GE - A Science That Decries Life by Noel Josephson
The history of industrialised agriculture is a history of science penetrating ever deeper into the realm of nature with an economic focus of – how do I extract more from the productive capacity of nature at the lowest cost possible. Synthetic fertilisers, chemical pesticides and herbicides are the outcomes of a mechanistic scientific manipulation of nature and genetic technology is the latest and a deeper exploitation of nature, all of which come with the accompanying rhetoric of the wonderful benefits and the solving of problems like climate change. Earlier, it was about feeding the world being only possible with genetic technology before this was discredited. All these physical interventions through industrialised agriculture have disrupted the ecology of the soil and polluted the elements of water and air, well beyond any disruption from any form of sustainable and traditional agriculture.
The mode of thinking behind this science is that humankind can control nature, and this will lead to greater prosperity. This is both absurd and at the same time a reflection of our current human consciousness that is lost in materialism. To think science can control nature is not to recognise its limits or to recognise what life is. In no way am I rejecting science for its grasp of the material world is profound and we would not have had the huge advances in technology without it. This physical realm is what our mechanistic reductionist science understands.
What our science fails to observe is the difference between the physical world and the living world. Our science is built on what can be measured and is sense perceptible. Anything beyond this is deemed not to be scientific. Living beings stand outside this definition. As an example:
We marvel at our ability to build skyscrapers ever higher, especially in the last few decades. Our ability to build is based on physical laws and we can build in a ratio of the base to the height of 1:10, maybe stretching in optimum conditions to 1:11 or 1:12. If we exceed this the building becomes unstable due to physical forces such as gravity and wind shear. As an aside to save you from rushing away to find out, Buri Khalifa, the world’s tallest building, is built on a wide base to support its height, and the ratio is approximately 1:4.5.
Compare this to a stalk of a traditional wheat variety (many current wheat varieties are hybrids from dwarf varieties and not as tall) which has a corresponding ratio of base to height of 1:400. It is not the building materials of the wheat stalk, lignin, bast, water and silica, which we know well, it is the difference between a building which is dead and a wheat stalk which is living.
A skyscraper is dead and subject to physical laws which we understand. A stalk of wheat by comparison does not follow these physical laws. The ratio of base to height is well outside what we could physically achieve and in addition the wheat stalk is top heavy with grain, swaying in the wind and returning to an upright position. The wheat stalk defies physical laws and is subject to what we could call living formative forces drawing it upwards. When the wheat stalk dies, it then becomes subject solely to physical laws.
Our science describes this growth process in plants as photosynthesis or the converting of the energy of the sun. It can’t describe the energy of the sun any more than it can say what gravity is other than it exists. We know gravity exists because we experience it every day, and if we go against it, then it is to our peril. What it is and what the energy of the sun is beyond measuring it is outside of our science. What is it that draws the wheat and other plants upwards? There is nothing in our science that can define this. This is precisely the point where we can say our science knows the laws of the physical world because they can measure and perceive them even in the case of gravity, which it can’t fully define. What is happening with the wheat stalk science can’t measure beyond the physical growth outcomes and any changes in the living organism. The forces at work are super sensible and beyond our science. Our science does not know life like it knows matter, and this is why genetic technologies are a danger. Living organisms are not machines and do not behave like machines, and therefore, neither do ecosystems. Science is entering a realm it does not know, and while we can manipulate a physical element, we are in the realm of life where, because we do not understand it, we cannot know the ramifications or unintended consequences. We may think we can solve a problem through genetic technology, but more likely, we are deepening the damage through this thinking that we can control nature. A precautionary element must always prevail to protect the future of the earth for the generations to come.
What can we say about the growth of a wheat stalk or any other plant, or what is this life force such that it is not totally mysterious. We can say physical forces can be measured and work towards a central point. Life forces can’t be physically measured, they are super sensible, but we can observe that they come from the periphery and draw the plant upwards. These formative forces in the life sphere may be super sensible but it doesn’t mean we cannot come to understand them. The work initiated by the mathematician George Adams Kaufman in the early and middle part of the 20th century with modern synthetic geometry including polar Euclidean geometry, (published as physical and ethereal spaces) gives us the ability to think into how they work and applying this through careful observation of the living world we can come to understand more deeply what is taking place. This is the path science needs to follow to understand nature and the living world.
The knowledge of the science of life is young but is emerging in practice through biodynamic and organic agriculture which follows a path of working in harmony with nature. Within this movement farmers and a few scientists across the world are uncovering solutions to climate change that are inherently there in the practice of sustainable agriculture.
‘‘We may think we can solve a problem through genetic technology, but more likely, we are deepening the damage through this thinking that we can control nature. A precautionary element must always prevail to protect the future of the earth for the generations to come.’’
- Noel Josephson. OANZ Board Member and Cere’s Organics Co-Founder and Director.