From Eukaryogenesis to Human Macro-History: The Value of a Crude Look at the Whole.

This article explores the heuristic value of what Murray Gell-Mann called 'a crude look at the whole' by comparing two domains: the biological origins of complex life and the macro-historical development of humanity. Lynn Margulis' endosymbiotic theory of eukaryogenesis exemplifies how a bold, integrative hypothesis can reframe scientific understanding by focusing on systemic integration rather than incremental adaptation. Initially dismissed for its lack of mechanistic detail, Margulis' perspective ultimately reshaped evolutionary biology once molecular evidence confirmed her insights. Drawing a parallel, this article develops a systems-dynamics approach to human macro-history that emphasizes structural control parameters—division of labor, technology, consciousness, and population dynamics—and identifies a teleodynamic trajectory toward global integration. The argument is that large-scale historical processes, like biological transitions, cannot be reduced to selectionist mechanisms alone. Instead, they require a developmental framework that highlights emergent order, systemic integration, and spatiotemporal dynamics. By comparing biological and historical transitions, this article makes the case that 'crude wholes' are indispensable for orienting inquiry into complex systems, particularly at a time when humanity faces the challenge of navigating toward a sustainable and integrated global future. Introduction Scientific progress often depends not only on fine-grained empirical analysis but also on the ability to step back and grasp the larger shape of a problem. Murray Gell-Mann (1994) described this capacity as taking 'a crude look at the whole'—a willingness to see the broad outline of a system before its internal mechanisms are fully known. Such perspectives can be controversial, precisely because they risk imprecision, but they have repeatedly proved indispensable in advancing knowledge. One of the clearest illustrations comes from the history of evolutionary biology. In the late 1960s, Lynn Margulis advanced the theory of endosymbiosis as the explanation for the origin of eukaryotic cells (Margulis, 1967; 1970). Her claim—that mitochondria and chloroplasts originated as free-living bacteria incorporated into larger host cells—challenged the prevailing gradualist orthodoxy of the Modern Synthesis. At the time, her proposal was considered speculative and even heretical. Yet Margulis' capacity to discern a systemic pattern before the details were available proved prescient. Later advances in molecular biology confirmed her view, establishing endosymbiosis as a cornerstone of modern evolutionary theory (Gray, 2012). This article argues that a similar situation now confronts the study of human history. Current frameworks often emphasize cultural evolution, local adaptation, or competition among states and groups. While valuable, these approaches risk overlooking the overarching developmental trajectory of humanity as a whole. Drawing on insights from dynamical systems theory and developmental biology, I propose a macro-historical framework organized around four control parameters—division of labor, technology, consciousness, and population dynamics—that together shape the spatiotemporal dynamics of history (Clemmensen, 2025; see humanmacrohistory.com). Like Margulis' hypothesis, this framework is a crude look at the whole: an attempt to articulate the structural logic of historical development prior to the elaboration of detailed mechanisms. The comparison between eukaryogenesis and human macro-history highlights the importance of systemic thinking in addressing very complex systems. Both illustrate the need to move beyond reductionist, selectionist explanations and toward developmental models that account for emergent integration and teleodynamic processes. The aim of this article is thus twofold: first, to show how Margulis' intellectual strategy provides a model for framing complex transitions, and second, to argue that human macro-history demands a similarly bold, integrative perspective in order to orient future inquiry and guide global action. Margulis and the Challenge of Eukaryogenesis By the mid-twentieth century, evolutionary biology was largely unified under the Modern Synthesis. This framework emphasized gradual genetic mutation and natural selection as the primary drivers of change, while alternative mechanisms were often marginalized. Within this paradigm, the problem of eukaryogenesis—the origin of cells with nuclei, mitochondria, and complex internal structures—was particularly vexing. The leap from prokaryotic simplicity to eukaryotic complexity seemed too abrupt to be explained by incremental changes alone. In 1967, Lynn Margulis published On the Origin of Mitosing Cells, advancing what would become her most influential idea: that mitochondria and chloroplasts originated as free-living prokaryotes incorporated into larger host cells (Margulis, 1967). Her proposal revived early twentieth-century speculations on symbiotic origins but reframed them with new coherence. Margulis argued that evolutionary innovation could arise not only through mutation and selection but also through the integration of distinct lineages into higher-order systems. At the time, the theory was regarded as highly speculative. Critics pointed to the lack of direct evidence and to its apparent inconsistency with the incrementalism of the Modern Synthesis. Yet Margulis' hypothesis had explanatory power: it accounted for the morphological and biochemical similarities between organelles and