“Serit arbores, quae alteri saeclo prosint, ut ait Statius noster in Synephebis."

- Cato Major I.24

From “How Did Consciousness Evolve? An Illustrated Guide”

Driven by learning, consciousness and cognition evolved further. In some lineages, selection for increased learning capacity led to the gradual evolution of imaginative, dreaming animals. They did not just learn about aspects of their world; they also learned about how events unfolded in time. They recalled past events— they could recall when and where a particular event happened, and they planned ahead by recombining aspects of their recollections and evaluating the planned, imagined event. These animals, which inhabit the third floor in Dennett’s generate-and-test tower, could imagine different scenarios and choose between them.

There are many examples of imaginative planning by birds and mammals, and there are more limited examples of the imaginative ability of some fish, bees, and cuttlefish. It is likely that imagination evolved gradually and to different degrees in different species. Curiously, most imaginative animals are social. Are their social sensibilities related to their imaginative capacities? Whatever the answer and however striking animal imagination is, it remains in the private domain. The ability to communicate about what one imagines is peculiar to humans.

Taking it to the next logical level, we begin to see the collective imagination as a marker separating one human species from the next, while physical attributes tend to remain the same over evolutionary timelines. Creative expression, epiphany learning (EL), and communication are all that remain to distinguish Homo planetarius from Homo sapiens. Those who transcend the limitations of ordinary consciousness are capable of naturally selecting a more beneficial outcome for the evolution of human consciousness. It’s simply a matter of choice, not a matter of genetics. As evolutionary biologist Mary Jane West-Eberhard put it: “Genes are followers, not leaders, in evolution.”

I suppose Neil Armstrong, being the first man on the Moon, indicates a possible type specimen of a new species. Maybe someday we’ll look back on Apollo as the dawning of Homo planetarius. Maybe someday we’ll look back on my maps as the migration of Homo planetarius. Symbolic language is one marker that separates humans from other conscious animals. Is there something about Homo planetarius that separates it from Homo sapiens?

The photographs of Earth from Space were transformative. Could we measure traits associated with expansive consciousness in an individual, as opposed to regressive consciousness, as possible markers? Awareness is another key attribute. At the furthest end of the spectrum, we have advanced humans with varying degrees of omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscient awareness. Related to that is meta-awareness, or the ability to step back and observe our own thoughts, emotions and mental state in real time or in retrospect.

Worth considering is hope vs. hopelessness and how optimism fuels imagination. I notice that travel is different for me now, because I rarely imagine living in a place, whereas when I was young, that idea was part of what made it intriguing and fun. Now I am more interested in putting down roots in one place. Instead, my focus has shifted towards helping my company to become profitable, thereby allowing me to put down roots in other places too, like maybe the Moon or Mars.

Some evolutionary biologists claim that reverse evolution isn’t possible. Others say that dormant traits may reappear under prolonged duress. Certainly we are unlikely to see a complete regression back to the apes. However, I do think that with our increased awareness of how to direct the trajectory of human evolution, there are obvious behaviors that will be counterproductive. There are choices that will keep humanity trapped in an endless cycle of repetition, generation after generation, producing only clones but never triggering evolutionary leaps of consciousness.

The adaptation of culture and technology to external threats may have more to do with the long term survival of our species than natural selection. If technology continues to shield humans from natural selection, it may also alter how evolution operates over the long term. If so, then conscious evolution may be the only option for Homo planetarius.

Yuval Noah Harari, author of Homo Deus, proposes another possibility for an advanced human species. He suggests that the merger of biotechnology and AI with man will create a sort of superman, capable of ruling over Homo sapiens. He refers to conscious evolution as “intelligent design,” suggesting that it will replace natural selection in the future. Linked to this idea is the concept of the singularity, where AI evolves to the point of meeting, and then surpassing, human intelligence and control.

How will the rapid rate of technological obsolescence impact these proposed trajectories? To me, any suggestion of replacing Homo sapiens with an upgraded version of Homo sapiens is just another way of keeping humanity trapped in an endless cycle of repetition.

One interesting thread is the evolution of beauty as a marker, which, increasingly, is a survival trait. Humans tend to value and protect beautiful creatures while feeling an aversion to ugly ones. But what about inner beauty or wisdom? That seems more relevant to advanced civilizations and higher consciousness.

Maybe the best we can do at this stage in history is to make choices that protect our own peace, which may mean removing ourselves from certain societies and experiences. In the meantime, conscious evolution is a wide open space, without any documented examples or success stories, because the timelines are so long.

Conscious Evolution

Alternative Structure of the Union

GPS in Space