The Strange Order of Things

The Strange Order of Things Plot Summary

Introduction

Understanding the human condition requires a venture into the most fundamental aspects of life, back to the origins of homeostasis—the process that regulates and maintains life within viable parameters. The strange order referenced in this examination points to a counterintuitive discovery: many of the features we associate with human cultural innovations were actually foreshadowed in early life forms billions of years ago, long before complex nervous systems or minds existed. While we typically credit human intellect, language, and social abilities for our cultural achievements, these explanations miss a crucial motivating factor—feelings. Feelings serve as the mental deputies of homeostasis, translating the state of life regulation into subjective experiences of pain, pleasure, and the vast spectrum between them. They focus our attention on what truly matters for survival and flourishing, and they serve as the catalysts for cultural innovations. From medicine to religious beliefs, from moral systems to artistic expressions, human cultural instruments emerged as responses to homeostatic imbalances signaled by feelings. By recognizing the biological roots of cultural achievements, we gain a richer understanding of human nature without diminishing the exceptional status of human beings. Our uniqueness lies in the way our memories of the past and anticipations of the future amplify our sufferings and joys, creating a distinctly human experience that drives our cultural minds to endless creativity.

Chapter 1: Homeostasis: The Biological Foundation of Cultures

Homeostasis refers to the collection of coordinated processes that maintain life in a stable yet dynamic state. While often simplified as mere balance maintenance, homeostasis actually encompasses something far more profound—it represents the powerful, unthought, unspoken imperative that drives all living organisms to endure and prevail against the entropy that threatens to pull them apart. It is nature's solution to the problem of life persistence in the face of constant challenges. The homeostatic imperative operates across all scales of life, from single cells to complex multicellular organisms. In bacteria, which appeared approximately 3.8 billion years ago, homeostasis already manifested as sophisticated mechanisms for sensing environmental conditions and responding with appropriate behaviors. These simple organisms can determine whether nutrients are abundant or scarce and adjust their social behaviors accordingly—living independently when resources are plentiful or banding together when they are limited. They even exhibit primitive forms of cooperation and competition that foreshadow human social interactions. Even more remarkably, bacteria can detect threats to their colonies and mount collective defenses. They form protective biofilms, coordinate group movements, and can even "sense" the number of individuals in their community through a process called quorum sensing. Though lacking anything resembling a brain or mind, bacteria behave "as if" they judge situations and make decisions based on collective welfare. This represents an early form of social governance driven purely by the homeostatic imperative, accomplished without consciousness or deliberation. Social insects like ants, bees, and termites evolved even more elaborate collective behaviors approximately 100 million years ago. These species, representing just 2% of all insect species, developed sophisticated social structures that include division of labor, architectural achievements in nest construction, complex resource management, and apparently altruistic behaviors that benefit the colony. Their colonies function as superorganisms with coordinated actions that ensure collective survival through elegant solutions to environmental challenges. What connects these early manifestations of social organization to human cultures is the underlying imperative of homeostasis. The fundamental processes that regulate life and enable flourishing have shaped biological evolution from its beginnings, gradually producing more complex systems including nervous systems, minds, feelings, and eventually, the human cultural mind. The capacity for humans to create cultural instruments for life regulation represents a new level of homeostatic strategy—one that operates through subjective experience and creative intelligence rather than through purely genetic mechanisms.

