Can we have these conversations with a majority population that “learns” with 15 second sound bites and is increasingly less inclined to engage in anything intellectually rigorous?
Critical thinking gets us to where you’re at. Unlike most issues we’re facing (abortion, gun rights, gender issues), there is no intelligent other side to your arguments where growth continues and the human race keeps expanding. It’s just scientifically and logically impossible.
We cripple ourselves by refusing to think critically and to encourage that same thought process in others, especially the next generations. Real thinking is hard. Education, active learning, critical thought education and not the common “banking” method used in schools throughout the world should be our focus. People want to feel actively engaged in the world. Unless we revamp our educational system to reflect this we’ll continue to preach and some may pretend to listen, but too few will critically engage with us.
Do as your told and accept things the way they are doesn’t make for good revolutionaries.
Hi Matt, You've hit on a huge problem in our society. The lack of critical thinking and intelligent discussion is appalling. The matter ought to be topic #1 across the media and in all the schools for a couple of months, especially in the USA. Thanks for your thoughtful comments.
Years ago, when I was in my 20s, I had just read Colin Fletcher’s The Man Who Walked Through Time, when I found myself on an airplane, sitting next to a young Mormon fresh out of missionary school. Anxious to deliver his spiel, he droned on, in rote fashion, as I listened. When I countered with “bigger than us” ideas, I could tell nothing I said was even beginning to penetrate. He would respond, time and time again…”What WE believe…” I was struck by the realization this young man wasn’t even thinking for himself. I wondered how he would fare on his mission to New York City, never having traveled much beyond his insular town in Utah.
It is indeed a tragedy that we live in a culture that doesn’t seem to cultivate critical thinking—even outside of religious doctrine—and our sound-byte sources are all many need to form their opinions.
Thank you, Tony, for your articulate and thought provoking pieces.
In grad school, way back, I had a professor who had "how to listen" as the topic for his first class. Indeed, that was "first class" and is sorely missing today. Thank for reading and commenting, Nikki. All best wishes.
McGilchrist in his book “The Matter with Things” argues rather intriguingly that consciousness precedes matter—that it did not somehow “wink into being” (as the Atlantic article you linked to posits) at some point in the evolutionary journey of sea creatures onto the land millions of years ago. This goes along with the discovery of an invisible (to us) field of energy, and the so-called “God particle” (Higgs Boson), etc in physics.
Generally speaking, religion is one of the few places where the idea of a singular “creation” exists—a sense of the whole, the totality of life, including animals, stars, etc. While people rightly criticize the failures of religion, at bottom it is a desire to reconnect with a totality beyond us, whether that totality is God, Gaia, Wakan Tanka (the Great Mystery), the goddess Isis, Shiva, or however the concept manifests. Religion, like yoga, is a search to reconnect with the totality of life and unite with it : look at the word itself—re (again) ligare (to bind, join, connect), so “religion” means to reconnect what is separate. Likewise, “yoga” means to connect, as in the related word “yoke.” We search for union with that totality beyond our limited self or selves.
In my opinion, we should stop demonizing religion and rejecting what it has to offer. Buddhism, Native American teachings of Beauty (the Dine), St. Francis, ancient Mystery cult religions, (such as the Eleusinian Mysteries), Shaivism, etc etc—do we really want to throw the baby out with the bath water?
Thanks again, Tony! Very thoughtful and thought-provoking as always! And great photo of the snowy egret!
Much depends on what "religion" one connects to. A patriarchal god divorced from the organic world, or a god that's subsumed in the Great Mystery. The former religions have great marketing, the later not so much. I certainly agree that religion could provide a basis for ending human supremacy, but not when it is based on that. Thank you for your thoughts, Vero, much appreciated.
Well, I assume when you refer to a patriarchal religion that is unconnected to the organic world you’re talking about the Judeo Christian religion as expressed in the Old and New Testament? So what did the God of that religious tradition want humans to do with creation? Burn it up as garbage? How is that expressed in those scriptural texts? The other issue is the word patriarchal. In my opinion everything is patriarchal in this human world, historically. The justice system is patriarchal worldwide, the political system is patriarchal worldwide, the scientific community is patriarchal worldwide, etc, so why should the religious community be any different? the patriarchy has been the dominant system for thousands of years. When did women get the vote in America, supposedly an advanced nation? 1920, not so long ago when you consider that human history goes back thousands of years. Why pick on religion for being patriarchal when the patriarchy is everywhere?
Also I question whether the Judeo Christian God (assuming that’s the God you had in mind) was unconnected to creation or the organic world— since that God created the organic world, how could “he” be unconnected to his own creation?
