The Introspection of a Cell Upon the Organism of Which it is a Part;
 A Perspective on Human Consciousness

by Paul Kamadulski

      I here present an idea regarding the nature of humanity and attempt to define a duality which exists as part of the human experience; an idea which I find thought provoking but which is nothing more, or less, than my viewpoint. I present it as suchÑa working hypothesis which beckons further development, which at once seems rather tenuous yet seems to possess some profound substance. I have little formal knowledge of philosophy and I am not aware if the connection I attempt to make has ever been drawn before.       
			I propose the existence of a "functional organism" whose acistence and development is an evolutionary phenomenon. I further propose that human minds, or the results of the activities of these conscious minds, make up cellular subunits of this organism. Included in, but perhaps not exclusive of, the manifestations of this entity is the human collective conscience and a kind of collective cognizance made up of all aspects of culture and society. This functional organism is intimately intertwined with human beings. I will attempt to explain and define this entity as best I can at this point.      
			 I place the entity, i.e. the functional organism, into an evolutionary perspective; this is a cornerstone in my hypothesis.       
			In the beginning of the universe, at the time of the big bang, everything existed in the form of plasma and atoms had not yet formed. Shortly after this theoretical event matter began to organize and within billions of years our solar systcm and plana formedÑthe result of evolution, which I define as an underlying force which drives things towards greater complexity. This force drives some systems in an obvious and inexorable manner while seeming to have forgotten others. But evolution follows no timetable. It is a great opportunist which can move at a snail's pace or at lightning speet, depending upon the opportunities which present themselves. It is widely accepted that sometime after the Earth formed, chemical precursors to life arose. Evolution seized the opportunity which I believe it itself created, and from these chemical precursors life as we know it evolved. Note that the progression to what we today call life was not an instantaneous one. There was undoubtedly a fuzzy time in which it would not be clear to an obsever that evolution was proceeding through a state of change. In fact if one was willing to challenge the definition of life it could be said that the life that existed in the form of inanimate matter evolved and a major state change or change in levels occurred. The result was early life, or life as it is generally understood to be. Life, which had never existed before on Earth, represented a revolutionary jump in order of complexity that happened because it could happen. Whatever was needed was allowed for, hence the opporeunity for the evolution of life existed! Such a revolutionary jump may be taking place now and we would be the necessary precursors which would allow for an evolving into a higher order of complexity.
       It is important to realize how revolutionary was the evolution of the human mind.       The development of the human mind with it consciousness and capacity for thought unrivaled in the animal kingdom was indeed revolutionaly, but was the result of a progression of evolutionary steps. The indefinite lineage of the human brain can be traced from humans through certain primates through lower mammals through reptiles to ancient organisms with primitive nervous systems. The exact pathway is perhaps unknowable. However, one can deduce a basic lineage by comparing the anatomy of the human brain to that of other animals alive today. Evolution never starts from scratch; it builds upon what it has already produced. The development of the human mind and its consciousness allows for further evolution on unprecedented levels . The possibility of another organism alive today possessing a consciousness comparable to that of humans (or some rudimentary form of one) may be debatable, but none are thought to have the neural machinery necessary for higher brain function comparable to that of humans. The past has left no evidence of an organism which commanded a comparable consciousness. It seems that humans are the first, and the possible existence of another animal consciousness is not relevant to this phenomenon. Are we the foremost on Earth? This means an evolutionary hierarchy as measured by level of consciousness, albeit not easily discernable levels. I propose that the functional organism is but we as organisms are not.
       Here I must define "the human collective consciousness/cognizance." It is not simply an intangible consciousness which is an entiy greater than the sum of the individual human consciousnesses which compose it. I include a cognizance which constitutes the output which we receive from the "functional organism." This cognizance encompasses the sum of man's recorded knowledge, all institutions and mechanisms which are inherently human and exist as products of the human organism while outside of it. A thought experiment will highlight this evolving cognizance of which we are all aware but take for granted. If a modern child was raised in some world completely human activities, yet all its emotional and physical needs were met, perhaps by the inclusion of this hypothetical situation a complete family unit all reared under the same pretenses, this child would then be back to square one comparable to the first homosapiens with only the benefits of its evolution on animal an organism level. The physical difference between our distant ancestors and the seemingly complex human of today? Not much to speak of. The species has differentiated into different races over time but we are still essentialty the same.       		
			What has occurred is the formation of an entity-like organism, which I call the "functionat organism" and defining as the sum of 1) the visible and 2) the largely abstract constituent quatities of the human coltective consciousness/cogrizance.       I 
			I am not interested in semantic arguments. One might have different definitions of "cognizance" or "collective consciousness," I have chosen these words because they seemed most appropriatley descriptive. Whether you consider these part of the self or a separate living entity is also really only a matter of semantics because it is a part of ourselves yet it has a life and existence of its own.
       Consider the beginning of another level of life: a fuzzy area which is difficult to define; a place between state changes.
       Our evolution as organisms is occurring at a snails pace and no new species have since evolved from us. However, the evolution of our collective consciousness/ cognizance is occurring very quickly by comparison and seems to feed upon itsetf in that further development increases its rate of evolution. In fact I hope to be "feeding" it at some level right now by communicating these thoughts to others. The formation of an "organism" from already existing units which have the capacity to support a larger organism need not wait for anatomical evolution. The foundation exists and it only remains a matter of getting the organization right.
      Perhaps if humans were collectively so inclined, we could direct this evolution to influence its results over time by facilitating the development of an organization whose end result would more completely satisfy our needs. This quest is the driving force behind the development of the functional organism and we are at the wheel. We have struggled with this, although not entirely consciously in trying to influence the functional organism as a whole. Mainly, we try to meet our own individual needs and desires and take care of business in our daily lives, but the ramifications of our actions are far-reaching. I can offer no answer that addresses the entire nature of such a deliberate action, and by definition no one person could have an answer. Instead the evolution of the human race is in our collective hands and at the core of this dilemma lies a conflict. The conflict arises from the separateness of the endties which comprise humanity. The innate inalienable characteristics which comprise human nature are inseparably tied to and dependent upon the evolution of the human animal. Conversely, the evolution of the human collective consciousness/cognizance is not dependent upon the evolution of the human animal for its evolution. Instead the functional organism relies on its cellular subunits to provide what ultimately directs its growth This input may result in an organization of the functional organism detrimental to the human animal. In fact if we're not careful we may kill ourselves. Can we reconcile these two parts of ourselves or, for that matter, is it imperative that we do so? In any case, I find the implications of these queries fascinating.