Well, according to Jiddu Krishnamurti, it hasn’t evolved. In fact, if there was any change at all, he implies that humanity’s psyche is devolving instead of evolving.

Continuing my reflection on Krishnamurti’s and Bohm’s dialog in “the Future of Humanity,” another concept that caught my attention is the evolution of the human psyche or consciousness. A difficult topic indeed. In fact, I tried to find scientific articles on the subject, but most of them talk about physical evolution that leads to human consciousness instead of the evolution of consciousness itself, such as the articles here and here.

Thankfully I could still find resources that discussed psyche or consciousness in a similar light to the discussion in “the Future of Humanity” such as the ones here and here. 

All of this literature showed a nuanced definition of the evolution of the human psyche or consciousness, indicating the vastness and divergence of the topic. A lot of those literature noted the difficulties of adopting a unified definition of the psyche or consciousness.

Back to Krishnamurti’s opinion that the human psyche has stagnated. His theory correlates with other theories in Richard Coen’s book, “Human consciousness and its evolution: a multidimensional view.” In it he discussed the two general models of evolution. 

The two models are the cyclic model and the unidirectional model. The cyclic model sees evolution as a cyclic process, where the best condition is in the beginning of the cycle. In this case, the best version of the human psyche is in the earlier humans. Humans that possess a primordial psyche, the most complete psyche. There is then a cycle in which the psyche degrades, improves, and returns to the beginning of the cycle, albeit not exactly the same. 

The unidirectional model sees evolution as an upward or a downward trend. There is a tendency in modern society to assume that evolution always has an upward trend. Everything evolves into a better version of itself, in the biological sense (species, human beings) and in the abstract sense (the psyche, societies, ideologies, etc.). I personally don’t think that this is the case.

The downward evolution model is similar to what Krishnamurti is describing for the human psyche. That there is a sense of decay and degeneration of the human psyche, which is leading humanity to its downfall.

As mentioned, there is a divergence in the understanding and definition of the human psyche. The construct of Krishnamurti’s human psyche / consciousness includes intentions, aspirations, desires, understanding, etc., which is the result of thought. Another term he used for it is “the ego”, “the me.” The egocentric substance of a human being. 

Krishnamurti’s definition is very similar to the self (nafs) in the Islamic and many religious traditions. In the Islamic tradition, many great scholars have extensively written about the self and how to master it. The struggle (jihad) against it is the greatest struggle of all. Only the elite elect have the ability to fully conquer and master it.

In these modern times, the psyche, self, nafs, consciousness, or whatever we want to call it, has received very little attention. The problems we see in humanity from time to time stems from the flawed nature of it. The problems that humanity is facing now, in the past, and in the future will always stem from pride, greed, lust, gluttony, and other flaws within the human psyche.

So when Krishnamurti says that humanity is on a downward spiral and its psyche / consciousness has not evolved, he is making a lot of sense.

God knows best…

Reflection on “the future of humanity” (J. Krishnamurti and D. Bohm)

#evolution #evolve #psyche #consciousness #nafs #self #krishnamurti #bohm