A Grand Unification Theory of Origins Humans can actualize abstractions that have led to the evolvement of morality and ethics by Theodore C Kent We can look at almost everything from two different points of view. One view focuses on an actual thing itself. The other view reveals its connection to the world around it. The first view could be called the small picture view; the other, the Big Picture view. The small picture view has the advantage of highlighting details. A Big Picture view gives meaning to what is looked at and relates it to the world in which we live. Small picture and Big Picture views apply to the theories on origins. Beginnings, considered in isolation from other events, lack meaning. To understand beginnings we must go beyond them to speculate on their significance and consequences. In the Big Picture, an event large or small appears as part of the pattern of nature. The Biggest Picture view takes us, inevitably, to the nature of the universe. Our special concerns as humans, is how and why the Big Bang (as the origin of the universe is colloquially called) has led to life and to ourselves. Creationism and "Selfish Genes" Long before the Judeo-Christian tradition, creationism explained the origin of the universe in terms of the supernatural. Gods or spirits, separately or in unison, and later God alone, were believed to be responsible for the existence of al I life. In this article I shall not deal with the supernatural except to note that it represents the kind of Big Picture view to which humankind is intuitively attracted. In contrast to creationism, Charles Darwin in 1859 focused : on the small picture of life when he wrote the book, The Origin of Species and later the Descent of Man. In these books he startled the Western world with his theory of evolution. From its beginning Creationism relied on faith, whereas evolution explained the origin of species on the theory of natural selection. Later this concept was described as the "survival of the fittest" in terms of the ability to adjust to varying environmental conditions. Darwin's work, based on keen observation and insight, was supported by worldwide observations, the subsequent discovery of mutations, and by the modern molecular biology philosophy of "selfish genes." Some contemporary philosophical writings based on neurophysiology consider behavior as originating within the brain. Thus, with passing time, perceptions of the origins of behavior became increasingly narrow as they were ascribed to fewer and fewer things. Evolution spells out success in life as the reproduction of offspring which, in turn, are capable of producing offspring, thus continuing the species. The key to evolutionary success is seen as adaptation and exploitation of ecological niches that lead to biological advantages. Put in the simplest terms, this adds up to the idea — the world is out there for your benefit — grab as much as you can for yourself and for your species. Anything beyond that is peripheral and of not much concern. Among sophisticated species like humans it would mean that behavior called "good," "decent," "unselfish"," and "ethical" serves merely as a disguised form of self and species aggrandizement. If human nature were forced into this kind of mold, we would not be able to write a poem, compose music, or paint a picture merely to be creative. All behavior, including altruism, ethics, and morality would have to have to some underlying, camouflaged, self-serving purpose. Things done for themselves would not exist. "Goodness is its own reward," as the folk wisdom maintains, would be nonsense. In that case, the philosopher Immanuel Kant was totally wrong when he defined morality as "conduct that requires that nothing be gained by it" (italics mine). Evolution and the modern concept of the "selfish gene" have conditioned us to think that selfishness and proliferation is nature's sole goal and its raison d'etre for existing. However, when seen from a Big Picture view. we can hypothesize that something beyond their ``selfish genes. In spite of wide acceptance, the theory of evolution suffers from one overriding flaw. It is a small picture view of a much larger phenomenon. The history of life on earth represents a small picture view of a much larger phenomenon, even though it covers a time span of roughly three billion years. The universe has existed approximately 15 billion years. Because Darwin's theory of the evolution of life is a small picture view, it lacks connectiveness to the rest of the universe. Consequently, this theory has misled those who use it to reach Big Picture conclusions. For example, terms such as "evolutionary pressure" bypass thoughts of life's roots predating biology. Instead of evolutionary pressure we should think of it as the pressure inherent in the universe's expansion from a dot to a cosmos. Evolution of species manifested by life on earth is, intrinsically, a derivative of this primordial expansion. In short, the theory of evolution is incomplete because it fails to go beyond life on earth to find connectiveness. In their small picture view, evolutionists have found consistencies to their theory on earth. In the Big Picture that includes the universe they have failed to put the pieces together. Creationism, no matter