object:1.03 - THE GRAND OPTION
book class:The Future of Man
author class:Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
subject class:Christianity
subject class:Science
class:chapter
CHAPTER 3
THE GRAND OPTION
7. On the Threshold of Human Socialisation
JUST AS astronomy, by the comparative study
of heavenly bodies, has been able to detect the ex-
istence and determine the phases of a life-history
of the stars, so the science of biology, by the com-
parative study of living forms, has been able to
determine the successive stages through which
animal and vegetable groups pass in the course
of their evolution. No natural scientist doubts
any longer that different species appear, grow, age
and die.
In this sense it is evident that Mankind of its
nature behaves like a species, and is therefore sub-
ject as a whole, as in the case of the individual, to
a definite cycle of development. To every thinking
man this poses a problem of obvious importance
for the ordering and orientation of our collective
life. What is the precise point reached at this moment
by the human race in the ineluctable curve of
growth which is described by every zoological
species in the course of its existence? In other
THE GRAND OPTION 29
words, what phase of its "phyletic" development may we consider
Mankind to have attained at the present time, in comparison with
the other branches surrounding us on the tree of life?
This overwhelmingly important question is one to which I
think we can find a reply provided we take into account a phe-
nomenon familiar to all biologists, but of which the significance in
terms of "phase" or "stage" has not been sufficiendy recognized or
made use of: I mean that of association or, better still, social organiza-
tion. No sooner is it constituted by the grouping together of ele-
mentary particles, than the living element, whatever its degree of
internal complexity, begins to reproduce itself. But the process does
not end there. When it exists in sufficient numbers the separate el-
ement tends to link up with others of its kind so as to form with
them a more or less differentiated organic whole. In this fashion
the higher plants and the metazoa evolved out of isolated cells, the
corals out of fixed or drifting polyps, the termitary out of free neu-
roptera and the ant hill and the bee colony out of independent hy-
menoptera. A similar impulse of group formation seems to have
become operative along each zoological branch, but at very differ-
ent ages of the earth; so far as we are able to judge, the phenome-
non has occurred in each case at a predetermined age of the
species under review. In the case of the oldest groups the mecha-
nism of their formation can only be conjectured; but with more re-
cent groupings the stages of the process may still be discerned in
their present natural state. We know of unattached bees and
wasps, and of others forming small and loosely ordered communi-
ties; and by way of a varying series of intermediate states we ar-
rive at the bee colony, which is almost as organically centered on
its queen as is the termitary. In short, everything happens as though, in the
course of its phyletic existence, every living form achieved (with more or less
success) what may be called a period, or even a point, of socialization.
30 THE FUTURE OF MAN
This being so, let us look at the human species and see if we
can fit it into the scheme. Because we are a part of it, because the
rhythm of its growth is infinitely slow in comparison with our own,
and because its grandeur overwhelms us, Mankind, in its total evo-
lution, escapes our intuitive grasp. But may we not see reflected in
the life around us things that we cannot see directly in ourselves?
Let us study ourselves in the mirror of other living forms. What do
we see?
Prehistory teaches us that in the beginning Man must have
lived in small, autonomous groups; after which links were estab-
lished, first between families and then between tribes. These asso-
ciations became more elaborate as time went on. In the phase of
the "neolithic revolution" they hardened and became fixed on a
territorial basis. For thousands of years this principle remained es-
sentially unchanged; it was the land, despite all social readjust-
ments, which remained the symbol and the safeguard of individual
liberty in its earliest form. But now a further transformation is tak-
ing place; it has been going on irresistibly for a century under our
very eyes. In the totalitarian political systems, of which time will
correct the excesses but will also, no doubt, accentuate the under-
lying tendencies or intuitions, the citizen finds his center of gravity
gradually transferred to, or at least aligned with, that of the na-
tional or ethnic group to which he belongs. This is not a return to
primitive and undifferentiated cultural forms, but the emergence
of a defined social system in which a purposeful organization or-
ders the masses and tends to impose a specialized function on each
individual. We can find many ways of accounting in part for this
development, which is so important a characteristic of the modern
world — the automatic complication of economic relations, the
compression within the limits of the earth's surface of a living mass
in process of continual expansion, and a great deal besides. Exter-
nal pressures of this sort undoubtedly play a part in what is hap-
THE GRAND OPTION 31
pening. But taken as a whole and in its essentials the phenomenon
can only be interpreted as a basic transformation, that is to say a
change of major dimensions in the human state, of which com-
parative biology suggests the cause. The immense social distur-
bances which today so trouble the world appear to signify that
Mankind in its turn has reached the stage, common to every
species, when it must of biological necessity undergo the coordi-
nation of its elements. In our time Mankind seems to be approaching its
critical point of social organization.