bacteria, such as double membranes and bacterial ribosomes, which were otherwise puzzling. More importantly, it offered a systemic rethinking of how complexity arises. Her work exemplified what Gell-Mann called a crude look at the whole. Without access to the molecular evidence that would later vindicate her, Margulis identified the structural pattern of integration and cooperation as the key to understanding eukaryotic origins. She provided a developmental narrative that reframed the question from one of gradual tinkering to one of systemic reorganization. Subsequent research confirmed her vision. Molecular sequencing revealed that mitochondria and chloroplasts possess their own DNA, closely related to bacterial genomes, and that significant gene transfer occurred between symbionts and the host nucleus (Gray, 2012). What began as a bold, integrative hypothesis evolved into a central dogma of modern biology. The case of endosymbiosis thus illustrates the enduring scientific value of crude wholes: they orient inquiry, reshape paradigms, and prepare the ground for mechanistic elaboration. The Logic of a Developmental Leap Margulis' theory of endosymbiosis demonstrates that certain transformative events in the history of life are best understood not as incremental adaptations but as developmental leaps. Conrad Waddington (1957) introduced the concept of homeorhesis to describe how complex systems follow structured trajectories of change rather than drifting randomly. Eukaryogenesis fits this description: it was not simply the product of slow, selective accumulation but the integration of distinct organisms into a new, higher-order unit. This transition exemplifies what Terrence Deacon (2012) has called a teleodynamic process—one in which emergent properties arise from systemic organization rather than from the parts alone. The incorporation of mitochondria did more than allow survival within the host cell; it fundamentally redefined the metabolic capacity of the entire system, enabling aerobic respiration and ultimately supporting the evolution of multicellular life. The leap thus altered the developmental trajectory of life as a whole. Events of this kind have been called 'major transitions in evolution' (Maynard Smith & Szathmáry, 1995). They include the origin of life itself, the emergence of multicellularity, and the development of language and culture. What distinguishes these transitions is their cooperative and integrative logic: novel wholes arise from the union of previously independent parts. Selection remains relevant but insufficient. The novelty lies in the systemic reorganization that creates qualitatively new levels of complexity. Understanding such leaps requires what Gell-Mann (1994) called a crude look at the whole. Before molecular biology could detail the precise gene transfers involved in endosymbiosis, Margulis grasped the pattern of integration. Likewise, before plate tectonics was formally established, Alfred Wegener's continental drift offered a crude but powerful hypothesis that oriented geological research. In both cases, the crude model preceded and enabled the elaboration of mechanisms. The lesson is clear: developmental leaps demand explanatory frameworks that emphasize emergent order, systemic integration, and spatiotemporal coordination. Without such perspectives, science risks missing the structural logic that underlies radical transformations. Human Macro-History as a Parallel The study of human history faces a challenge comparable to that of biology before Margulis. Dominant frameworks often emphasize cultural evolution, group competition, or adaptive responses to environmental pressures. These perspectives capture important elements, but they risk reducing history to a sequence of local adaptations. What remains obscured is the broader developmental trajectory of humanity as a species. A systems-dynamics approach offers a complementary perspective by treating human history as a spatiotemporal process shaped by a small set of control parameters (Clemmensen, 2025; see humanmacrohistory.com). Four parameters are particularly decisive: 1. Division of labor — the foundational driver of social complexity, enabling cooperation and specialization. 2. Tools and technology — extensions of human capacities that co-evolve with the organization of labor. 3. Consciousness and information handling — symbolic systems, language, and collective memory that allow coordination across time and space. 4. Population dynamics — demographic pressures that both sustain survival and generate the need for larger integrative structures. The interaction of these parameters has produced a developmental trajectory that can be divided into three broad phases. The first phase is the biological and cognitive emergence of Homo sapiens, spanning millions of years and culminating in the appearance of anatomically modern humans around 200,000 years ago. The second phase is the global dispersal and diversification of human populations, a period of migration, adaptation, and cultural differentiation lasting until roughly 10,000 years ago. The third phase, beginning with the Neolithic revolution, is characterized by increasing integration: the rise of agriculture, cities, states, empires, and eventually a global networked society. This trajectory exhibits a teleodynamic quality. Just as eukaryogenesis involved the integration of previously independent lineages into a higher-order system, human history has repeatedly moved toward the formation of larger and more complex cooperative units. Tribes give way to chiefdoms, city-states to empires, federations to supranational institutions. The