Chapter 2: Feeling and Subjectivity: The Mental Expression of Homeostasis

Feelings represent the mental experience of homeostasis—they translate physiological states into subjective experiences that can guide behavior. Unlike other mental processes, feelings are inherently valenced, meaning they are experienced as pleasant or unpleasant, reflecting whether the current state of the organism is conducive to life and flourishing or potentially threatening. This valence serves as a compass that orients behavior toward what benefits the organism and away from what harms it. The content of feelings is unique compared to other perceptions. While the images we form of the external world represent objects and events outside our bodies, feelings portray the state of life within our own organisms. They derive primarily from the viscera—the internal organs such as the heart, lungs, and gut—as well as from the chemical processes occurring throughout the body. The tightness in your throat when afraid, the lightness in your chest when joyful, the heaviness in your stomach when anxious—these bodily states constitute the actual content of our feelings. What makes feelings particularly powerful is their strange hybrid nature. They are neither purely mental nor purely physical, but rather arise from the continuous interplay between body and brain. The nervous system does not simply "receive signals" from the body; it is literally embedded within it, creating a relationship that is not merely contiguous but continuous. This fusion is most apparent in the parts of the nervous system that evolved earlier and remain largely unmyelinated—the nerve fibers that lack insulation and therefore can interact directly with surrounding tissues and with each other. These ancient neural pathways, which make up most of our interoceptive system, create the conditions necessary for the experiences we call feelings. The evolutionary benefit of feelings becomes clear when we consider what life would be like without them. A life not felt would have no subjective meaning or value. Pain without the feeling of suffering would fail to motivate protective behaviors; pleasure without the feeling of reward would fail to reinforce beneficial actions. By enabling organisms to experience the consequences of their actions and states subjectively, feelings created a powerful new layer of homeostatic regulation—one that could guide behavior based on anticipated outcomes rather than just immediate reflexes. Feelings also form a critical component of consciousness itself. For an organism to have subjective experiences—to possess a perspective from which the world is experienced—requires not just images of the external world but also the continuous stream of feeling that anchors those images to the experiencing subject. Without feelings, there would be no subjective "ownership" of experiences, no sense that the world is being experienced by someone. This perspectival quality, combined with the integration of multiple experiences into a coherent whole, constitutes what we recognize as consciousness.

Chapter 3: From Bacterial Sensing to Human Consciousness

The capacity to sense and respond to the environment is not unique to complex organisms with nervous systems. Even single-celled bacteria possess sophisticated mechanisms for detecting chemical changes in their surroundings and altering their behavior accordingly. These chemical detection systems represent the evolutionary precursors to what would eventually become sensory perception in more complex organisms. As multicellular life evolved, these basic sensing capacities expanded into specialized sensory systems. A critical transition occurred with the emergence of nervous systems approximately 500-600 million years ago. Early nervous systems were simple networks of neurons that coordinated basic functions like digestion and movement. These "nerve nets," still found in creatures like hydras and jellyfish, lacked the ability to form maps or images of their environment, but they established the basic architecture upon which more complex neural functions would later develop. The watershed development came when nervous systems evolved the capacity to map the configurations of objects and events in space using the activity of neural circuits. This mapping ability transformed sensing into true perception—the creation of analog representations that "resemble" what they represent. When a brain makes a map of an X-shaped object, it activates neurons along two intersecting lines, creating a neural pattern that preserves the essential configuration of what it represents. This innovation opened the possibility for organisms to form internal images of both the external world and their own bodily states. These images became the building blocks of minds. Vision, hearing, touch, taste, and smell each provide different aspects of the world, which the brain integrates into more complete representations. Critically, the nervous system simultaneously maps the state of the organism's internal environment—the viscera and their operations—creating representations that would become feelings. The integration of these external and internal maps laid the groundwork for consciousness. Consciousness emerged when organisms developed the capacity to create not just images of the world and their bodies, but also a subjective perspective on those images. This required two essential components: first, a means of establishing a viewpoint by mapping the relationship between the sensing body and what it senses; and second, the continuous presence of feeling states that animate those images with value and significance. When an organism can place its mental contents within this feeling-infused perspectival frame, subjectivity emerges. The strange order of these developments contradicts conventional expectations. We might assume that mental phenomena like feeling and consciousness would emerge only in the most advanced organisms with the most sophisticated brains. Yet the evidence suggests that the basic features of consciousness are widely distributed among vertebrates and likely extend to many invertebrates with sufficiently complex nervous systems. Even more surprising, the precursors to these mental phenomena—the homeostatic processes that eventually gave rise to feelings—were present at life's very beginning. This evolutionary story reveals that human consciousness and the cultural innovations it enables are built upon ancient biological foundations. The continuity between bacterial sensing, animal feeling, and human consciousness suggests that the cultural mind did not appear suddenly with Homo sapiens but emerged gradually through the expansion and enrichment of life-regulating processes that have been operating since life began.

