separated, and a growing percentage of the population has moved away from the world's religions.
Still, though, religion is not going down without a fight. What's more, even many who have turned away from religion question science's ability to provide the kinds of understandings that truly satisfy the human psyche. The problem, many believe, is that science, with its materialist explanations, fails to accommodate our deeper spiritual and moral nature. According to the author Carter Phipps, though, while science and spirituality may seem diametrically opposed, the latest developments in evolutionary theory are actually upsetting this notion.
This is the case because the theory of evolution, which was once confined to the realm of biology, has now spread to envelop every other domain of human inquiry, such that it has become the key paradigm in understanding the natural (and meta-natural) world, from biology to psychology to morality to culture to spirit to god to the unfolding of the universe. The result is that evolution can now be turned to in order to answer virtually all of our deepest and most profound existential questions, and in a unified and coherent way that does in fact satisfy our deepest spiritual longings.
More than providing just a way of understanding the world, though, Phipps argues that an evolutionary worldview provides us with a moral guide in terms of how to act, and what to strive for in life. This is the case because, to begin with, such a worldview allows us to see that human agency is possible in the truest sense of the word, and that it does indeed have an important impact. When it comes to using our agency, an evolutionary worldview prescribes working towards the good and the continued evolution of our own species, the planet, and even the entire universe. While the specifics of this enterprise remain to be worked out, Phipps hints at the idea that this project should include a system of global cooperation that features pan-governance with ecological sustainability at its heart.
At least in the near term. In the long-term, as evolution continues to proceed (perhaps at an accelerating rate), Phipps flirts with idea that the role of human agency in forwarding the evolutionary project may stretch beyond the borders of our own planet and extend even to the edges of the universe (or multiverse).
When I say that this is Phipps' argument, it is true that the author is very much a proponent of the evolutionary worldview. However, rather than focusing on his own particular views in the book, Phipps centers his attention on the theories that the leading thinkers have advanced in the field. This includes not only current theorists, but all of the major theorists that have been involved with the worldview since its inception some 200 years ago (beginning with Georg Hegel--whom Phipps identifies as the first explicitly evolutionary philosopher).
Phipps does do a very good job of outlining the theories of these major thinkers, and, through this, providing a broad overview of the evolutionary worldview. When I say broad overview, I really mean it: Phipps very much sticks to a general and theoretical exploration of the evolutionary worldview. In one sense, this is an advantage, as it allows the reader to gain a broad picture of such a worldview (to see the forest as a whole, rather than just the trees, as it were). However, the devil is in the details, as they say, and I did find that the lack of details in some cases compromised the believability of the theories (which are, in some cases, highly speculative).
Also, Phipps does well to show how evolutionary views have spilled out of science and into more meta-natural domains, such as spirituality and conceptions of god (theology). While this is no doubt interesting, it presents a problem. The approach of scientific evolutionism to spirituality and god is entirely different from an evolutionarily-informed spirituality and theology (indeed, scientific evolutionism thinks of the phenomena of 'spirit' and 'god' as products [if not bi-products] of our evolved brain, and hence ultimately illusory--or at least not 'real' in any sense like spiritual/theistically-inclined people think they are).
Given that this is the case, as evolutionary theory is pushed beyond the boundaries of science, it necessarily splits into opposing sects. This is a major problem for any supposedly whole and coherent evolutionary worldview. Phipps glosses over this issue by saying that subjective experience is every bit as important as objective reality (thus showing where he stands on the issue). While this may well be true, it is unlikely to convince any staunch scientific evolutionist that 'spirit' and 'god' are proper subjects of evolutionary theory--much less that we should be exploring and/or embracing an evolutionarily-informed spirituality and theology. As it stands, this issue is left unresolved in the book, and in fact seems completely insoluble, thus forcing us to question how viable a unified and coherent evolutionary worldview (that includes spirituality) really is.
Still, though, religion is not going down without a fight. What's more, even many who have turned away from religion question science's ability to provide the kinds of understandings that truly satisfy the human psyche. The problem, many believe, is that science, with its materialist explanations, fails to accommodate our deeper spiritual and moral nature. According to the author Carter Phipps, though, while science and spirituality may seem diametrically opposed, the latest developments in evolutionary theory are actually upsetting this notion.