But Man is not an insect. Nothing is more pathetic than the to-
tal and blind devotion of an ant to its ant hill; and to us nothing
could be more deplorable. The ant toils without respite until it dies
of exhaustion in a state of complete self-detachment whose ab-
solute nature and "faceless" purpose are precisely what we find re-
pugnant. Are we too to sink irresistibly, victims of an inevitable
process of organic determinism, into a state in which our individ-
ual personality is wholly destroyed? The thing is inconceivable.
Birth and death and the reproductive function, these are common
to both men and animals. But Man, because he is capable of re-
flection and of planning his own actions, does not blindly respond
to these laws like an animal: he assimilates and transforms them,
investing them with a meaning and an intelligible moral value.
Our species, let us accept it, is entering its phase of socialization;
we cannot continue to exist without undergoing the transforma-
tion which in one way or another will forge our multiplicity into a
whole. But how are we to encounter the ordeal? In what spirit and
what form are we to approach this metamorphosis so that in us it
may be hominized?
This, as I see it, is the problem of values, deeper than any techni-
cal question of terrestrial organization, which we must all face to-
day if we are to confront in full awareness our destiny as living
beings, that is to say, our responsibilities toward "evolution." A
32 THE FUTURE OF MAN
whirlpool is beginning to appear ahead of us, in the stream which
carries us along. We can already feel the first eddies and there can
be no doubt that the whirlpool is far stronger than we. But, being
men, we have the power of judgment to aid our navigation. I shall
seek, in this paper, to pass under review the various possible
courses of action open, at this critical moment, to those at the
helm — that is to say, to each of us.
Finally to decide which is the best course to follow, that is the
grand option.
2. The Possible Paths
A priori (by "dichotomic" analysis of the various outlets theo-
retically offered to our freedom of action) as well as a posteriori (by
classification of the various human attitudes in fact observable
around us), three alternatives, together forming a logically con-
nected sequence, seem to express and exhaust all the possibilities
open to our assessment and choice as we contemplate the future of
Mankind: a) pessimism or optimism; b) the optimism of with-
drawal or the optimism of evolution; c) evolution in terms of the
many or of the unit.
Before we comment upon them, let us look separately at these
alternatives so that we may understand their value and their rela-
tion to one another.
a Pessimism or Optimism? "Is the state of Being good or evil?
That is to say, is it better to Be than not to Be?" Despite its abstract,
metaphysical form, this is essentially a practical question repre-
senting the fundamental dilemma upon which every man is com-
pelled to pronounce, implicitly or explicitly, by the very fact of
having been born. Without having willed it, without knowing why,
THE GRAND OPTION 33
we find ourselves engaged in a world which seems to be laboriously
raising itself to a state of ever greater organic complexity. This uni-
versal stream on which we are borne expresses in material terms,
within the field of our experience, the preference of Nature for
Being over non-Being, for life over non-life — Being and Life
manifesting and evaluating themselves through the growth of con-
sciousness. But can this instinctive choice on the part of Nature
withstand the critical activity of Thought? This question could re-
main at the back of our minds so long as the human task did not
appear to extend beyond the need of assuring as agreeable or tol-
erable an existence as possible for each of the individual elements
of Mankind. But it comes to the forefront, it thrusts itself urgendy
upon us, directly Life shows signs, as it does today, of requiring us,
by very virtue of its movement toward a state of higher Being, to
sacrifice our individuality. There can be no doubt that the burden
of continuing the World weighs more and more heavily on the
shoulders of Mankind. How immense it has already become, this
ever-growing task of enabling the world to live and progress! We
are like the ant that slaves itself to death that its fellow slaves may
live! Is not each of us therefore a dupe, a Sisyphus? For centuries
a whole order of men served another, privileged order without ask-
ing whether this state of inequality was really beyond remedy; un-
til in the end they rebelled. Is there not reason for Man, become
aware of the direction in which Life is taking him, to rebel at last;
to go on strike against a blind course of evolution which may not,
in any event, betoken any real progress? "Time, space, becoming,
Me, images of the Void. Nothing is born of anything else, and
nothing is necessary to the existence of any other thing," so wrote
a contemporary philosopher (A. Consentino). It is inevitable, as the
collective effort required of men costs more and more, that the
dilemma, already present to clear-sighted minds, should eventually
disclose itself to the mass. Is the Universe utterly poindess, or are
34 THE FUTURE OF MAN
we to accept that it has a meaning, a future, a purpose? On this
fundamental question Mankind is already virtually divided into the
two camps of those who deny that there is any significance or value
in the state of Being, and therefore no Progress; and those, on the
other hand, who believe in the possibility and the rewards of a
higher state of consciousness.
