KOESTLER AS SYSTEM-MAKEiR
537
On the one hand, Koestler says, we have emotions of the "hunger–
fear-rage" type which are controlled by the sympathico-adrenal
system and essentially seek motor outlets, and on the other, sharply
distinct from these, essentially contemplative and relaxing emotions
which are governed by the parasympathic system. One of the mani–
festations of the latter is crying, the basic "tragic" type of response.
This distinction between the two main families of emotions is the
starting point of a huge generalization on which Koestler builds his
unified theory of life and civilization. He takes his two types of
emotion to be instances of two antagonistic forces which pervade all
biological and cultural phenomena: the "self-assertive" and the "self–
transcending" principle. In order to present his unified theory, the
author has to show, first, that these two principles can account for the
main characteristics of life processes, and, second, that they play an
analogous role in cultural processes.
In the biological analysis, the "self-assertive" principle is equated
with the differentiation of cells in embryonic development, and the
"self-transcending" principle with the integrative trend by virtue of
which all parts, no matter how differentiated, function together in a
harmonious way. In the analysis of culture Koestler finds that in society,
too, the point is to maintain an integrative equlibrium between the "self–
assertive" tendencies of the individual and the "self-transcending" prin–
ciple, the subordination of the individual to the requirements of the
whole. When human society reaches maturity, its life
will be
as harmoni–
ously functional as that of the individual organism. In order to reach
this stage, what is primarily needed is a better balance between "self–
assertive" and "self-transcending" tendencies. And in this respect, our
Western civilization is woefully defective. We emphasize the "self-asser–
tive" trend almost exclusively; our education fosters the competitive
impulse and stifles the "self-transcending" attitude. What we need, then,
is a social ethics evolved in this grand evolutionary perspective to cure
our moral one-sidedness.
What Koestler calls for is by no means merely a more altruistic,
more "socialized" behavior; the prototype of "self-transcending" behavior
is neither altruism nor love, but self-abandonment in cosmic contem–
plation. The "self-transcending" emotions do not seek an outlet in motor
activity, altruistic or otherwise; they seek relaxation, suspension of
activity. Koestler speaks in this context of what Freud has called the
"oceanic feeling," oneness with the universe. Aesthetic contemplation
is another case in point. What the West needs, then, is not only more
social integration and more altruism, but, above all, more contemplation,
