Is our planet doubly alive? Gaia, globalization, and the Anthropocene’s planetary superorganisms

Abstract

The theory of the superorganism—that there exist composite forms of life organized at scales above the multicellular organism—has been part of scientific discourse and speculation since the late 1800s. Over the last century theories of the superorganism have grown in scope from designating the local insect colony as emergently alive to positing a global entity enveloping the entire planetary surface. The planetary version of superorganism theory has developed in two different forms, the ecological form of Gaia theory and the sociological form of globalized humankind, with the possible implication that the surface of our single planet is now occupied by two distinct planetary superorganisms. In this article, I summarize the parallel histories of this speculative biological-planetary concept, propose a theory about the relationship of the two coexisting planetary superorganisms, and reflect on how this theory recasts the global environmental challenges of the Anthropocene. I conclude with a note about simplistic or totalizing superorganism assertions.

Conceptualising Sustainability as the Pursuit of Life

“…Specifically, what is the role of humans (generally) within nature? And how do we account for human intellect, culture, and ingenuity that have arguably led us to the situation we find ourselves in, while at the same time providing us with the knowledge and acknowledgement of the same (Hanna, 1995;Newton, 2002;Shoshitaishvili, 2021Shoshitaishvili, , 2022?…”

“…For instance, some have refocused their efforts on identifying links between mind, matter, and life generally either as a monolithic one (holism), or as distinct but dynamically related concepts (Heikkurinen et al, 2021;Labatut, 2023;Shoshitaishvili, 2021;Walsh et al, 2021). Relational ontologies thus stand in contrast to mechanistic, materialistic, and individualistic worldviews by stressing holistic and interconnected views of reality according to which many dualisms including those of nature-humanity are simply artificial (Böhme et al, 2022;Shoshitaishvili, 2022). Such ontologies, based on the idea of "one living system", also tend to be more widely shared in many diverse non-Western forms of thought (Banerjee & Arjaliès, 2021) and thus promise to offer a more inclusive approach towards theorising sustainability.…”

“…Others, including Lovelock, have described Earth as a form of biological super-organism, though the use of this terminology is problematic given its superficial sociopolitical adoption by totalitarian and eugenics movements in the past; instead, the more qualified use of "superorganismic features" is favoured with reference to such phenomena (Shoshitaishvili, 2021(Shoshitaishvili, , 2022. Another central critique by biologists of the Gaia hypothesis is whether it is possible for Earth to be alive in a way that is consistent with evolutionary theory given a population of one entity alone (Shoshitaishvili, 2022).…”

“…Others, including Lovelock, have described Earth as a form of biological super-organism, though the use of this terminology is problematic given its superficial sociopolitical adoption by totalitarian and eugenics movements in the past; instead, the more qualified use of "superorganismic features" is favoured with reference to such phenomena (Shoshitaishvili, 2021(Shoshitaishvili, , 2022. Another central critique by biologists of the Gaia hypothesis is whether it is possible for Earth to be alive in a way that is consistent with evolutionary theory given a population of one entity alone (Shoshitaishvili, 2022). Importantly, however, Gaia hypothesis recognises that the boundaries between organisms of the biosphere (including humans) and their environment are significantly blurred by their interactions (Lenton et al, 2020) which raises epistemological questions about whether they can be studied and understood in isolation and what if any implications this has for both theory and ethics.…”

Extending Planetary Health: Global Ethics and Global Governance in the Noosphere

“…1959), he means a superorganism with physiological, anatomical and psychological properties. So to articulate the notion of planetary health, one has to assume a kind of planetary superorganism framework, while avoiding simplistic or totalizing assertions (Shoshitaishvili 2022). Let us explore a few examples.…”