For the first only one attitude is possible: a refusal to go further;
desertion which is equivalent to turning back. For these no further
problem arises, since they are lodged in incoherence and disinte-
gration. We may leave them there. But those in the other camp are
confronted by the call of duty and the problems of a further ad-
vance. Let us follow them toward the logical end of their position.
b Optimism of Withdrawal or Optimism of Evolution. To have de-
cided in favor of the value of Being, to have accepted that the world
has a meaning and is taking us somewhere, does not necessarily im-
ply that we must follow its apparent course further, or a fortiori to the
end. Walking through a town we often have to make a sharp turn to
right or left in order to reach our destination. Centuries ago the
wise men of India were struck by the enslaving and inescapable
character of the environment in which human activities are con-
ducted. The greater our efforts to know and possess and organize
the world, they observed, the more do we strengthen the material
trammels that imprison us and increase the universal multiplicity
from which we must free ourselves if we are to attain the blessed
unity. They concluded, therefore, that there was no conceivable way
of approach to the state of higher Being except by breaking the
bonds that confine us. We must persuade ourselves of the nonexis-
tence of all surrounding phenomena, destroy the Grand Illusion by
asceticism or by mysticism, create night and silence within our-
selves; then, at the opposite extreme of appearance, we shall pene-
trate to what can only be defined as a total negation — the ineffable
THE GRAND OPTION 35
Reality. Such is the thinking of Oriental wisdom; and there is still
an appreciable number of Christians who think on similar lines, al-
though far less radically (since their God comprises all the deter-
minisms in which Nirvana is lacking). Seeing that a state of total
socialization awaits the human species, they ask, can we fail to rec-
ognize the Eastern concept of Karma in this monstrous form?
What we call civilization is weaving its web around us with a terri-
fying rapidity. Let us cut the threads while there is yet time. Pursu-
ing all the paths of detachment and contemplation, not from
disdain but from excessive esteem for the state of Being, let us break
away from the evolutionary determinism, break the spell, withdraw
Thus at the outset there is a cleavage in the "optimist" branch
of Mankind. On the one hand there are those who see our true
progress only in terms of a break, as speedy as possible, with the
world: as though the spirit could not exist, or at least could not
henceforth fulfill itself, except in separation from matter. And there
are those on the other side, the believers in some ultimate value in
the tangible evolution of things. For these latter (the true optimists),
the tasks and difficulties of the present day by no means signify
that we have come to an impasse in our evolution. Their faith in
the Universe is stronger than any temptation to withdraw. The
worst of courses, in their view, would be to retreat from the
whirlpool, or alter course in order to avoid it. The way out (since
this certainly exists!) can only be further ahead — forward beyond
the rapids. It is in intelligent alliance with the rising tides of mat-
ter that we shall draw nearer to the Spirit.
Withdrawal, or evolution proceeding ever further? This is the
second choice that human thought encounters in its search for a
solution to the problem of action.
At this new point of bifurcation two attitudes are defined — two
"mentalities" disclose themselves and separate. We may leave the
believers in withdrawal to go their way along a road which vanishes
36 THE FUTURE OF MAN
from our sight. Let us follow the others, those who are faithful to
Earth, in their effort to steer the human vessel onward through the
tempests of the future. This second group may at first sight appear
to be homogeneous; but in fact it is not yet wholly one in mind or
spirit. A final cleavage is necessary to separate absolutely, in a pure
state, the conflicting spiritual tendencies which are confusedly in-
termingled in the present world, at the heart of human freedom.
c Plurality or Unity? As we have shown, the subdivision of what
one may call "the human spiritual categories" begins logically with
faith in the state of Being, and proceeds to faith in the further
progress of the material world around us — that is to say, in the most
fundamental terms, faith in the spiritual value of matter. But psycholog-
ically this dichotomic process, whereby at each point of choice
something like a new spiritual species breaks away, is influenced
throughout by a final orientation which qualifies or obscurely dic-
tates each of the earlier choices: "In what direction and in what
form are we to look for this new state of being which we expect to
be born of our future development? Is the Universe, of its nature,
scattering itself in sparks; or on the contrary is it tending to con-
centrate in a single center of light?" Plurality or Unity? Two possi-
bilities determining two basic attitudes, more radical than any
difference of race, nationality, or even formal religion; and between
them runs the true line of the spiritual division of the Earth. Plu-
ralism or (using the word in its purely etymological sense) monism?
This is the ultimate choice, by way of which Mankind must finally
be divided, knowing its own mind.
In the view of the "pluralist" the world is moving in the direc-
tion of dispersal and therefore of the growing autonomy of its sep-
arate elements. For each individual the business, the duty and the
interest of life consist in achieving, in opposition to others, his own ut-
THE GRAND OPTION 37
most uniqueness and personal freedom; so that perfection, beati-
tude, supreme greatness belong not to the whole but to the least
part. By this "dispersive" view the socialization of the human mass
becomes a retrograde step and a state of monstrous servitude — un-
less we can discern in it the birth of a new "shoot" destined eventu-
ally to bring forth stronger individualities than our own. Only with
this reservation, and within these limits, is the phenomenon to be
tolerated. Collectivization in itself, no matter what form it may
take, can only be a provisional state and one of relative unimpor-
tance. Evolution culminates, by the progressive isolation of its
fibers, in each separate individual and even in each moment of the
individual's life. Essentially, as the "pluralist" sees it, the Universe
spreads like a fan: it is divergent in structure.
