• home
• about
• new
• essays
• AI
• book

Frank Visser, graduated as a psychologist of culture and religion, founded IntegralWorld in 1997. He worked as production manager for various publishing houses and as service manager for various internet companies and lives in Amsterdam. Books: Ken Wilber: Thought as Passion (SUNY, 2003), and The Corona Conspiracy: Combatting Disinformation about the Coronavirus (Kindle, 2020).

The Spirit That Never Acts

Why Wilber's "Spirit of Evolution" Explains Nothing

Frank Visser / ChatGPT

Ken Wilber's Sex, Ecology, Spirituality carries one of the most programmatic subtitles in contemporary spiritual philosophy: The Spirit of Evolution. It is not a casual flourish. It announces an ambition—to reinterpret the entire evolutionary story as the self-unfolding of Spirit itself. Matter evolves into life, life into mind, mind into culture, and culture into mystical realization. Evolution, on this view, is not blind, contingent, or indifferent; it is meaningful through and through.

But once the rhetorical force of this vision is stripped away, a simple and devastating question remains:

What does Spirit actually do?

If evolution is “Spirit-in-action,” then action must be specified. Otherwise, the phrase collapses into metaphysical poetry—uplifting, perhaps, but explanatorily empty.

A subtitle as a declaration of metaphysical intent

Wilber's subtitle performs a strategic function. It signals that evolution does not belong to biology alone, but to metaphysics. It tells the reader in advance that standard evolutionary explanations—mutation, selection, drift, constraint, contingency—are insufficient. Something deeper is at work.

That “something” is Spirit.

Yet from the outset, Wilber is careful not to define Spirit in a way that would place it in direct competition with science. Spirit is not a fifth physical force. It does not tinker with DNA. It does not suspend natural law. Instead, it is said to be immanent—the interior dimension of the evolutionary process itself.

This move is rhetorically elegant. It allows Wilber to claim scientific respectability while simultaneously re-enchanting the cosmos. But it also creates a fatal problem: immanence without causation.

The four ways Spirit could act—and why none work

There are only a limited number of ways Spirit could meaningfully be said to act in evolution.

First, Spirit could function as a causal agent, influencing mutations, selection pressures, or developmental pathways. If this were the case, we would expect detectable deviations from standard evolutionary expectations—directional trends not explainable by known mechanisms. None exist. Evolutionary biology does not merely lack evidence for such intervention; it actively explains complexity without it.

Second, Spirit could operate as a teleological attractor—an Eros pulling evolution toward greater depth, consciousness, or integration. But evolution displays no universal drive toward complexity. Simplification is common. Extinction is ubiquitous. Contingency reigns. To preserve teleology, Wilber must soften it until it becomes indistinguishable from no teleology at all.

Third, Spirit could be a purely descriptive principle: a poetic name for the interiority that emerges when matter becomes complex enough. This view is coherent—but deflationary. Spirit does nothing. It explains nothing. It merely redescribes what already occurs.

Fourth, and most commonly, Spirit functions as a post hoc metaphysical gloss. Evolution unfolds exactly as Darwinian theory predicts, and afterward its results are declared the expression of Spirit. Compatibility with science is preserved—but only because Spirit never enters into the causal story.

In every case where conflict threatens, Spirit retreats. And where Spirit retreats from causation, it retreats from explanation.

Teleology without responsibility

Wilber's great ambition was to reintroduce purpose into evolution without invoking design. “Spirit of Evolution” sounds like direction without a director, purpose without interference. But this balancing act collapses under scrutiny.

If Spirit genuinely guides evolution, it must accept responsibility for its outcomes: mass extinction, suffering, waste, and failure on a geological scale. Wilber rarely confronts this implication. Instead, directionality is asserted at the level of abstraction, while the brutal details of evolutionary history are waved away as necessary steps in a cosmic ascent.

The result is a metaphysical asymmetry: Spirit is credited for complexity and consciousness, but not accountable for carnage and collapse. Evolution becomes a morality tale told after the fact.

The rhetoric of synthesis

Why, then, subtitle SES The Spirit of Evolution at all?

Because the phrase performs crucial rhetorical work. It reassures spiritual readers that modern science has not evacuated meaning from the cosmos. It reassures scientifically minded readers that no crude supernaturalism is being smuggled in. Each audience hears what it wants—until the conceptual bill comes due.

Wilber presents Spirit as indispensable, yet never allows it to do anything indispensable. He invokes evolution as evidence for Spirit, but ensures that evolution would look exactly the same if Spirit were absent.

This is not integration. It is insulation.

The diagnostic question Wilber never answers

There is a single question that Sex, Ecology, Spirituality never answers—and cannot answer without unraveling its own framework:

What happens in evolutionary history that would not happen if Spirit were not involved?

If the answer is “nothing,” then Spirit is not acting. It is being named. And naming is not explanation.

Conclusion: a vision without traction

The Spirit of Evolution is a powerful subtitle because it promises what many want: a universe that is meaningful, directional, and spiritually saturated without lapsing into premodern myth. But promises are not mechanisms.

Wilber's Spirit animates nothing, constrains nothing, predicts nothing, and explains nothing. It hovers above evolution as a metaphysical aura—invoked when needed, withdrawn when challenged.

What remains is evolution, full stop—rich, contingent, creative, and tragic—accompanied by a spiritual narrative that confers significance without paying explanatory rent.

In the end, the Spirit of Evolution is not a force, not a telos, and not a cause. It is a story told about evolution, not an account of how evolution works.

And stories, however grand, do not make Spirit act.