This is the case because the theory of evolution, which was once confined to the realm of biology, has now spread to envelop every other domain of human inquiry, such that it has become the key paradigm in understanding the natural (and meta-natural) world, from biology to psychology to morality to culture to spirit to god to the unfolding of the universe. The result is that evolution can now be turned to in order to answer virtually all of our deepest and most profound existential questions, and in a unified and coherent way that does in fact satisfy our deepest spiritual longings.
More than providing just a way of understanding the world, though, Phipps argues that an evolutionary worldview provides us with a moral guide in terms of how to act, and what to strive for in life. This is the case because, to begin with, such a worldview allows us to see that human agency is possible in the truest sense of the word, and that it does indeed have an important impact. When it comes to using our agency, an evolutionary worldview prescribes working towards the good and the continued evolution of our own species, the planet, and even the entire universe. While the specifics of this enterprise remain to be worked out, Phipps hints at the idea that this project should include a system of global cooperation that features pan-governance with ecological sustainability at its heart.
At least in the near term. In the long-term, as evolution continues to proceed (perhaps at an accelerating rate), Phipps flirts with idea that the role of human agency in forwarding the evolutionary project may stretch beyond the borders of our own planet and extend even to the edges of the universe (or multiverse).
When I say that this is Phipps' argument, it is true that the author is very much a proponent of the evolutionary worldview. However, rather than focusing on his own particular views in the book, Phipps centers his attention on the theories that the leading thinkers have advanced in the field. This includes not only current theorists, but all of the major theorists that have been involved with the worldview since its inception some 200 years ago (beginning with Georg Hegel--whom Phipps identifies as the first explicitly evolutionary philosopher).
Phipps does do a very good job of outlining the theories of these major thinkers, and, through this, providing a broad overview of the evolutionary worldview. When I say broad overview, I really mean it: Phipps very much sticks to a general and theoretical exploration of the evolutionary worldview. In one sense, this is an advantage, as it allows the reader to gain a broad picture of such a worldview (to see the forest as a whole, rather than just the trees, as it were). However, the devil is in the details, as they say, and I did find that the lack of details in some cases compromised the believability of the theories (which are, in some cases, highly speculative).
Also, Phipps does well to show how evolutionary views have spilled out of science and into more meta-natural domains, such as spirituality and conceptions of god (theology). While this is no doubt interesting, it presents a problem. The approach of scientific evolutionism to spirituality and god is entirely different from an evolutionarily-informed spirituality and theology (indeed, scientific evolutionism thinks of the phenomena of 'spirit' and 'god' as products [if not bi-products] of our evolved brain, and hence ultimately illusory--or at least not 'real' in any sense like spiritual/theistically-inclined people think they are).
Given that this is the case, as evolutionary theory is pushed beyond the boundaries of science, it necessarily splits into opposing sects. This is a major problem for any supposedly whole and coherent evolutionary worldview. Phipps glosses over this issue by saying that subjective experience is every bit as important as objective reality (thus showing where he stands on the issue). While this may well be true, it is unlikely to convince any staunch scientific evolutionist that 'spirit' and 'god' are proper subjects of evolutionary theory--much less that we should be exploring and/or embracing an evolutionarily-informed spirituality and theology. As it stands, this issue is left unresolved in the book, and in fact seems completely insoluble, thus forcing us to question how viable a unified and coherent evolutionary worldview (that includes spirituality) really is.
November 18, 2022
Written in an intelligent but easy to read journalistic style, the book surveys the thought of some of the leading evolutionary theorists who are working on the cutting edges of philosophy, science and theology, developing and articulating fascinating and exciting evolutionary worldviews--worldviews grounded in a broad and comprehensive understanding of evolution that is not limited to biology. Especially refreshing and encouraging in our pessimistic times.
March 15, 2019
If Goodreads allowed a 2 1/2 rating, that's all I would have given it.
No clear direction, just a lot of diffuse information and short almost unrelated biographies.
