There are two systems. One system, based on rationality, is logical,
orderly, and efficient; the other, based on intuition, instinct, and emotion,
is reactive, unplanned, and unpredictable. I call the former the ‘mechanistic’
system and the latter the ‘organic’ system.
In psychology, these respective systems are sometimes
referred to as the “cold” and “hard” modes of cognition, and also relate to the
common distinction between logical and creative, right- and left-brained, or practical
and visionary personality types. A similar distinction can be made with regard
to our nervous systems, which comprise both somatic and autonomic sub-systems,
respectively responsible for voluntary and involuntary activities. In fact, however,
the organic-mechanistic dichotomy is an overarching, metaphysical concept that applies
to areas beyond our selves. In the social realm, for example, we can
distinguish between informal communities and formal institutions. Religion,
too, can be analysed using this framework – while some groups are primarily concerned
with theology and doctrine, and tend to conduct their services in an organised fashion,
others focus on spirit and experience, and operate on a more spontaneous basis.
In a way, of course, the organic-mechanistic dichotomy is
merely a restatement of the well-known yin-yang schema. Indeed, like yin and
yang, organic and mechanistic systems are at once complementary and competing. They
are complementary because no system can function effectively without both
sub-systems; think of a person with either no emotion or no logic, or a
religion with either no doctrine or no experience. They are competing, however,
because the two sub-systems function according to conflicting logics. Indeed,
the logic of the organic system is
not necessarily logical at all; and
the very fact that I have used the word ‘logic’ to describe the modus operandi of both systems – and indeed,
the fact that I have referred to them both as ‘systems’ – demonstrates a key
insight of the dichotomy, namely that the mechanistic system has an inherent
and inexorable tendency to engulf and overwhelm the organic system. This is
evident in, for example: the bureaucratisation and patriarchal domination of
society; the relentless insatiability of capitalism and empire; and the tendency
for schools to focus exclusively on ‘head-knowledge’ to the neglect of other
aspects of education.
The mechanistic system colonises the organic system in an
attempt to tame its intolerably wild nature, which does not cohere with its paradigm
of order, progress, or whatever. By this very token, however, it is the
mechanistic system that must in fact be tamed, for its attempts at control
ultimately violate the divine balance, producing a lopsided, ineffective, and unviable
system that ultimately self-destructs. An industrialised world destroys the
natural environment on which it depends; a power-based politics provokes
nuclear holocaust; commodification, consumerism, and cost-benefit analysis
devalue the very commodities that that they purport to value while excluding those non-quantifiable and non-tradable aspects of life that actually improve wellbeing.
Indeed, it is the failure of the mechanistic system that
shows us the need for the organic. I think, for example, of how the vast
failures of the current socio-economic system (which I have discussed at length on
my other blog) indicate (in my opinion) the need for a more cooperative – that
is, a more organic – socio-economy. There is also a clear parallel here to the
gospel of Christ, who came not to abolish the Law, with its detailed lists of rules
and regulations, but to fulfil it – to complement it with a ‘logic of Love’. Indeed,
these two applications – the socio-economic system and the gospel of Christ –
are not completely separate. I am particularly reminded of how, in Britain, the
mechanistic systems of the Roman Empire – both religious and socio-economic – eventually
overpowered the organic systems of the native Celts, only to later implode
under the sheer weight of their own organisational apparatus. Such situations likewise reveal the
need for a new, more balanced system.
*Note: This post was inspired by Charles Eisenstein’s
insightful tome, The Ascent of Humanity.