emergent pattern is one of integration rather than fragmentation. Recognizing this trajectory requires a crude look at the whole. Detailed accounts of warfare, trade, or political institutions provide necessary texture but cannot by themselves reveal the overarching arc. A systems-dynamics model, grounded in structural parameters, highlights the developmental logic of human history. It situates local variation within a larger teleodynamic process of integration that may now be approaching a planetary threshold. The Value of Crude Wholes in Science The parallel between Margulis' endosymbiotic theory and a systems-dynamics framework for human history illustrates the enduring importance of what Gell-Mann (1994) called a crude look at the whole. Crude wholes are not endpoints but starting points. They provide orientation in domains where detail is either unavailable or overwhelming, allowing inquiry to be guided by large-scale patterns rather than lost in minutiae. The case of endosymbiosis makes this point vividly. Without Margulis' integrative vision, molecular biologists might not have sought bacterial DNA inside mitochondria or chloroplasts. Her crude model made a testable claim and directed attention to new lines of evidence. Similarly, Wegener's continental drift, though imprecise in mechanism, prompted generations of geologists to consider global tectonic processes, ultimately culminating in plate tectonics. In both cases, crude wholes prepared the ground for mechanistic refinement. Human history today requires a similar orientation. Without a macro-historical framework, scholarship risks becoming fragmented into isolated narratives—economic, political, cultural—without recognition of the structural trajectory binding them together. A systems-dynamics approach provides such a framework, emphasizing integration as the teleodynamic tendency of human development. This is not to deny the role of conflict, selection, or local adaptation. Rather, it situates them within a larger trajectory, much as natural selection continues to operate within developmental processes in biology. Critics often dismiss crude wholes as speculative or unfalsifiable. Yet their value lies precisely in their heuristic power. They reveal patterns invisible at smaller scales, generate new hypotheses, and frame research agendas. They also serve a normative function: by clarifying trajectories, they allow societies to orient themselves in relation to possible futures. In the context of contemporary global crises—climate change, demographic imbalances, geopolitical fragmentation—the need for such orientation is acute. Seen in this light, a crude look at the whole is not merely a style of theorizing but a scientific necessity when dealing with very complex systems. It is the intellectual step that enables subsequent precision. Conclusion Lynn Margulis' theory of endosymbiosis stands as one of the most striking examples of how a crude but integrative hypothesis can reshape scientific understanding. By focusing on the structural integration of symbiosis, she reframed the puzzle of eukaryogenesis and paved the way for decades of empirical confirmation. Her intellectual courage lay in grasping the systemic pattern before the mechanisms were known. Human macro-history demands a comparable approach. By modeling history as a spatiotemporal dynamical system shaped by control parameters—division of labor, technology, consciousness, and population dynamics—it is possible to discern a teleodynamic trajectory toward integration. This does not replace local, selectionist, or adaptive explanations, but it situates them within a broader developmental framework. The crude whole provides the skeleton upon which detailed scholarship can build. The comparison between eukaryogenesis and human history underscores a methodological lesson. Very complex systems—whether biological or historical—cannot be understood solely by analyzing their parts. They require a view of the whole, even if initially crude, to reveal the pathways of transformation. Just as Margulis' framework enabled biology to comprehend the leap to complex life, a systems-dynamics framework may enable humanity to comprehend its own trajectory toward a global society. At a moment when humanity faces existential risks and unprecedented opportunities for integration, the value of such frameworks is more than academic. They provide orientation, a sense of historical direction, and a basis for anticipatory governance. If Margulis' insight teaches us anything, it is that crude wholes can precede revolutions in understanding. Taking a crude look at the whole of human history may be the first step toward navigating the uncertain but potentially integrative future that lies ahead. References - Clemmensen, B. (2025). Navigating Human History: A Systems Dynamics Approach to Our Global Future. Manuscript. See humanmacrohistory.com. - Deacon, T. (2012). Incomplete Nature: How Mind Emerged from Matter. W. W. Norton. - Gell-Mann, M. (1994). The Quark and the Jaguar: Adventures in the Simple and the Complex. Freeman. - Gray, M. (2012). 'Mitochondrial evolution.' Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology, 4(9). - Margulis, L. (1967). 'On the origin of mitosing cells.' Journal of Theoretical Biology, 14(3), 225–274. - Margulis, L. (1970). Origin of Eukaryotic Cells. Yale University Press. - Maynard Smith, J., & Szathmáry, E. (1995). The Major Transitions in Evolution. Oxford University Press. - Waddington, C. H. (1957). The Strategy of the Genes. Waddington, C.H. Tools for Thought , Waddington, C.H. and Jantsch, Eric. Evolution and Consciousness (1975)