Chapter 4: How Feelings Motivated the Creation of Cultural Instruments

Cultural instruments and practices—from medicine to art, from religious beliefs to economic institutions—arose as responses to problems posed by the human condition. While conventional accounts emphasize the role of intellect, language, and sociality in cultural development, they often overlook the crucial motivating force: feelings that signal homeostatic needs or imbalances and drive the search for solutions. Consider medicine, one of our most significant cultural enterprises. The practices that eventually became medicine began not as intellectual puzzles but as responses to the pain and suffering caused by injuries, infections, and other threats to bodily integrity. The experience of physical suffering motivated early humans to develop techniques and remedies that could alleviate pain and promote healing. Over time, these practical responses evolved into systematic knowledge and technologies, but their original impetus came from feelings that signaled homeostatic disruption. Religious beliefs similarly emerged as responses to emotional needs. The grief caused by the loss of loved ones, the anxiety provoked by unpredictable environmental threats, and the suffering inflicted by social conflicts all motivated the development of belief systems that could provide meaning, consolation, and guidance. Buddhism explicitly identifies suffering as the central problem of human existence and offers a path toward its alleviation. Other religious traditions address different aspects of emotional distress through practices that promote social harmony, ethical behavior, and psychological resilience. The arts represent another domain where feelings serve as primary motivators. Music, dance, and visual arts allow humans to explore, express, and transform emotional experiences. The earliest musical instruments—flutes dating back approximately 40,000 years—suggest that humans recognized early on the power of organized sound to evoke and modify feeling states. The pleasure derived from aesthetic experiences, the comfort offered by artistic expression of difficult emotions, and the social bonding facilitated by shared artistic activities all provided homeostatic benefits that made these cultural practices adaptive. Moral systems and social institutions evolved to address the emotional challenges of living in complex social groups. The suffering caused by conflicts, inequities, and breaches of trust motivated the development of codes of conduct, principles of justice, and systems of governance that could reduce social friction and promote cooperation. These cultural inventions did not eliminate negative emotions but created frameworks for managing them in ways that enhanced collective homeostasis. Feelings serve not only as motives for cultural innovation but also as monitors of its success. When a cultural response effectively addresses the problem that provoked it, the resulting positive feelings reinforce that response and increase the likelihood of its cultural transmission. When a response fails to alleviate distress or creates new problems, negative feelings prompt further innovation or abandonment of the practice. This feedback loop, mediated by feelings, drives the process of cultural selection.

Chapter 5: Reason and Affect: Partners in Cultural Innovation

The relationship between reason and affect in human cultural evolution is not one of opposition but of synergy. Feelings focus the intellect on problems that matter for survival and flourishing, while reason develops solutions that feelings alone could not devise. This partnership has been fundamental to the development of human cultures and remains essential to their continued evolution. When confronted with homeostatic challenges—threats to survival, obstacles to flourishing, or opportunities for advancement—feelings alert us to their significance and motivate a response. Fear signals danger and prepares the body for defensive action; hunger motivates the search for food; curiosity drives exploration and learning; compassion promotes caregiving behaviors. These affective responses focus attention and mobilize resources toward addressing pressing needs. Reason then enters the process to analyze the situation, identify causal relationships, imagine possible solutions, and anticipate their consequences. The cognitive abilities that distinguish human intelligence—abstract reasoning, imaginative projection, symbolic thought, and language—allow us to develop responses far more sophisticated than automatic emotional reactions. We can design tools, devise strategies, articulate principles, and create institutions that address not just immediate problems but also prevent future ones. This partnership is evident in the historical development of medicine. The pain and suffering caused by disease motivated the search for treatments, but effective medical practices required careful observation, systematic experimentation, and theoretical understanding of bodily processes. Over time, this combination of affective motivation and rational inquiry produced increasingly sophisticated medical knowledge and technologies, from herbal remedies to modern pharmaceuticals and surgical techniques. Similarly, moral systems evolved from the interplay of emotional responses and reasoned reflection. Empathy and compassion motivate concern for others' welfare, while anger and indignation respond to perceived injustices. These moral emotions provide the impetus for ethical thinking, but effective moral systems also require reasoned analysis of principles, consequences, and social contexts. The result is moral frameworks that can reconcile competing values and guide behavior in complex social environments. The creative arts likewise demonstrate this partnership. Emotional experiences provide the raw material and motivating energy for artistic expression, but creating effective art requires technical skill, formal understanding, and aesthetic judgment. The greatest works of art combine emotional power with intellectual sophistication, speaking to both heart and mind. Even in modern science, often portrayed as the triumph of pure reason, affect plays a crucial role. The curiosity that drives scientific inquiry, the excitement of discovery, the aesthetic appreciation of elegant theories, and the satisfaction of solving problems all contribute to scientific progress. The most successful scientists are not those who suppress emotions but those who channel them productively through rigorous methods and critical thinking. The modern tendency to separate reason and emotion, treating them as opposing forces, misrepresents their natural relationship. Neurobiological evidence indicates that effective decision-making requires both emotional evaluation and rational analysis working in concert. When this partnership is disrupted—whether through brain injury, emotional disorders, or cultural practices that devalue either component—human functioning is impaired.