But to the "monist" the precise opposite is the case: nothing ex-
ists or finally matters except the Whole. For the elements of the
world to become absorbed within themselves by separation from
others, by isolation, is a fundamental error. The individual, if he is
to fulfill and preserve himself, must strive to break down every kind
of barrier that prevents separate beings from uniting. His is the ex-
altation, not of egoistical autonomy but of communion with all
others! Seen in this light the modern totalitarian regimes, whatever
their initial defects, are neither heresies nor biological regressions:
they are in line with the essential trend of "cosmic" movement. Plu-
ralism, far from being the ultimate end of evolution, is merely a first
outspreading whose gradual shrinkage displays the true curve of
Nature's proceedings. Essentially the Universe is narrowing to a
center, like the successive layers of a cone: it is convergent in structure.
So the question can finally be posed: fulfillment of the world
by divergence, or fulfillment of the same world by convergence? It
seems that the final answer must lie in one or other of these two di-
38 THE FUTURE OF MAN
rections, in the sense that anything else that has to be decided can
only be of lesser importance. Our analysis of the different courses
open to Man on the threshold of the socialization of his species
comes to an end at this last fork in the road. We have encountered
three successive pairs of alternatives offering four possibilities: to
cease to act, by some form of suicide; to withdraw through a mys-
tique of separation; to fulfill ourselves individually by egoistically
segregating ourselves from the mass; or to plunge resolutely into
the stream of the whole in order to become part of it.
Faced by this apparent indeterminacy of Life in ourselves,
what are we to do? Shall we try to ignore the problem and con-
tinue to live on impulse and haphazard, without deciding any-
thing? This we cannot do. The beasts of the field may trust blindly
to instinct, without thereby diminishing or betraying themselves,
because they have not yet seen. But for us, because our eyes have
been opened, even though we seek hurriedly to close them, the
question will continue to burn in the darkest corner of our
thought. We cannot recapture the animal security of instinct. Be-
cause, in becoming men, we have acquired the power of looking to
the future and assessing the value of things, we cannot do nothing,
since our very refusal to decide is a decision in itself.
We cannot stand still. Four separate roads lie open to us, one
back and three forward.
Which are we to choose?
3. The Choice of the Road
a In search of a criterion. The classification we have established
is more than a flight of fancy. The four roads are not a fiction.
They exist in reality and all of us know people embarked upon one
or other of them. There are both pessimists and optimists around
THE GRAND OPTION 39
us; and among the latter there are "buddhists," "pluralists" and
"monists."
Confronted by this diversity and division of human attitudes in
face of a world to be abandoned or pursued, we are apt to shrug
our shoulders and say "It's all a matter of temperament." This
amounts to saying that, in every sphere, faith or the lack of faith
means no more and is no more controllable than a tendency of the
spirit toward sadness or joy, music or geometry A comfortable ex-
planation, since it renders discussion unnecessary; but an inade-
quate one, since it purports to settle, by invoking the subjective side
of our nature, a problem that is essentially objective, namely that of
the structure peculiar to the world in which we find ourselves. For
let us face it: to each of the four choices we have outlined there must
necessarily correspond a Universe of an especial kind — disorderly
or ordered, exhausted or still young, divergent or convergent. And
of these four kinds of Universe only one can exist at a time — only one is
true. We are no more free to follow our impulses blindly in the or-
dering of our lives than is the captain of a ship heading for a pre-
scribed harbor. Accordingly we need some criterion of values to
enable us to make our choice. But immersed in the Universe as we
are, we have no means of getting outside it, even momentarily, to
see if it is going anywhere, and if so where. We have no periscope;
we are navigating in the depths. Is there nothing within the world to
enable us to judge whether we inside it are moving in the right di-
rection, that is to say, in the same direction as it is moving itself?
