Earth Spirit Dreaming: Shamanic Ecotherapy Practices - Elizabeth E. Meacham 2020

The Participatory Worldview
Everything Is Connected: A Brief Introduction to Visionary Environmental Thought
Introduction

We begin to assimilate the worldview of objects very young. We get the idea from what we are taught about ourselves: that we are separate entities existing in a world of separate entities. Reductionism, or the idea that things can best be understood by breaking them into their individual parts, is being replaced within certain strata of environmental thought. The scientific and philosophical field of ecology presents a worldview in which experience and the world can best be understood through complex webs of relationship. Participatory thought, an important offshoot of environmental thought from the last century, supports the idea that the world is relational, rather than atomistic and mechanistic.

The aspects of ourselves that develop in an atomistic worldview are very different from those that develop in a relational worldview. In the context of our evolution, we have existed as a species within a relational world view much longer than we have in an atomistic one. The ideas that support the experience of a separate self can be traced back to many thinkers in Western history, including Descartes, Newton and others. The idea of a relational, participatory view of the self and the world is both ancient and supported by contemporary fields of inquiry that feed into environmental thought; these include: general systems theory, quantum physics, the biological understanding of ecology, gestalt theory, field theory and so many more. The table below introduces key concepts of the participatory worldview by contrasting it with the dominant aspects of the current mechanistic worldview:¹⁹

As a philosophical perspective on the nature of reality, participation is an evolving worldview with broad and complex origins, including both long and deep roots in the Western philosophical canon (especially Romanticism) and more recent influences issuing from continental philosophy and the scientific community. Kenyan philosopher John Mbiti provides an excellent encapsulation of the participatory worldview, which closely resembles the idea from Thomas Berry mentioned earlier in the chapter. Mbiti captures the essence of a participatory worldview in his transformation of Descartes’s famous dictum from, “I think therefore I am,” to “I belong therefore I am” (Moodie 2004, 4).²⁰ Though this comment is made in reference to indigenous knowledge as it differs from imperialist systems of knowledge, and though it refers to belonging in a social sense, “I belong therefore I am” works just as effectively to describe the participatory view that all of life is interconnected.

The participatory reorientation toward belonging on a cosmic scale arises from the profound need to heal and replace the mind-body split deepened and systemized by Cartesian first philosophy. “I belong therefore I am” encapsulates the participatory expansion of human belonging from the level of human social communities and motivations to concern for the Earth and cosmic communities. This expansive, relational worldview transforms the schema for understanding the nature of the self in Western culture, offering new pathways for experiencing ourselves and the world.

Joanna Macy and Deep Ecology

I owe much of my orientation in deep ecology to the work of Joanna Macy. Macy’s thinking contributes to an evolving ecological/relational/ participatory worldview in a unique way. Her ideas derive from her blend of insights from East and West and converge with her inspiration by influential participatory thinkers such as Gregory Bateson. Inseparable from these influences are Macy’s decades of political activism, and the impact of this work on the framing of her enquiry. Macy is in a circle of mutual influence in her work with Arne Naess (the Norwegian philosopher who coined the term deep ecology), and rainforest activists John Seed and Pat Fleming (Thinking Like a Mountain: Towards A Council of All Beings 1988). Important contributors to Macy’s deep ecological vision include Ervin Laszlo’s The Systems View of the World: A Holistic Vision for Our Time (1996) and Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s foundational text, General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications (1968).

Deep ecologists call the relational wisdom of our connection with life on Earth the ecological self. This is one manifestation of what can also be called a model for the relational or participatory self. Arne Naess first introduced the concept of the ecological self as an extension of identification that goes beyond the experience of the ego self. In Is It Painful to Think?: Conversations with Arne Naess, with David Rothenberg,²¹ Naess describes the usual cleavage thought to exist between the ego self and the surrounding self. He does not accept this separation, instead presenting a concept of the human ego that is enlarged and deepened beyond traditional Western standards.

In her book World as Lover, World as Self,²² in the chapter “The Greening of the Self” Macy outlines why this wider, more relational metaphor of self is currently coming to the fore. The three conditions for the emergence of this ecological self, as she calls it, are: the breakdown of the conventional self by the spiritual and psychological impact of the destruction of nature; the offering by contemporary science of an alternative to the concept of a self that is separate from the world; and the upsurge of interest in non-dualistic spirituality, such as many find in Buddhism. As the subject/object separation loses theoretical and practical viability, the underpinnings of this belief in separateness are replaced by discoveries in twentieth-century science. These ideas suggest that no separation of self from an objective, outside world is possible. As just one example, Macy cites Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, which demonstrates that, at the level of the quantum, “the very act of observation changes what is observed.”²³ Macy suggests that the systems sciences challenge long-held assumptions about the separate self. She shows that there is no logical or scientific evidence supporting the arbitrary separation of experience into one part that is “me,” and everything else that is “other.”

Quoting Naess in Coming Back to Life,²⁴ Macy refers to the wider sense of identity of the ecological self, seeing it as involving a natural maturation process: “We underestimate ourselves when we identify with the narrow, competitive ego.”²⁵ With the development of the ecological self, we move to “a social self and a metaphysical self, but an ecological self as well.”²⁶ Inspired by Gregory Bateson, Macy calls the ego self a “false reification.” She contends that a separate self cannot be delimited. Instead, in systems language, each self is a flow-through of information. In Macy’s words:

What I am, as systems theorists have helped me see, is a “flow-through.” I am a flow-through of matter, energy, and information, which is transformed in turn by my own experiences and intentions.²⁷

Spiritual Ecology

The field of spiritual ecology in closely intertwined with deep ecology and participatory thought. Trying to capture the field of spiritual ecology in a few paragraphs is a difficult task. Not only has it been the focus of my study, teaching and work for more than half of my life, it is also the story of my unfolding spiritual experience and understanding of the world. What I offer here is a very small piece of a large and complex puzzle. My intention is to offer the beginning of a map for those who are new to this path and may wish to explore and expand their journey.

