Ellis/A Systemic History, 3. Provisionality and Absolutization in Human Culture

My third section, then, attempts to track the development of human cultural complexity. It does so by identifying a variety of sub-systems that have arisen at various points within human cultures, each of which has offered new complexity and new adaptive potential, but each of which was then followed by a rigidification process as increasingly absolute judgements were applied to it. When this rigidification (or reinforcing feedback loops) became too maladaptive in the face of new conditions, though, frustration has resulted, and new innovators have managed to gain support in adapting the culture with yet another complex sub-system. The pattern is then repeated. For instance, the development of religious archetypes early in human development offered important developmental potential by allowing us to maintain inspiration over time, thus fulfilling plans, being open to new ideas, identifying long-term threats, and feeding helpful relationships. However, this balancing feedback loop (as I tracked in my recent book Archetypes in Religion and Beyond) soon became rigidified by the projection of these archetypal symbols into objects of belief: archetypal gods who helped us recall more sustainable qualities of mind, for instance, became supernatural agencies who intervened to help us pass our exams.