Yes, there is a clear indication, and it is the one of which we have
already spoken: the growth, within and around us, of a greater con-
sciouness. More than a century ago the physicists observed that, in
the world as we know it, the fraction of unusable energy (entropy) is
constantly increasing; and they found in this a mathematical expres-
sion of the irreversibility of the cosmos. This absolute of physics has
thus far not only resisted all attempts at "relativization," but, if I am
40 THE FUTURE OF MAN
not mistaken, it tends to find its counterpart in a current moving in
the opposite sense, positive and constructive, which is revealed by
the study of the earth's biological past: the ascent of the Universe
toward zones of increasing improbability and personality. Entropy
and life; backward and forward: two complementary expressions of
the arrow of time. For the purposes of human action, entropy (a
mass-effect rather than a law of the unit) is without meaning. Life,
on the other hand, if it is understood to be the growing interioriza-
tion of cosmic matter, offers to our freedom of choice a precise line
of direction. Confronted by the phenomenon of "socialization" in
which Mankind is irresistibly involved, do we seek to know how to
act that we may better conform to the secret processes of the world
of which we are a part? Then of the alternatives that are offered we
must choose the one which seems best able to develop and preserve
in us the highest degree of consciousness. If we turn out to have
been wrong in this, then the Universe has no less gone astray.
b Reduction of the alternatives. To have accepted, on the strength
of historical evidence, that the world reveals through its past its
progress toward the Spirit, is to recognize equally that we need no
longer choose between being and non-being. Indeed, how can we
choose when we are already enrolled? The choice was made long
before we were born; or more exactly, it was of the choice itself that
we were born, inasmuch as the choice is implied in the progress of
the Universe, that from the first has followed a preordained course.
An underlying doubt as to the primacy of consciousness over un-
consciousness might at a pinch be conceivable in a mind emerging
suddenly from nothingness; but it seems contradictory in an
evolved being whose origins attest to this primacy. In their extreme
form pessimism and agnosticism are condemned by the very fact of
our existence. Therefore we need not hesitate in rejecting them.
This disposes of the first alternative.
THE GRAND OPTION 41
The second alternative seems to pose a more delicate problem.
"Withdrawal — or evolution proceeding ever further?" In which di-
rection does a higher state of consciousness await us? Here, at first
sight, the answer is less clear. There is nothing contradictory in it-
self in the idea of human ecstasy sundered from material things.
Indeed, as we shall see, this fits in very well with the final demands
of a world of evolutionary structure. But with one proviso: that the
world in question shall have reached a stage of development so ad-
vanced that its "soul" can be detached without losing any of its
completeness, as something wholly formed. But have we any rea-
son to suppose that human consciousness today has achieved so
high a degree of richness and perfection that it can derive nothing
more from the sap of the earth? Again we may turn to history for
an answer. Let us suppose, for example, that the strivings and the
progress of civilization had come to an end at the time of Buddha,
or in the first centuries of the Christian era. Can we believe that
nothing essential, of vision and action and love, would have been
lost to the Spirit of Earth? Clearly we cannot. And this simple ob-
servation alone suffices to guide our decision. So long as a fruit
continues to grow and ripen we refrain from picking it. In the same
way, so long as the world around us continues, even in suffering
and disorder, to yield a harvest of problems, ideas and new forces,
it is a sign that we must continue to press forward in the conquest
of matter. Any immediate withdrawal from a world of which the
burden grows heavier every day is denied to us, because it would
certainly be premature. So much for the second alternative.
And so, since we are bound to press on, we find ourselves faced
by the third alternative. What course are we to adopt in order that
our personal efforts may most effectively contribute to the terres-
trial consciousness which we must strive to heighten and extend? Is
it to be a jealously guarded fostering of our own individuality,
achieved in increasing isolation; or in the association and giving of
42 THE FUTURE OF MAN
ourselves to the collective whole of Mankind? Are we to reject or
accept human socialization, elect for a divergent or a convergent
world? Where is the truth? Which is the right way?
It appears to me that at this last fork in the road the modern
problem of Action displays itself in its most essential and acute
form. If there is any characteristic clearly observable in the
progress of Nature toward higher consciousness, it is that this is
achieved by increasing differentiation, which in itself causes ever
stronger individualities to emerge. But it would seem that individ-
ualization leads to opposition and separation. In logic, therefore,
we are led to suppose that every man must fight to break away
from any influence that threatens to dominate and restrict him.
And does not this separatist tendency exactly correspond to one of
the deepest instincts of our being? But what is the voice that speaks
to us in the exaltation of separateness and self-enclosure? Is it a
challenge or a seduction?
It is undeniable that, viewed in a certain light, a Universe of
divergent or pluralistic structure seems to be capable of giving rise
to localized paroxysms of consciousness. The man who thinks to
gamble the whole world for the sake of his own existence, and
to gamble his own existence for the sake of the moment, is bound
to live every minute with extraordinary intensity. But if we look at
it we can see that this brilliance, besides being pitifully limited in
scope, is radically destructive of the spirit in which it springs to
light. For one thing, though it may enable the individual to achieve
the heights of momentary ecstasy, it robs him in return of the in-
effable joys of union and conscious loss of self in that which is
greater than self: the element burns up all its future in a flying
spark. And again, since the impulse must logically spread from one
to another through all the elements, it becomes a process of general
volatilization infecting Mankind as a whole. To adopt the hypothesis
THE GRAND OPTION 43
of a final divergence of Life is, in fact, to introduce biologically into
the thinking part of the world an immediate principle of disinte-
gration and death. It is to reestablish, at the very antipodes of Con-
sciousness (become no more than a fleeting reality!), the primacy
and preponderant stability of Matter. It is to deny, even more
gravely than by an ill-timed act of withdrawal, the historic im-
pulses of Life.