There are multiple reasons why our society is so condescending toward nonhuman life. It wasn't my purpose to blame that on religion, or Judeo Christian religion in particular. But it is a factor. I think Lynn White's paper from 1967 covers this pretty well. https://www.cmu.ca/faculty/gmatties/lynnwhiterootsofcrisis.pdf
I looked at the article—it makes many unsupported but sweeping statements. For ex, that the idea of ever improving progress derives from Judeo Christianity. No evidence offered. Nations that are adamantly atheistic do not have a good environmental track record, to put it mildly. I read that hand pollination has to be done in China bc no more bees or other pollinators. Christians are 31% of pop worldwide but they are now responsible for what happens in non Christian nations? I don’t think so. In my view, scientism, cruel and useless experiments on animals, horrific factory farms, corporations being allowed to pollute rivers and oceans, etc etc are more appropriate targets of environmentalist ire.
There are a lot of appropriate targets, no doubt. But even St. Francis, whose views were very unpopular with the church hierarchy, purportedly "tamed" the wolf. Consider how Christianity and Islam view non-human life. Given their huge influence on humanity's world view, they are not exactly helpful. Nor are materialistic, technocratic atheists.
I was watching a storm last night. Flashing lighting just seconds apart, the rolling thunder never stopped. That smell in the air. The was a full moon so bright only a handful of stars made an appearance. I was barefoot in the "weeds" hoping to miss stepping in dog poop.
I can't see my fellow humans leaving their safe houses and trusted technology to feel nature anymore. We have become as domesticated as the cattle in the CAFO's, who have never tasted grass.
As we grow further from physical reality it becomes harder to touch the awe we felt from living on this planet. The "Awe" that humbles us. The "Awe" that proves the immortallity human supremacy.
Dennis, you are a very fortunate human being. I feel sad for so many others who will never truly "smell the air" or see stars at night. They've been blinded by the harsh lights and cruel noise of our depraved civilization. All best to you.
Yes, agree, so many people are horrified about (for example) a lot of people having to be farmers, as though that is the worst job ever. Many people love growing food. Also people won't even agree that it would be OK to live like it's 1970, as though medicine was so horrendous that it would be suicidal to live that way. But actually medicine was GOOD in 1970.
People have been brainwashed into thinking that maximum progress at top speed is the only way to live a happy life.
Great writing. Conversation that matters. Appreciate the historical reference to Hugh Iltis, “Man First? Man Last? The Paradox of Human Ecology,” Bioscience 1970. First exposure to Hugh's thoughts
Can we have these conversations with a majority population that “learns” with 15 second sound bites and is increasingly less inclined to engage in anything intellectually rigorous?
Critical thinking gets us to where you’re at. Unlike most issues we’re facing (abortion, gun rights, gender issues), there is no intelligent other side to your arguments where growth continues and the human race keeps expanding. It’s just scientifically and logically impossible.
We cripple ourselves by refusing to think critically and to encourage that same thought process in others, especially the next generations. Real thinking is hard. Education, active learning, critical thought education and not the common “banking” method used in schools throughout the world should be our focus. People want to feel actively engaged in the world. Unless we revamp our educational system to reflect this we’ll continue to preach and some may pretend to listen, but too few will critically engage with us.
Do as your told and accept things the way they are doesn’t make for good revolutionaries.
Hi Matt, You've hit on a huge problem in our society. The lack of critical thinking and intelligent discussion is appalling. The matter ought to be topic #1 across the media and in all the schools for a couple of months, especially in the USA. Thanks for your thoughtful comments.
Years ago, when I was in my 20s, I had just read Colin Fletcher’s The Man Who Walked Through Time, when I found myself on an airplane, sitting next to a young Mormon fresh out of missionary school. Anxious to deliver his spiel, he droned on, in rote fashion, as I listened. When I countered with “bigger than us” ideas, I could tell nothing I said was even beginning to penetrate. He would respond, time and time again…”What WE believe…” I was struck by the realization this young man wasn’t even thinking for himself. I wondered how he would fare on his mission to New York City, never having traveled much beyond his insular town in Utah.
It is indeed a tragedy that we live in a culture that doesn’t seem to cultivate critical thinking—even outside of religious doctrine—and our sound-byte sources are all many need to form their opinions.
Thank you, Tony, for your articulate and thought provoking pieces.
In grad school, way back, I had a professor who had "how to listen" as the topic for his first class. Indeed, that was "first class" and is sorely missing today. Thank for reading and commenting, Nikki. All best wishes.
Yep. They'd sooner watch the football and ignore the slavery.
It's quite irritating, really.
McGilchrist in his book “The Matter with Things” argues rather intriguingly that consciousness precedes matter—that it did not somehow “wink into being” (as the Atlantic article you linked to posits) at some point in the evolutionary journey of sea creatures onto the land millions of years ago. This goes along with the discovery of an invisible (to us) field of energy, and the so-called “God particle” (Higgs Boson), etc in physics.
Generally speaking, religion is one of the few places where the idea of a singular “creation” exists—a sense of the whole, the totality of life, including animals, stars, etc. While people rightly criticize the failures of religion, at bottom it is a desire to reconnect with a totality beyond us, whether that totality is God, Gaia, Wakan Tanka (the Great Mystery), the goddess Isis, Shiva, or however the concept manifests. Religion, like yoga, is a search to reconnect with the totality of life and unite with it : look at the word itself—re (again) ligare (to bind, join, connect), so “religion” means to reconnect what is separate. Likewise, “yoga” means to connect, as in the related word “yoke.” We search for union with that totality beyond our limited self or selves.
