The  motor  behind  evolution, whether biological, techno- logical,  cultural, or spiritual, is diversity. It is difference, uniqueness, and mutation that fills the pool out of which life crawls forward. Darwin really helped get this idea off and run- ning in the modern world, but the same theme is found in virtually all the ancient creation stories where the divine wants some  company and creates a universe, bursting into endless forms – the one in the many. It is diversity in what we do, in how we think and perceive, and the difference between where we are and where we want to go, between one idea and another, that creates the dynamic tension germinating growth. But there are considerable forces that work against diversity, difference, and originality, and it starts very early.

On her fifth day of kindergarten, one of my daughters was given a short homework assignment that required her to circle the two out of three objects on the page that were alike. There were six sets of shapes and six separate questions. She handled all without ambiguity except one group that included a small green rectangle, a green triangle, and a red square. “Which two belong together?” She circled the red square and the green rectangle. When I asked her about this, she acknowledged that they had different colors, but she saw more value in the fact that two of them each had four sides, while the other had three. The next day at school, this was marked incorrect and returned to her. Obsession with the right answer misses the opportunity to see the question and the world from multiple vantage points, in this case to understand that some shapes can perform certain functions. My five-year-old explained that rectangles and squares form “bottoms” of things like buildings, while triangles may form “tops.” She could imagine possibilities beyond the information given. This homework assignment is a tiny example, involving a tiny kindergartner in her first days of school, but it will happen again and again and will teach her that there is one correct way of looking at something.

If the creative flow is the ultimate process as many think, and if diversity is central to that flow, then perhaps the most insidious threat to human evolution is not nuclear war or global warming but instead the efforts and institutions that work to homogenize this exuberant abundance. One of the risks of overemphasis on things that tend to provide the same perspectives in similar ways is simply that they tend toward homogenization: standardized testing, uniform curriculum and instruction in schools, the widespread diagnosis of mental disorders and use of psychiatric medications for attention deficits and mood issues, the proliferation of the mega-marts, chain stores, restaurants, and other monster corporations, singular literalist interpretations of texts, or concentrated mainstream media.

There are some benefits as well – standardized airport landing protocols, computer interfaces, and rules of the road allow us to function efficiently and safely, for example. But in the realm of living things, diversity engenders innovative solutions, creative evolution, and growth. Entrepreneurial capitalism, for example, has been successful on the local and global stage not because it is the most moral, fair, healthy, easiest, or even most efficient, but because more than any other approach, it engenders creative diversity and thus invites innovation. In so doing, it taps the same impulse to create and risk reward or failure. Homogeniza- tion, at its best, tends toward a degree of efficiency and control, and this has real value in many applications, but it’s not the highest value for everything or all the time. It is an incomplete goal that has sometimes been mistaken as the end goal. When homogeneity overwhelms diversity whether in a classroom or a culture, the available intellectual and spiritual gene pool starts to dry up. When it comes to human consciousness and human creativity, unique ways of seeing and being catalyze growth and evolution.

In the quest for living a life that matters, theologian Paul Tillich said there exists unusually powerful forces that can thwart us and even destroy us. He had a name for this kind of power, one that captures just how dangerous it can be: demonic. He didn’t use the term in the mythological sense of the devil or little demons running about, but instead as recognition that our essen- tial or creative nature can be overwhelmed by other forces. The demonic is a force that is stronger than the individual’s good will, a force capable of overpowering our creative nature. Addiction is an example of an individual’s incapacity to resist possession by a drug. The influence of the Third Reich to turn scientists and school teachers into components in a genocidal machine is, for Tillich, an example of how a force can overcome individual good will. Today, there is a mixed blessing in the ability to standardize, homogenize, and globalize. Both great good and great harm is possible when forces are so powerful and universal. The greatest threat is its potential to distort or estrange us from our authentic, creative nature without us even realizing it. When forces are so pervasive, we can hardly step outside their gravitational pull long enough to recognize their influence on us.

Excerpted from The Four Virtues by Tobin Hart, to be published February 4, 2014. Reprinted with permission of Beyond Word Publishing/Atria Books, Hillsboro, Oregon.

Tobin Hart, PhD, is a father, professor, psychologist, speaker, and author of The Secret Spiritual World of Children. He has spent more than thirty years as a researcher and ally helping students, clients, and patients integrate their psychological and spiritual lives. He serves as professor of psychology at the University of West Georgia, as well as co-founder and president of the ChildSpirit Institute, a nonprofit educational and research hub exploring the spirituality of children and adults. He is sought out as an expert resource and keynote on children, spirituality, psychology, and education. He serves on various advisory boards, think-tanks, and organizations.