So there is no way out, if we wish to safeguard the preemi-
nence of the spirit, except by taking the one road that remains to
us, which leads to the preservation and further advance of con-
sciousness — the road of unification. A convergent world, whatever
sacrifice of freedom it may seem to demand of us, is the only one
which can preserve the dignity and the aspirations of the living be-
ing. Therefore it must be true. If we are to avoid total anarchy, the
source and the sign of universal death, we can do no other than
plunge resolutely forward, even though something in us perish,
into the melting pot of socialization.
Though something in us perish?
But where is it written that he who loses his soul shall save it?
4. The Properties of Union
IT is AT this point that we must rid ourselves of a prejudice which
is deeply embedded in our thought, namely the habit of mind
which causes us to contrast unity with plurality, the element with
the whole and the individual with the collective, as though these
were diametrically opposed ideas. We constantly argue as though
in each case the terms varied inversely, a gain on the one side be-
ing ipso facto the other side's loss; and this in turn leads to the wide-
spread idea that any destiny on "monist" lines would exact the
44 THE FUTURE OF MAN
sacrifice and bring about the destruction of all personal values in
the Universe.
The origin of this prejudice, which is largely imaginary, can no
doubt be traced to the disagreeable sense of loss and constraint
which the individual experiences when he finds himself involved in
a group or lost in a crowd. It is certainly the case that any agglomer-
ation tends to stifle and neutralize the elements which compose it;
but why should we look for a model of collectivity in what is no more
than an aggregate, a "heap"? Alongside these massive inorganic
groupings in which the elements intermingle and drown, or more
exactly at the opposite pole to them, Nature shows herself to be full
of associations brought about and organically ordered by a precisely
opposite law. In the case of associations of this kind (the only true
and natural associations) the coming together of the separate ele-
ments does nothing to eliminate their differences. On the contrary, it
exalts them. In every practical sphere true union (that is to say, synthesis)
does not confound; it differentiates. This is what it is essential for us to
understand at the moment of encountering the Grand Option.
Evidence of the fact that union differentiates is to be seen all
around us — in the bodies of all higher forms of life, in which the
cells become almost infinitely complicated according to the variety
of tasks they have to perform; in animal associations, where the in-
dividual "polymerises" itself, one might say, according to the func-
tion it is called upon to fulfill; in human societies, where the growth
of specialization becomes ever more intense; and in the field of per-
sonal relationships, where friends and lovers can only discover all
that is in their minds and hearts by communicating them to one an-
other. We may note, certainly, that in these various forms of collec-
tive life (except the last) differentiation, the fruit of union, goes
hand-in-hand with mechanization, the element becoming a cog in
the machine; and that this is especially what happens in the case of
the termitary and the hive, of which the shadow looms so dis-
THE GRAND OPTION 45
turbingly over the collective future of Mankind. But we must take
care not to bring phenomena of a different order into our argument
without making the necessary adjustments. In the termitary and the
hive (as in the case of the cells of our own body) the union and there-
fore the specialization of the elements takes place in the field of
material junctions — nutrition, reproduction, defense, etc. — which ac-
counts for the transformation of the individual into a standardized
part. But let us imagine another kind of association within which a
different possibility of mutual fulfillment is offered to the individuals
composing it, this time a psychic grouping corresponding to what
might be called & junction of personalization. Operating in such a field,
the tendency of union to bring about differentiation, far from giving
birth to a mere mechanism, must have the effect of increasing the
variety of choice and the wealth of spontaneity. Anarchic autonomy
tends to disappear, but it does so in order to achieve its consumma-
tion in the harmonized flowering of individual values.
And this is precisely what happens in the case of Mankind. By
virtue of the emergence of Thought a special and novel environ-
ment has been evolved among human individuals within which
they acquire the faculty of associating together, and reacting upon
one another, no longer primarily for the preservation and continu-
ance of the species but for the creation of a common conscious-
ness. In such an environment the differentiation born of union
may act upon that which is most unique and incommunicable in
the individual, namely his personality. Thus socialization, whose
hour seems to have sounded for Mankind, does not by any means
signify the ending of the Era of the Individual upon earth, but far
more its beginning. All that matters at this crucial moment is that
the massing together of individualities should not take the form of
a functional and enforced mechanization of human energies (the
totalitarian principle), but of a "conspiration" informed with love.