whatever else we may think of it, does not suffer from this defect. Origin of Behavior Beyond Biology Within science it is possible to obtain a Big Picture view of life, of humankind, and of ourselves. I proposed this in a paper, Speculating on the Roots of Human Behavior Beyond Biological Origins, presented at the Annual Meeting of the Pacific Division of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (1989). I argued that the common ancestry of human behavior with all else that exists leads the search for human roots to the beginning of the universe. Human nature can be viewed as a derivative of the nature of the universe and human behavior may have obtained some of its characteristics from enduring patterns manifested throughout the universe in the physical world. After the paper was reprinted I received a note from John Archibald Wheeler, Department of Physics, Princeton, who called the ideas expressed in the paper "thoughtful and thought-provoking." John L. Casti, Professor of Operations Research and System Theory, at the Technical University, Vienna, read the reprint and commented, "Looking beyond heredity and environment for origins of mind and behavior may well turn out to be the key that unlocks thorny issues." I propose that maintaining balance in human affairs and in the lives of organisms is usually explained as resulting from natural selection for survival. But being in balance isn't what is really selective. Being in harmony with the laws of nature that require balance throughout the universe is what is selective. In other words, everything that exists represents, in one way or another, a microcosm of our cosmos. We are all children of the universe. I can put the idea into a couplet that might be in accord with both creationism and science: Even before the universe had begun Its design and the Designer were one.   The Grand Unification Theory in Physics From its very beginning, the universe was a huge treasury of dormant potentialities that had inherent in them pressure for their actualization. Actualized potentialities of the universe, concrete or abstract, are the only realities that we know. In the physical world, actualized potentialities of the universe are manifested by forces of nature: the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, electromagnetic force, and gravitation. Physicists have searched for a fifth force which they call a Grand Unification Theory (GUT). A number of candidates including "superstring theories" have evolved. GUT represents the ongoing search for the Big Picture view in physics. It seems to me that we need a similar effort in biology and also in psychology. The diversification of life is not only a product of evolution as we have been taught, but also is a concomitant of the tendency of the universe to actualize its potentialities. Both life and non-life participate in this activity as partners. Evolution, like other phenomena of nature, is a tool of the universe used to actualize its potentialities and maintain them once they have been actualized. The universe's tendency for innovation and conservation are mirrored in life — even in the politics of nations. Within the Big Picture view, the "evolutionary pressure of biologists is seen as a manifestation of cosmic pressure emanating from the Big Bang. Looking at it from the Big Picture view, evolution is a struggle — not merely for existence — but one to actualize the dormant potentialities of the universe to the largest extent possible. Seen this way, randomness takes on a new meaning. Both random and regular events represent actualizations. For example, only a small fraction of all mutations leads to survival. From the small picture view of evolution harmful mutations have been called nature's "mistakes." From the Big Picture view they are tiny examples of the dynamics of the universe exerting pressure for actualizing its potentialities. These may be for better or for worse for life. The universe is neutral. Nature lacks compassion. Compassion, and a morality without ulterior motives, are exciting potentialities of the universe left for humans to actualize and bring into existence. Our Role Humans can actualize abstractions that have led to the evolvement of morality and ethics. These amazing potentialities existed from the beginning of everything and lay dormant until aroused from their slumber by us. In this way we play a part in shaping the universe into what it is and will become. It imposes on us an impressive responsibility. The Big Picture view of life puts us and the stars and all the phenomena of nature into the same category of actualized potentialities. The dynamics of the universe viewed as operating within all of nature from its beginning leads to a "Grand Unification Theory" that encompasses all of the sciences and sheds light on our role as citizens of the cosmos.   Dr. Theodore C. Kent has a B.A. from Yale and graduate degrees from Columbia, University of Southern California, and Johannes Gutenberg University, Mains, Germany. He is professor emeritus, University of Southern Colorado, where he chaired the Department of Behavioral Science. His seven books on psychology and philosophy are directed at creating problem-solving behavior. His background is listed in Who's Who In America.