It certainly did not help me understand better the answer to the question, "How I should live day by day, or how to better love my neighbor?"
No clear direction, just a lot of diffuse information and short almost unrelated biographies.
It certainly did not help me understand better the answer to the question, "How I should live day by day, or how to better love my neighbor?"
October 4, 2022
Fascinating read. Evolution isn't ONLY survival of the fittest. I love the research on collaborative, cooperative evolution.
September 25, 2018
The author argues that evolution happens at a rate that cannot be observed during one humans life, with rare exceptions! The result is that except for organized long-term scientific analysis it is a concept beyond human observation. 4.5 billion years ago the earth came to be, but Homo sapiens have only existed for about 250,000 years. How did we come to be? Creation by a supreme being is the view of most religions, Evolutionaries dispute that, favoring theories of evolution.
This book argues that we will continue to evolve; but to what. No one knows if we will! IQ's are rising, understanding common worldwide problems is increasing, but resources are increasingly stretched! Will we be smart enough to work in common cause or will we fight for our narrow interest! History tells us we will fight first and then cooperate and the fight again!
We started as hunter gatherers and then decided to cooperate when we'd discovered grains that needed planting, irrigating, harvesting and storing for the common good. We then established systems of governance, usually under kings claiming deity. Then dark ages, then enlightenment, then wars, then democracies!
All the while most of us believed in a benevolent deity who set behavioral standards to help us progress to ever lasting life.
This book is confusing, it tries to say that we will still be spiritual as we evolve, but there is no "humans creating" deity to worship!
There is much discussion of natures capability to use creativity to cause evolution. But understanding how man with a self awareness could have evolved, remains the question!
Read this book only to be exposed to the thinking; no answers are provided; not even guesses!
The book's author and some of those quoted seems to believe in an "invisible hand," not the hand of a god, but something called the creative process of evolution,(undefined), maybe undefinable, which is based on a belief that science will eventually define it.
Is it Artificial Intelligence that will replace human cognition and be the next step in evolution! That is implied but there is no discussion of implications.
As I said, the reason to read this book is to understand the thinking, not to learn any proven truth!
This book argues that we will continue to evolve; but to what. No one knows if we will! IQ's are rising, understanding common worldwide problems is increasing, but resources are increasingly stretched! Will we be smart enough to work in common cause or will we fight for our narrow interest! History tells us we will fight first and then cooperate and the fight again!
We started as hunter gatherers and then decided to cooperate when we'd discovered grains that needed planting, irrigating, harvesting and storing for the common good. We then established systems of governance, usually under kings claiming deity. Then dark ages, then enlightenment, then wars, then democracies!
All the while most of us believed in a benevolent deity who set behavioral standards to help us progress to ever lasting life.
This book is confusing, it tries to say that we will still be spiritual as we evolve, but there is no "humans creating" deity to worship!
There is much discussion of natures capability to use creativity to cause evolution. But understanding how man with a self awareness could have evolved, remains the question!
Read this book only to be exposed to the thinking; no answers are provided; not even guesses!
The book's author and some of those quoted seems to believe in an "invisible hand," not the hand of a god, but something called the creative process of evolution,(undefined), maybe undefinable, which is based on a belief that science will eventually define it.
Is it Artificial Intelligence that will replace human cognition and be the next step in evolution! That is implied but there is no discussion of implications.
As I said, the reason to read this book is to understand the thinking, not to learn any proven truth!
February 12, 2014
I was interested in this topic; otherwise, it would have been a difficult read; as it was, I skipped around a bit and did not finish. I studied rhetoric and the humanities at the height of deconstruction, when the idea of "progress" or in fact any hierarchy was deemed highly suspect, intellectually. In science, the sense of evolution was also rather rigid, with random genetic variation and natural selection being the only two mechanisms allowed in the picture, along with lots and lots and LOTS of time for the monkeys in the room to compose Shakespeare's Complete Works. Carter Phipps comments on the history that led to that pass, and provides evidence that many folks on the fringe (i.e., not in Institutional Academia) share his sense that evolution does entails Progress, and that better governance and a more peaceful world are in fact possible. Those stressing out over climate change (like me) can be reassured that it was extreme environmental stress that caused the first cells to form from a "collective" of bacteria (viz. Lyn Margulis), jumpstarting Evolution.
