• 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).

Selfless-Organization

Why "Self-Organization" Misleads More Than It Explains

Frank Visser / ChatGPT

The term self-organization is widely used across science to describe the spontaneous emergence of order without external design. But the term is also misleading. As soon as we examine it carefully, we find that neither part of the phrase truly fits: nothing organizes itself, and there is no identifiable self involved. Eric Chaisson famously argued that “self-organization” is a misnomer because all organization requires energy flows—nothing happens in isolation. And philosophically, there is no agent, no inner locus, no “self” doing the organizing.

A more accurate term is selfless-organization: organization that emerges precisely because there is no self involved, only interactions, flows, and constraints. This shift removes the phantom agent implied by “self” while preserving the core idea of spontaneous pattern formation.

This essay explores why this re-framing clarifies the science and prevents metaphysical overreach.

1. The Romance—and Confusion—of “Self-Organization”

“Self-organization” has become a catch-all term for bottom-up complexity:

• convection cells in physics
• morphogenesis in biology
• food webs in ecology
• flocking algorithms in computer science
• markets and networks in economics

But the phrase carries conceptual baggage. It suggests:

• autonomy
• purpose
• interiority
• proto-agency

This makes it irresistible to spiritual interpreters who want evolution to have a hidden intention. But scientifically, nothing could be further from the truth. The patterns emerge not from a self, but from the absence of one—from distributed, selfless dynamics.

2. Chaisson's Point: Order Requires Energy, Not Intention

Chaisson's critique cuts to the heart of the issue:

• No system organizes itself. It is organized by energy flows passing through it.
• Galaxies, hurricanes, ecosystems, and organisms all depend on energy gradients to maintain structure. Remove the flow and the order collapses.

Thus the organization is selfless—not self-generated, but driven by the thermodynamic imperative to dissipate energy. Calling this “self-organization” subtly misleads; calling it selfless-organization puts the emphasis where it belongs.

3. The “Self” That Never Existed

Even concepts like autopoiesis, which describe living systems maintaining their own boundaries, do not posit a literal self. The “self” is an emergent, dynamic boundary, not a causal agent.

In non-living systems—snowflakes, dunes, vortices, chemical cycles—the absence of a self is even clearer. These systems do not “self”-organize. They selflessly-organize, meaning they are shaped by:

• constraints
• fluctuations
• interactions
• thermodynamic flows

The “self” is an illusion created by the stability of the pattern.

4. Prigogine and Kauffman: Deep Science, Misused Narratives

Two of the most rigorous thinkers on emergent order, Ilya Prigogine and Stuart Kauffman, provide naturalistic explanations for how complexity arises—yet both have been adopted by spiritual philosophers like Ken Wilber, who recast their work as evidence for cosmic purpose.

Prigogine: Dissipative Structures Without Purpose

Prigogine showed that far-from-equilibrium systems spontaneously form ordered structures—“dissipative structures”—because energy input amplifies fluctuations. These structures are:

• temporary
• flow-dependent
• entropy-producing

There is no intrinsic teleology. The order is selfless: a by-product of thermodynamic necessity, not cosmic intention.

Kauffman: Order for Free, Not Purpose for Free

Kauffman's autocatalytic sets, the “adjacent possible,” and his models of early life all show how order emerges without guidance. Evolution explores combinatorial spaces because it must—not because it is guided by Spirit.

Spiritual interpreters tend to read Kauffman as implying a cosmic drive toward complexity. But what he actually shows is the opposite: that complexity emerges selflessly, simply because the chemistry and combinatorics of the universe allow it.

Prigogine and Kauffman explain why no self is needed. Wilber takes them as evidence that a cosmic Self is hiding behind the scenes. Their science is about selfless-organization; his metaphysics is about Spirit-as-designer.

5. Why Selfless-Organization Is the Better Concept

If all emergent order arises from interactions, flows, and constraints—none of which presuppose a self—then the term self-organization introduces a conceptual error. The process is:

• distributed
• non-agentic
• non-teleological
• relational

This is exactly what selfless-organization emphasizes.

It captures the paradox beautifully:

• Complex systems organize precisely because there is no self doing the organizing.
• The organization is a consequence of interactions, not intentions.

The term “selfless-organization” dissolves the anthropomorphic residue left behind by “self-organization.”

6. Preventing Metaphysical Drift

“Self-organization” easily becomes a slippery slope:

spontaneous order → directionality → purpose → cosmic intention.

This conceptual drift lies at the heart of spiritualized evolutionary theories—especially Wilber's—where complexity becomes evidence for Spirit-in-action.

But Prigogine, Kauffman, and Chaisson show that:

• order can emerge without purpose,
• complexity can grow without intention,
• systems evolve without an inner self.

Selfless-organization provides a clean conceptual firewall against metaphysical inflation.

7. Conclusion: The Beauty of a Selfless Universe

Selfless-organization captures a profound scientific insight: the universe does not need a self to generate order. Complexity arises because of thermodynamic flows, boundary conditions, and combinatorial possibilities—not hidden teleology.

Replacing self-organization with selfless-organization makes this explicit. It preserves the idea of spontaneous order while stripping away the misleading implication of agency.

And far from reducing the wonder of nature, it enhances it: the universe is not driven by a cosmic self but unfolds through the astonishing creativity of interactions themselves.