Chapter 6: The Biological Roots of Human Cultural Achievements

The remarkable human capacity for cultural creation did not emerge ex nihilo but evolved from biological processes present in simpler organisms. Many of the behaviors we associate with human cultures—cooperation, social governance, communication, problem-solving—have precursors in non-human species and even in single-celled organisms. Bacteria exhibit rudimentary forms of social cooperation that foreshadow human cultural practices. They can coordinate their behaviors through chemical signaling, form protective communities when threatened, and even display primitive forms of altruism by producing compounds that benefit the colony at energetic cost to individual cells. These behaviors emerge from homeostatic imperatives without requiring consciousness or deliberation, yet they establish patterns that would later be elaborated in cultural forms. Social insects developed even more sophisticated collective behaviors. Ant colonies create architectural structures, maintain sanitation systems, practice agriculture, wage wars, and enslave other species. Bees communicate the location of food sources through elaborate dances and make collective decisions through democratic processes. These complex social systems emerge from the interaction of relatively simple behavioral programs but achieve results that parallel human cultural innovations. The transition to human culture involved several key biological developments. First, the evolution of complex nervous systems capable of mapping both the external world and the internal state of the organism created the foundation for image-based minds. Second, the emergence of feelings as mental representations of homeostatic states provided a motivational system that could guide behavior toward survival and flourishing. Third, the development of memory systems allowed organisms to learn from experience and accumulate knowledge across generations. Language represents a particularly crucial innovation. By translating experiences into symbolic form, language enabled humans to share knowledge, coordinate actions, and develop cumulative cultural traditions. Yet language itself builds upon biological foundations: the neural machinery for producing and processing speech evolved from pre-existing systems for vocalization and auditory processing, while the grammatical structures that organize language reflect patterns of thought shaped by our evolutionary history. Even the most abstract cultural achievements have biological roots. Mathematical reasoning builds upon neural systems for quantification and spatial representation that we share with other animals. Moral judgments engage emotional responses that evolved to regulate social interactions. Religious experiences activate brain networks involved in social cognition and theory of mind. Scientific thinking extends natural curiosity and causal reasoning to new domains. Understanding these biological foundations does not reduce cultural achievements to mere biology or deny human uniqueness. Rather, it reveals how cultural evolution built upon and transformed biological capacities, creating something genuinely new through the accumulation and refinement of innovations. The cultural mind emerged from the biological mind but transcended it through the power of symbolic thought, social learning, and collective intelligence. The relationship between biological and cultural evolution is bidirectional. Cultural practices create new selective pressures that influence biological evolution, as evidenced by genetic adaptations to agricultural diets and disease environments. Simultaneously, biological constraints shape the range of possible cultural variations, explaining cross-cultural universals in domains like language, morality, and art. This integrative perspective challenges both biological reductionism and cultural exceptionalism. Human cultures are neither simply expressions of genetic programs nor wholly independent from biological influences. They represent a unique evolutionary development—a system of inheritance parallel to but interacting with genetic inheritance, enabling adaptations to occur at unprecedented speed and in unprecedented directions.