June 23, 2014
This book is a survey or compilation of the ideas of multiple philosophers, scientists, observers of culture, and others about the concept of evolution. The ideas relate not just to biological evolution, but cultural and spiritual also. It is futuristic and yet solidly based on more than 100 years of writings. It challenged me intellectually and I enjoyed trying on new ideas and seeing how they fit into my preconceptions and understandings of evolution. The author is clearly biased, enthusiastically so, in favor of his guiding thesis the evolution is continuing on all fronts and rapidly accelerating, and that we as thinking a sentient species can be involved in its direction.
January 19, 2023
I'm not sure. This couldn't keep my interest like how "Dark Green Religion" did, which was about environmentalism and spirtuality. I first got interested by Carter Phipps after a review summarized the different strains of evolutionaries. I might give it another try some time.
Here are the types I can think of (freestyle): neutral theory, drift, adaptionists, symbiotic (holobiont), behavioral, complexity, spandrel, byproduct, hybrid, gradualism, punctuated equilibrium, convergent, divergent, unbounded, random, founder effect, bottleneck, group selection, selfish, fast, slow, indvidualistic, climax community.
Here are the types I can think of (freestyle): neutral theory, drift, adaptionists, symbiotic (holobiont), behavioral, complexity, spandrel, byproduct, hybrid, gradualism, punctuated equilibrium, convergent, divergent, unbounded, random, founder effect, bottleneck, group selection, selfish, fast, slow, indvidualistic, climax community.
August 20, 2012
The best book I've read all year! This is a must-read for anyone interested in understanding the human experience more clearly. Carter's writing style allows those with varying levels of depth to process an enormous amount of information without feeling like your brain is going to explode. :) He delves into the evolution of technology, cooperation, religion, consciousness, worldviews, information, and values, providing a larger lens to view the world through. There were so many moments of awe and inspiration while I read this book that I can't wait to read it again.
February 26, 2013
This book was lost on me. I'm sure it is my lack of understanding about cultural evolution, but I didn't find it compelling; at least not at it's present length. The first two sections (about science and culture) had some interesting parts to them, but the third part (on spirituality) was too general to be interesting. A book of this type is supposed to excite a broad readership, but it seems to be preaching to the choir. I couldn't recommend this except for someone who already has a background in the subject matter, and wants to add to their knowledge base.
September 19, 2012
Excellent overview of this emerging movement. If you are interested in new ways of connecting religion and science in your quest for wisdom, I recommend this book. If you engage in the art of preaching, you need to read this book in order to reconcile the Christian tradition with what we now know about creation.
Check out my blog for more on this book:
http://pastordawn.com/2012/07/20/co-o...
Check out my blog for more on this book:
http://pastordawn.com/2012/07/20/co-o...
February 9, 2014
The first two parts are pretty standard views of the debate between scientific evolution and "spiritual evolution." But when Phipps presents his ideas on Parts III and IV, he comes into his own. I won't summarize his ideas, but I would strongly suggest reading this thought-provoking book if you are at all interested in where human spirituality may be headed.
January 1, 2013
Disliked the author's usage of the word evolution. Development and evolution are not interchangeable. Had major discrepancies and jumped to conclusions. As a religious movement, it is positive and implies we must be good stewards of the earth.
September 15, 2012
Oh my, this one is deep and lots and lots of research went into this book...
I love it...
I love it...
September 21, 2012
Interesting opinion as of so far, enjoying the book, just not too far into it yet. It's warming up to me though.
February 2, 2013
Paradigm shift...
November 8, 2014
By far the most influential book I have read in years.
October 26, 2017
I can't wait to reread Carter Phipps' brilliant work again and again annd again. Evolutionaries had my brain going in every direction and left me with a lot of notes to sort through and a list of new influencers to look into. I cannot praise this book enough; Phipps put into eloquent words some thoughts that I have been tackling for a few years and laid down new ground for them to continue. Yes, yes YES!!
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews