Integral Holonic Ontology
From an integral philosophy viewpoint, the world is made up of holons. Holon is a term coined by British thinker Arthur Koestler, and it refers to something that is simultaneously a part and a whole. For example, consider an atom. It is both a whole, since it is made up of other parts such as protons, electrons, neutrons, quarks, etc. And yet it is also often itself a part within a broader whole, such as a molecule. The molecule is a holon too when it is made up of parts (atoms) and is itself a part of a whole, such as a cell. The cell is part of a tissue. The tissue is a part of an organ. The organ is a part of an organ system. The organ system is a part of an organism. The organism is a part of an ecosystem. The ecosystem is a part of the biosphere. The biosphere is a part of Earth. The Earth is a part of the solar system. The solar system is a part of the galaxy. The galaxy is a part of the universe. And the universe may be a part of a multiverse. And so on.
In the case of higher social mammals, such as humans, social systems also come into play. Humans are not only a part of their ecosystems, but they are parts of their families and social networks, which are parts of certain sociocultural groups, which are themselves part of broader social structures and institutions, such as organizations, political states, economic markets, cultural systems, global civilizations, and so on.
Koestler claimed that when it comes to holons, they go all the way and all the way to down, ad infinitum. The limits on either end that we perceive, such as tiny vibrating strings on the quantum level, as in string theory, or the universe as a whole, or even the multiverse, in cosmology, are not the actual limits, according to Koestler. Rather they are only the points at which our human cognitive abilities fail to reach any further. In this sense, the search for the highest and lowest levels of existence, to use the spatial metaphor, is endless.
Ken Wilber distinguishes between the fundamental and the significant. A holon is fundamental if higher holons of which it is a part depend on its existence. For example, an atom is fundamental in relation to a molecule, because a molecule depends on its parts, the atoms, for its existence. Take away atoms, and you have no molecules. Hence, atoms are fundamental in this relation. Take away humans, and you have no nation-states. Hence humans are fundamental in this relation.
Something is significant if it is generally higher in the hierarchy of holons. An atom may be more fundamental, but an ant is more significant. Likewise, an organ is more fundamental, but a human is more significant. Even where a human is more fundamental, a whole society is more significant. The properties of fundamentality and significance or hence a relative property depending on the level of holon.
In terms of hierarchy, holons exhibit this structure naturally. Integral theorists refer to this as holarchy. A holarchy is a hierarchy of holons. Within a holarchy, there is a bi-directional influence and information flow between the higher and lower levels. When this open bi-directionality becomes imbalanced or dysfunctional, various forms of pathology or disrupture may ensue. One way this can happen is if any given holon comes deviate from its role within the larger whole of which it is a part. For example, cancer is perfect example in which the part (cancer cells) comes to disrupt the whole, i.e. the organ or the human person. Another example would be a revolutionary individual or group within society acting to challenge the social order. This example proves that such changes within a holarchy may not always be negative. There will be a continuous and dynamic interplay between levels.
The reverse type of imbalance is just as common: when holons dominate their parts. For example, a social system or government may come to dominate its individuals citizens, as has happened in countless authoritarian and totalitarian regimes throughout history. These are termed dominator hierarchies, and these are what people typically equate with the word hierarchy. Yet as we’ve seen, holarchies exhibit a broader range of properties than that one dimension. The perspective of holarchy, holons in hierarchies, fosters a framework to conceptualize the systemic, emergent ontological levels of reality.
In this framework, everything is a holon; a part/whole. However, there are multiple categories within which these fit. One distinction is between individual or collective holons. Individual holons exhibit a certain “I-ness,” or as philosophers call it, intentionality. That is to say, the individual holon, whether it is a human or a molecule, demonstrates some kind of agency (this is not to necessarily imply any metaphysical notion of free will). Furthermore, when an individual holon engages in such agentic behavior, all of the parts which make it up also behavior accordingly. For example, when a human being walks, all of its parts walk along with it.
Collective, or social, holons do not share this property of self-contained behavior or intentionality. A flock of geese, which is a collective holon, may shift to a different direction while flying, but the individual holons that make it up are not all guaranteed to move in accordance. Likewise, a cultural group may change in some way, but not every human member of it will necessarily change. This distinction between individual and collective holons cuts across at every level.
Ken Wilber adds to this framework the notion of artifacts. Artifacts are anything that is created by an individual or collective holon. Artifacts themselves lack the defining structural properties of either individual or collective holons, but they are nevertheless made up of holons. For example, a work of art is made up of atoms. Artifacts can play an important role is influencing other holons in the world. Think of the ways in which cultural artifacts influence human behavior.
Lastly, a heap is a random collection of holons that are not organized in any particular way. Consider a pile of leaves as a heap. However, one could argue that this particular heap is an artifact of the surrounding collective holon, i.e. trees in the local ecosystem. Hence, something might be a holon, heap, and an artifact.
This conceptualization of the world may at first glance appear to an arbitrary ontological division. However, it is not the product of speculative metaphysics. Indeed, the great religious traditions are often characterized by a “Great Chain of Being,” which is supposed to be a simultaneously psychological and metaphysical hierarchy of which the world is composed. But modern science, save for elements of reductionistic fundamentalism, largely reached a similar conclusion on its own terms. That is, the world exhibits increasingly greater levels of complexity, both over time, and across systems. General systems theory, complexity theory, chaos theory, dynamical systems theory, and so on, all share a basis in the fact the 20th century science discovered that the things in the world exhibit emergent properties that cannot be reduced nor explained by their constituent parts. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts is the motto here.
Furthermore, wholes can determine the function of their parts. For example, the word bark can mean totally different things whether it is in the sentence “the bark of a dog” or in “the bark of the tree.” Another example would be how the culture of which one is a part influences one’s characteristics. So not only are their emergent properties, but there is also downward causation from the higher level to the lower.
One cannot explain a molecule only by studying its atoms. For example, a water molecule consists of two hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom. Independently these atoms exhibit none of the properties that we associate with water. But put them together and, viola, liquidity! Where did this property of liquidity come from? It was not in the atoms. It EMERGED through the process of complexification. It is a brute fact that holds no promise of being reduced to simpler explanations.
And it is not just that liquidity is some illusion or epiphenomena. It actually plays a causal role at the macroscopic level of physics that studies liquids and their behavior. In other words, the emergent properties in the world make an actual causal difference. The way in which they emerge may seem like pure magic or metaphysics or miracles. And we may very well consider them to be. Because what we call “physical” often exhibits the seemingly unworldly characteristics that we associate with these former terms.
