Opus They – Reflections I (Human Perspective) 
by Dr Michael Quinton

The limitation of the human-centric or anthropocentric perspective is that it sets human beings apart from the rest of nature. All other non-human entities are only of value in their distinction to serve humans or have some form of instrumental value. All other non-human entities, objects or systems are means to human ends (Goralink and Nelson, 2012). 

This influences human perspective where the external world is measured in relation to the individual and creates distance and detachment between the individual perceiver and anything else that is relational to that person. This measurement tends to distort what is being perceived, and the object or subject becomes coloured by the perceiver’s beliefs, customs, education, culture, language and comparison to past experience. One must therefore question whether anyone actually perceives reality for what it is (Nietzsche, 2006). 

According to Jean Gebser (1986), he describes this type of perspective as being egocentric in nature and that it had evolved when the formation of human social structures became more complex, and individual perspective became the more dominant mental structure. As the individual started to become more immersed in the world outside of themselves, they achieved a more thorough sense of space and dimensionality, but as a result of this, became detached from the outside world since there was now a comparison being made between the individual and their standing in the context of the external world.  

Gebser calls this specific mutation in consciousness ‘Perspectival Consciousness’ and he describes the characteristics of this specific mental structure as having the following characteristics: 

• Spatial awareness - fully developed three-dimensional perception

• Dualistic perspective, Dialectical or Binary thinking

• Comparative thinking

• Materialist

• Reductionist

It is the type of consciousness that relates to the outer world and separates the individual from it. There is much focus on detail and breaking things down into tiny components, but the flipside of this is that in doing so, the perceiver becomes detached from the whole and views themselves in isolation. 

Iain McGilchrist (2009) attributes these characteristics to the left hemisphere of the brain and describes similar characteristics to the ones described by Gebser. The left-brain hemisphere has a tendency to be dogmatic, and to take things literally. Left-brain thinking is attributed to the consolidation of power and to establish control and certainty. The left-brain perspective views reality as being mechanical, useful, inanimate, reductionist, abstracted, decontextualised and dead (inanimate). 

Through our egocentric perspective we have developed social structures, political, economic and educational systems, religious institutions, industry and bureaucracies. All these systems are reflections of the individual or reflect egocentricity, and therefore powerplay, hierarchical structures, division, discrimination, uneven distribution of resources, corruption and many other attributes are inevitable for as long as we continue to reinforce our egocentric perspectives onto the world. 

This suggests that we would have to go beyond egocentrism to develop new systems and societal structures. We are currently witnesses stagnation in all of our institutions. Our current structures have calcified and are now becoming brittle and starting to flake. Radical change is required and this calls for profound measures to be taken to start developing new systems that evolve beyond concrete anthropocentrism. The human being does not exist in isolation but is part or complementary to a large and diverse ecosystem. We have become blind to the fact that we exist within a symbiotic relationship with the world around us, and probably even with the solar system and beyond. Therefore, our relationship with nature has to be stepped up for us to evolve towards a more harmonious relationship with ourselves in relation to the world around us. Not us in separation to everything else, but us in relation to everything else. 

Such radical change is not about completely eradicating ego-consciousness. This perspective presents many positives, and it is those structures that should be retained, but it is also time that we move away from egocentrism as being the dominant mental structure. Gebser describes how this is now a redundant mental structure, and it has to be replaced by a new paradigm. 

McGilchrist suggests that the Left-brain hemisphere should not be the master but must become the emissary to the right-brain hemisphere which is responsible for adaptation, flexibility and the ability to embrace complexity and change. Right-brain perspective is holistic and can recognise interconnectedness and is empathic since it overrides the divisive and detached thinking of the left-brain hemisphere. It also is integral and harmonious. 

However, McGilchrist does point out that the right-hemisphere will still need to the left-hemisphere for grounding and orientation. In other words, a harmonious working relationship between the two brain hemispheres would be the ingredient needed for the new mental form to emerge. 

Gebser suggests that a new form of consciousness is starting to emerge, an integral or ‘Aperspectival consciousness’. He suggests that when a new form of consciousness is starting to emerge it does not eradicate previous forms but integrates their positive attributes into the new form. Gebser delineates five forms of consciousness: Archaic, Magical, Mythical or Unperspectival, Mental or Perspectival and Integral or Aperspectival and in each new era the previous forms merged into the newer forms. The table below gives an overview of the characteristics of each consciousness structure.