Love has always been carefully eliminated from realist and posi-
46 THE FUTURE OF MAN
tivist concepts of the world; but sooner or later we shall have to ac-
knowledge that it is the fundamental impulse of Life, or, if you pre-
fer, the one natural medium in which the rising course of evolution
can proceed. With love omitted there is truly nothing ahead of us
except the forbidding prospect of standardization and enslave-
ment — the doom of ants and termites. It is through love and
within love that we must look for the deepening of our deepest self,
in the life-giving coming together of humankind. Love is the free
and imaginative outpouring of the spirit over all unexplored paths.
It links those who love in bonds that unite but do not confound,
causing them to discover in their mutual contact an exaltation ca-
pable, incomparably more than any arrogance of solitude, of
arousing in the heart of their being all that they possess of unique-
ness and creative power.
We may have supposed when a moment ago we were bidding
farewell to a Universe of divergence and plurality, that some part
of our individual riches must be absorbed by our immersion in
Life as a whole. Now we see that it is precisely through this appar-
ent sacrifice that we may hope to attain the high peak of person-
ality which we thought we must renounce.
Nor is this all.
Union differentiates, as I have said; the first result being that it
endows a convergent Universe with the power to extend the indi-
vidual fibers that compose it without their being lost in the whole.
But this mechanism, in such a Universe, begets another property. If
by the fundamental mechanism of union the elements of con-
sciousness, drawing together, enhance what is most incommunica-
ble in themselves, it means that the principle of unification causing
them to converge is in some sort a separate reality, distinct from
themselves; not a "center of resultance" born of their converging,
but a "center of dominance" effecting the synthesis of innumerable
centers culminating in itself. Without this the latter would never
THE GRAND OPTION 47
come together at all. In other words, in a converging Universe each
element achieves completeness, not directly in a separate consum-
mation, but by incorporation in a higher pole of consciousness in
which alone it can enter into contact with all others. By a sort of in-
ward turn toward the Other its growth culminates in an act of giv-
ing and in excentration. What does this mean except that at this
final stage there reappears the mystical "annihilation" advocated
by those whom we called earlier (in discussing the second alterna-
tive) the partisans of Withdrawal. Everything now becomes clear.
What the apostles of ecstasy foresaw was true. But they wished to
escape in an arbitrary and, as we have said, premature fashion.
They were right in their desire to be absorbed in the Other; but
they did not see that this mystical night or death could only be the
end and apotheosis of a process of growth. Can water boil under
ordinary conditions before it has reached a temperature of l oo de-
grees? Before passing into the Beyond, the World and its elements
must attain what may be called their "point of annihilation." And
it is precisely to this critical point that we must ultimately be
brought by the effort consciously to further, within and around our-
selves, the movement of universal convergence!
From which, to sum up, the following situation arises.
To elect in the depths of our being for the possibility and hope
of an indefinitely increasing unification of the Universe, is not
merely the only course we can pursue which conforms to the evo-
lutionary past of the world; it is the course that embraces, in its
essence, every other constructive act in which we might look for an alternative.
Not only does this road offer a positive outlet for the diminished or
specialized form of consciousness — a victory dearly paid for by
Life — but consciousness as a whole must follow it, with all the ac-
cumulation of riches which, at each turning point, we had thought
to abandon. Which amounts to saying that the world is well made!
In other words, the choice which Life requires of our considered
48 THE FUTURE OF MAN
action is a great deal less complex than at first seemed to be the
case; for it is reduced to a simple choice between the first and last
stages of the successive alternatives which we have been able to de-
fine: the rejection of Being, which returns us to dust, or the ac-
ceptance of Being, which leads us, by way of socialization, to faith
in a Supreme Unity — opposite directions along a single road.
But if, as history suggests, there is really a quality of the in-
evitable in the forward march of the Universe — if, in truth, the
world cannot turn back — then it must mean that individual acts
are bound to follow, in the majority and freely, the sole direction capa-
ble of satisfying all their aspirations toward every imaginable form
of higher consciousness. Having been initially the fundamental
choice of the individual, the Grand Option, that which decides in
favor of a convergent Universe, is destined sooner or later to be-
come the common choice of the mass of Mankind. Thus a particular
and generalized state of consciousness is presaged for our species
in the future: a "conspiration" in terms of perspective and inten-
tion.
Which brings us in conclusion to the consideration of an es-
pecial phenomenon arising directly out of this approaching una-
nimity — the more or less early establishment on earth of a new
atmosphere, or better, a new environment of action.