In my opinion, we should stop demonizing religion and rejecting what it has to offer. Buddhism, Native American teachings of Beauty (the Dine), St. Francis, ancient Mystery cult religions, (such as the Eleusinian Mysteries), Shaivism, etc etc—do we really want to throw the baby out with the bath water?
Thanks again, Tony! Very thoughtful and thought-provoking as always! And great photo of the snowy egret!
Much depends on what "religion" one connects to. A patriarchal god divorced from the organic world, or a god that's subsumed in the Great Mystery. The former religions have great marketing, the later not so much. I certainly agree that religion could provide a basis for ending human supremacy, but not when it is based on that. Thank you for your thoughts, Vero, much appreciated.
Well, I assume when you refer to a patriarchal religion that is unconnected to the organic world you’re talking about the Judeo Christian religion as expressed in the Old and New Testament? So what did the God of that religious tradition want humans to do with creation? Burn it up as garbage? How is that expressed in those scriptural texts? The other issue is the word patriarchal. In my opinion everything is patriarchal in this human world, historically. The justice system is patriarchal worldwide, the political system is patriarchal worldwide, the scientific community is patriarchal worldwide, etc, so why should the religious community be any different? the patriarchy has been the dominant system for thousands of years. When did women get the vote in America, supposedly an advanced nation? 1920, not so long ago when you consider that human history goes back thousands of years. Why pick on religion for being patriarchal when the patriarchy is everywhere?
Also I question whether the Judeo Christian God (assuming that’s the God you had in mind) was unconnected to creation or the organic world— since that God created the organic world, how could “he” be unconnected to his own creation?
There are multiple reasons why our society is so condescending toward nonhuman life. It wasn't my purpose to blame that on religion, or Judeo Christian religion in particular. But it is a factor. I think Lynn White's paper from 1967 covers this pretty well. https://www.cmu.ca/faculty/gmatties/lynnwhiterootsofcrisis.pdf
I looked at the article—it makes many unsupported but sweeping statements. For ex, that the idea of ever improving progress derives from Judeo Christianity. No evidence offered. Nations that are adamantly atheistic do not have a good environmental track record, to put it mildly. I read that hand pollination has to be done in China bc no more bees or other pollinators. Christians are 31% of pop worldwide but they are now responsible for what happens in non Christian nations? I don’t think so. In my view, scientism, cruel and useless experiments on animals, horrific factory farms, corporations being allowed to pollute rivers and oceans, etc etc are more appropriate targets of environmentalist ire.
There are a lot of appropriate targets, no doubt. But even St. Francis, whose views were very unpopular with the church hierarchy, purportedly "tamed" the wolf. Consider how Christianity and Islam view non-human life. Given their huge influence on humanity's world view, they are not exactly helpful. Nor are materialistic, technocratic atheists.
https://youtu.be/C_bE6NbFJFM
Here is a longer summary.
I was watching a storm last night. Flashing lighting just seconds apart, the rolling thunder never stopped. That smell in the air. The was a full moon so bright only a handful of stars made an appearance. I was barefoot in the "weeds" hoping to miss stepping in dog poop.
I can't see my fellow humans leaving their safe houses and trusted technology to feel nature anymore. We have become as domesticated as the cattle in the CAFO's, who have never tasted grass.
As we grow further from physical reality it becomes harder to touch the awe we felt from living on this planet. The "Awe" that humbles us. The "Awe" that proves the immortallity human supremacy.
Dennis, you are a very fortunate human being. I feel sad for so many others who will never truly "smell the air" or see stars at night. They've been blinded by the harsh lights and cruel noise of our depraved civilization. All best to you.
Well written.
Sadly I can't see much changing too soon. The disconnection is so strong and the indoctrination /education system is stacked against reality.
I think every little bit counts though even if its palliative care at this late stage.
www.pantheistunionfornature.com
Keep hope alive! And thanks for the link.
Yes, agree, so many people are horrified about (for example) a lot of people having to be farmers, as though that is the worst job ever. Many people love growing food. Also people won't even agree that it would be OK to live like it's 1970, as though medicine was so horrendous that it would be suicidal to live that way. But actually medicine was GOOD in 1970.
People have been brainwashed into thinking that maximum progress at top speed is the only way to live a happy life.
"The earth and the web of life come first, man comes second; profits and “progress” come last."
Amen to that!
https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html
I haven’t read the full encyclica from Pope Francis but here is an interpretation from a priest. https://youtu.be/yvBUswFA5bw
Great writing. Conversation that matters. Appreciate the historical reference to Hugh Iltis, “Man First? Man Last? The Paradox of Human Ecology,” Bioscience 1970. First exposure to Hugh's thoughts