Chapter 7: The Crisis of Modern Culture: A Homeostatic Perspective

Modern human societies face a paradoxical situation. Technological and scientific advances have created unprecedented capabilities for meeting basic homeostatic needs—providing food, shelter, protection from disease, and other material necessities—yet many people experience profound dissatisfaction, anxiety, and alienation. From a homeostatic perspective, this crisis reflects a mismatch between our biological heritage and the cultural environments we have created. Our homeostatic regulatory systems evolved in contexts where threats were immediate and concrete—predators, hunger, physical dangers—and where social groups were small and intimate. Modern life presents different challenges: chronic stress without physical outlet, information overload, social media environments that trigger comparison and status anxiety, sedentary lifestyles that disrupt metabolic regulation, and communities too large for meaningful social connection. These novel conditions engage our homeostatic responses in ways that can be maladaptive rather than beneficial. Digital technologies exemplify this mismatch. Social media platforms are designed to trigger dopamine-mediated reward systems through likes, shares, and notifications, creating patterns of engagement that resemble addiction more than healthy sociality. The constant availability of information overwhelms attentional systems evolved for different informational environments, leading to stress, distraction, and difficulty in distinguishing reliable from unreliable sources. Meanwhile, surveillance technologies enable unprecedented monitoring of behavior, creating new forms of social control that can undermine autonomy and well-being. Political polarization similarly reflects homeostatic processes gone awry. Our social emotions evolved to strengthen in-group bonds and mobilize against out-group threats—adaptive responses in ancestral environments but potentially destructive in diverse, interconnected societies where cooperation across group boundaries is essential. When political identities become primary sources of meaning and belonging, disagreements trigger threat responses that inhibit rational deliberation and compromise. Economic systems that prioritize growth and consumption over sustainability and equity create another form of homeostatic imbalance. Material abundance beyond what satisfies basic needs provides diminishing returns for well-being, while environmental degradation threatens the physical systems upon which all life depends. The pursuit of financial success at the expense of meaningful relationships, purpose, and community leaves many materially wealthy but emotionally impoverished. These challenges do not mean we should abandon technological progress or return to premodern ways of life. Rather, they indicate the need for cultural innovations that better align with our biological needs and capabilities. Cultural practices that promote physical activity, meaningful social connection, contact with natural environments, and opportunities for creative expression and purpose can counterbalance the homeostatic disruptions of modern life. Education represents a particularly crucial arena for intervention. Educational systems that nurture both reason and affect—developing emotional intelligence alongside analytical skills—can prepare individuals to navigate complex modern environments more adaptively. Teaching critical thinking, media literacy, and reflective awareness can help people resist manipulation by technologies designed to exploit homeostatic vulnerabilities. The current crisis also reveals limitations in how we conceptualize cultural progress. Measures like GDP that focus solely on material production miss crucial dimensions of human flourishing. A truly homeostatic approach to cultural development would consider how well societies support physical health, emotional well-being, social connection, meaning, and autonomy for all members.

Summary

At its core, this investigation reveals a profound connection between the biological imperative of homeostasis and the extraordinary flowering of human cultures. The strange order referenced in the title points to a remarkable discovery: the social behaviors, cooperative strategies, and problem-solving approaches we associate with human cultural achievement were foreshadowed billions of years ago in simple organisms lacking brains or minds. This continuity does not diminish human uniqueness but rather enriches our understanding of it by illuminating the deep biological foundations upon which our cultural minds are built. Feelings emerge as the critical bridge between basic homeostasis and cultural creation. As mental representations of homeostatic states, feelings translate the abstract imperative of life regulation into subjective experiences that can motivate, monitor, and negotiate the cultural process. They focus intelligence on problems that matter for survival and flourishing, guide responses to those problems, and evaluate their success. Without feelings, the brilliant intellect that we rightly celebrate would lack direction and purpose; without intellect, feelings would lack the means to create the complex solutions that characterize human cultures. Their partnership, forged in biological evolution and refined through cultural development, has produced the remarkable achievements and troubling contradictions of the human condition. By recognizing this partnership, we gain insight not only into our past but into possibilities for creating cultures that better align with our nature as feeling, thinking beings.

About Author

Loading...

António Damásio

Read more

Related Books by António Damásio

Loading...

Descartes’ Error

António Damásio

Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain

★★★½☆4.0