5. The True Environment of Human Action
the historians OF philosophy, in their study of the develop-
ment of thought through the ages, prefer to dwell upon the birth
and evolution of ideas, theses, formally constructed systems. But
arguable schemes of this sort do not constitute the whole, or per-
haps even the most important part, of the life of the spirit. A geo-
metrical system is made up of points, lines and diagrams, but in
THE GRAND OPTION 49
the deeper sense it depends on the type of space (number of di-
mensions, curvature) in which the geometer operates. According to
the nature of this space properties change or are generalized, and
certain transformations and movements become possible. Space in
itself is something that overflows any formula; yet it is in terms of
this inexpressible that a whole expressible world is interpreted and
developed. But what is true and clearly apparent in the abstract
field of geometry may also be found, and should be examined with
no less care, in the general systematization of phenomena which
we call philosophy. To philosophize is to put in order the lines of
reality around us. What first emerges from any philosophy is a co-
herent whole of harmonized relationships. But this whole, if we
look closely, is always conceived in terms of a Universe intuitively
endowed with certain fixed properties which are not a thing in
themselves but a general condition of knowledge. If these properties
should change, the whole philosophy, without necessarily breaking
down, must adapt itself and readjust the relation between its parts;
like a design on a sheet of paper which undergoes modification
when the paper is curved. Indeed the past history of human intel-
ligence is full of "mutations" of this kind, more or less abrupt, in-
dicating, in addition to the shift of human ideas, an evolution of
the "space" in which the ideas took shape — which is clearly very
much more suggestive and profound.
Let me cite a single instance, the most recent, of this sort of
transformation.
Until the sixteenth century men in general thought of space
and time as though they were limited compartments in which ob-
jects were juxtaposed and interchangeable. They believed that a
geometrical envelope could be traced round the totality of the stars.
They talked, thinking they understood, of a first and last moment
discernible in the past and the future. They argued as though every
element could be arbitrarily moved, without changing the world, to
50 THE FUTURE OF MAN
any point along the axis of time. The human mind believed itself to
be perfectly at home in this universe, within which it tranquilly
wove its patterns of metaphysics. And then one day, influenced by
a variety of internal and external causes, this attitude began to
change. Spatially our awareness of the world was extended to em-
brace the Infinitesimal and the Immense. Later, in temporal terms,
there came the unveiling, behind us and ahead, of the abysses of
Past and Future. Finally, to complete the structure we became
aware of the fact that, within this indefinite extent of space-time,
the position of each element was so intimately bound up with the
genesis of the whole that it was impossible to alter it at random
without rendering it "incoherent," or without having to readjust
the distribution and history of the whole around it. To accommo-
date this expansion of our thought the restricted field of static jux-
taposition was replaced by a field of evolutionary organization
which was limitless in all directions (except forward, in the direction
of its pole of convergence). It became necessary to transpose our
physics, biology and ethics, even our religion, into this new sphere,
and this we are in process of doing. We can no more return to that
sphere which we recently left than a three-dimensional object can
enter a two-dimensional plane. The general and also the irreversible
modification of perceptions, ideas, problems: these are two indica-
tions that the spirit has acquired an added dimension.
Let us now turn to the psychological effects of this Grand Op-
tion in virtue of which, as we have said, Mankind must elect to
adopt a general perspective and habit of mind appropriate to its
participation in a Universe of convergent consciousness. What
may we expect to be the inner consequences of the change? Hith-
erto Man as a whole has lived practically speaking without at-
tempting any far-going analysis of the conditions proper to and
ensuing from his activities. He has lived from hand to mouth in the
THE GRAND OPTION 51
pursuit of more or less immediate and limited aims, more by in-
stinct than by reason. But now the atmosphere around him be-
comes sustaining, consistent and warm. As he awakens to a sense
of "universal unification" a wave of new life penetrates to the fiber
and marrow of the least of his undertakings, the least of his de-
sires. Everything glows, expands, is impregnated with an essential
savor of the Absolute. Even more, everything is animated with a
flow of Presence and of Love — the spirit which, emanating from
the supreme pole of personalization, fosters and nourishes the mu-
tual affinity of individualities in process of convergence. Will it be
possible for us, having savored this climate, to turn back and toler-
ate any other? A general and irreversible readjustment of the values of
existence: again two indications (this time not in terms of vision
but in the field of action) showing our accession, beyond all ide-
ologies and systems, to a different and higher sphere, a new spiri-
tual dimension.
It truly seems that for Man this is the greatness of the present
moment. Further ideological clashes and moral dissensions lie in
wait for us as we go forward; and also further unions and further
triumphs. But the succeeding acts of the drama must take place on
another level; they must occur in a new world into which, at this
moment, we are being born: a world in which each thinking unit
upon earth will only act (if he agrees to act) in the consciousness,
become natural and instinctive to all, of furthering a work of total
personalization.
When it has passed beyond what we called at the beginning its
"critical point of socialization" the mass of Mankind, let this be
my conclusion, will penetrate for the first time into the environ-
ment which is biologically requisite for the wholeness of its task.
PARIS, MARCH 3, 1939. CAHIERS DU MONDE NOUVEAU, 1945.
questions, comments, suggestions/feedback, take-down requests, contribute, etc
contact me @ integralyogin@gmail.com or via the comments below
or join the integral discord server (chatrooms)
if the page you visited was empty, it may be noted and I will try to fill it out. cheers