15. Elaborating the reproducing individual

One way negative entropy could develop greater order of matter without violating the integrity of the reproducing individual was to elaborate the reproducing individual, make it bigger. Elaborating the reproducing individual is in fact how single-celled organisms were able to integrate to form multicellular organisms, and it is also how multicellular bees and ants were able to integrate to form the next level of order of the integrated whole of multicellular members of a species—in the case of bees/ ants, their colonies. In multicellular organisms, each organism, while composed of many individual cells, remains one reproducing individual. Similarly with bee/ ant colonies, each colony, while composed of many bees/ ants, remains one reproducing individual.

The biological mechanism for elaborating the reproducing individual involved the member cells, or member multicellular bees/ ants, deferring their sexual reproduction and leaving that task to another part of the whole that specialises in reproduction. In the case of the integration of single-celled organisms, the green algae known as Volvox provides an example of an organism in transition from the single-celled to the multicellular state, as this quote describes: ‘Volvox is…a small, green sphere…composed of thousands of flagellates Page 60 of
PDF Version embedded in the surface of a jelly ball…Volvox is a colony of unicellular animals rather than a many-celled animal, because even the simplest many-celled animals have considerably more differentiation between cells than appears among the cells of Volvox. The colony swims about, rolling over and over from the action of the flagella; but, remarkably enough, the same end of the sphere is always directed forward…Its behaviour can be explained only by supposing that the activities of the numerous flagellates are subordinated to the activity of the colony as a whole. If the flagella of each member of the colony were to beat without reference to the other members, the sphere would never get anywhere. In such subordination of the individual cells of a colony to the good of the colony as a whole we see the beginnings of individuality as it exists in the higher animals, where each animal behaves as a single individual, although composed of millions of cells…The co-ordination of numerous components into an individual is usually followed by the specialisation of different individuals for different duties. Only the slightest degree of specialisation is seen in the Volvox colony; the flagellates of the back part of the colony are capable of reproduction, while the front members never reproduce but have larger eyespots and serve primarily in directing the course of the colony’ (Animals without Backbones, R. Buchsbaum, 1938, p.50 of 401).

In the case of bees (ants also employ a similar chemical retardant), the queen bee feeds a ‘royal jelly’ that causes sterility in all of her offspring that she intends to be workers. To ensure the reproduction of their genes these offspring then have to support her because she carries their genes. (It should be mentioned that saying the queen ‘intends’ and the offspring ‘have to’ is obviously personifying the genetic process. The queen and the offspring are obviously not conscious thinking organisms deciding they ‘intend’ and ‘have to’ do something or other as we humans do, however such anthropomorphism is simply a useful way of describing what in effect occurs. For example, the way genetics actually causes offspring to ‘have to’ support the queen is that out of the many different mutational varieties of offspring that appear over time only those that happen to have a genetic make-up that inclines them to support the queen will tend to reproduce, naturally selecting that particular behaviour for all subsequent generations and eventually the whole species.)

Elaborating the reproducing individual allows the members of the elaborated individual to develop the ability to at least behave unconditionally selflessly, which, as has been explained, is fundamental for the fully cooperative integration of members into a new whole to develop. As has been mentioned, the reason our body works so well is because each part has sublimated its needs to the greater needs of the whole body; each part behaves in an unconditionally selfless way. Our skin for example is constantly growing and dying to protect our body. The leaves that fall in autumn do so to enable the tree to survive through winter. Bees and ants sacrifice themselves for the colony. The skin, leaves and bees/ ants have behaved unconditionally selflessly, they have in effect considered the welfare of the greater good above their own welfare.

Importantly our body’s skin, the tree’s leaves and the bees/ ants have only behaved unconditionally selflessly because their selflessness is not actually unconditional selflessness, it is not true altruism. This is because the self-sacrificing skin, leaves and bees/ ants are all indirectly selfishly ensuring their own genetic existence will be reproduced by supporting the body or tree or bee/ ant colony that carries the genes for their existence. Genetically they are selflessly fostering the body/ tree/ colony to selfishly ensure their own genetic reproduction. Their apparently unconditionally selfless behaviour is not actually unconditional and thus altruistic but rather a subtle form of selfishness. As was explained earlier, such reciprocity can develop genetically because it doesn’t compromise the integrity of the reproducing individual.

It now needs to be explained that large animals couldn’t employ this device of elaborating the reproducing individual to develop a fully cooperative, integrated Page 61 of
PDF Version association or whole of their members. The reason they couldn’t is that for them it involves too great a loss of the variability that all species need to be able to adapt to their environment. For example, if a female zebra happened to be born with a particular mutation that caused her to produce a chemical in her milk that retarded the sexual maturation of her offspring such that her offspring then had to protect her for their genes to be successfully reproduced by her, and this became a common practice amongst zebras, with every queen zebra having say 9 protector sacrificial zebras, then the genetic variety of a population of 1,000 zebras would be reduced to just 100, a drastic loss of variability. In the case of bees/ ants they are so small in relation to their environment that they can afford to have many fully integrated colonies in their environment without any significant loss of variability within their species.

Quite a number of species are, to varying degrees of success, attempting to create the integrated society of members by elaborating the reproducing individual. Many bird species, such as the Australian Kookaburra, delay their sexual maturation for a few years after they fledge and during those years they selflessly help raise their parents’ subsequent offspring, but they can’t delay their sexual maturation permanently because it would led to too great a loss of variability in their species. Underground-living naked mole rats form fully integrated colonies of up to 300 members comprising one queen who uses hormones to inhibit the sexual maturation of nearly all the others who then act as ‘workers’ and ‘soldiers’. A few ‘sexual disperser caste’ are allowed to reach sexual maturity and these periodically escape their natal burrow to access other colonies and, in doing so, help maintain the genetic variety of the mole rat species.

What has been explained here is very significant for humans because it means that, as large animals, we could not have employed the integrating device of elaborating the reproducing individual to create the pre-conscious fully integrated state that it is being asserted occurred. Further, it is being asserted that during that fully integrated, idyllic, ‘Garden of Eden’, ‘Golden Age’ in our species’ past our instinctive orientation was not reciprocity’s subtle form of selfishness that the parts of multicellular organisms and bee/ ant colonies practice but to being truly altruistic, genuinely unconditionally selflessly orientated towards all of life; so even if we could have employed the device of elaborating the reproducing individual it would not explain our unconditionally selfless soul. The question therefore remains, how did we humans manage to develop an unconditionally selfless, genuinely altruistic, all-loving moral orientation to the world?

Before answering this question we can now return to the problem of the atrophying, crippling effect denial of the issue of the human condition and of the truth of integrative meaning, and, as we will see throughout this book, many, many other important truths, has had on biologist’s ability to understand our world and our place in it. As will become apparent in this next section, these denials did lead to extremely dangerous levels of biological dishonesty about how our world works and the true nature of our soul, our moral sense and our corrupted human condition.