Spiritual ecology, also referred to as religion and ecology, ecojustice and sustainability and spirituality, inspires and chronicles the global religious responses to the immense environmental challenges of our era. The field touches on a broad range of contemporary theological, religious and spiritual themes in relation to the development of environmental thought. Spiritual ecological thinkers often engage with the interreligious reality of our world, and the need to cooperate and learn from each tradition. Spiritual ecologists encourage honoring and relating with the Earth community experientially through ritual. They often encourage the integration of Earth-based spirituality, from their own or other traditions, into more traditional Western religious practices and leadership.

While spiritual ecology is a diverse field covering a wide variety of perspectives, a commonality is revering all of life as sacred. Individual practitioners who describe themselves as spiritual ecologists often dip deeply into indigenous spiritualities and worldviews to support their work. Other streams of environmental thought inform spiritual ecology, such as ecotheology, environmental justice and ecofeminism.

Ecotheology is a form of spiritual ecology that focuses on the interrelationships of religion and nature, and particularly on environmental ethics. Ecotheology assumes that a relationship exists between human religious/spiritual worldviews and the choice between degradation or care for nature. Pope Francis’ encyclical on the environment and human ecology, Laudato Si (2015), is probably the most influential piece of eco-theology ever written. Laudato Si has reached more people on the planet than any other work on environmental ethics and religion to date, shifting global consciousness on climate change, and influencing world leaders to create and ratify the Paris Climate Agreement seven months after its publication. Although responses to the Pope’s encyclical varied greatly throughout the world, politicians and world leaders were unable to ignore the great swell of public support for his call for care for the Earth to take center stage as an essential moral and religious calling of humankind.

The Pope’s call to action in Laudato Si also fits squarely with another field in spiritual ecology: environmental justice (also called ecojustice). Environmental justice is made up of grass-roots environmental activism by usually minority communities. These communities tend to be the ones that are disproportionately targeted with toxic waste and environmental hazards. Often, these movements intersect with spiritual ecological perspectives, and are bolstered through the organization and outreach of the religious organizations of threatened communities.

Paul Hawken, a well-known environmental thinker and author, began collecting names of groups working for social and ecological justice in the late 1990s. Astounded by the vast number of groups he discovered, he started a non-profit organization, WiserEarth.org, dedicated to collecting and connecting these many organizations. By his count, in 2009 there were at least two million groups working for social and environmental justice in communities around the world. Hawken describes this vast network of social action as expressing “humanity’s collective genius, and the unstoppable movement to reimagine our relationship to the environment and one another.”²⁸

Ecofeminism is another important branch of spiritual ecology, and many books exist on the subject. Ecofeminism branches across disciplines to intersect with environmental justice, particularly through the work of physicist and environmental activist Vandana Shiva. Philosophically, ecofeminism compares the oppression of nature to the oppression of women and other “others.” Spiritually, ecofeminism is often expressed through goddess and Gaia spirituality. Susan Griffin is an early and essential voice of ecofeminism. This quotation from her now-famous book, Woman and Nature: The Roaring Inside Her,²⁹ captures the awe and reverence for Earth often present in the environmental literature, and the shift toward Earth-consciousness that is central to deep ecology, the next section of this chapter:

He says that woman speaks with nature. That she hears voices from under the earth. That wind blows in her ears and trees whisper to her. That the dead sing through her mouth and the cries of infants are clear to her. But for him this dialogue is over. He says he is not part of this world, that he was set on this world as a stranger. He sets himself apart from woman and nature.³⁰

Ecopsychology

The field of ecopsychology integrates the central tenets of visionary environmental thought, yet goes further by providing practical ways for moving toward the transformation described in this body of literature. The central idea of ecopsychology is that our psycho-spiritual health is dependent not only on healthy functioning within our human families and communities, but also on our healthy relationship with the more-than-human world. Disconnection from nature leads to much of the dis-ease that we experience: depression, anxiety and a sense that there is no meaning in life. Further, the dominant mechanistic-industrial world-view suggests to us that we live in a “dead” universe, devoid of meaning and magic.

Many of these “modern” ills can be traced back to the Western tendency to physically and conceptually separate ourselves from nature. We evolved to live outdoors, embedded in nature; now we spend most of our time indoors. The goal of ecopsychology practices in general is to heal the human/Earth split. This healing takes places by fostering awareness of ourselves in an ecological context. These approaches can inform the development of ethical shifts, psychological healing or spiritual transformation.

As a broad field, ecopsychology integrates environmental philosophy, spiritual ecology, indigenous knowledges, ecology and systems theory. Ecopsychology looks at our current attitudes toward nature as pathological. In his book Green Psychology,³¹ Ralph Metzner describes psychopathological metaphors for the “destructive and exploitative behavior of the human species toward the natural world ...”³² Metzner argues that the first person to create such a metaphor was Paul Shepard, in his book Nature and Madness.³³ Shepard identifies the emergence of agriculture and the domestication of ourselves and other animals, 12,000 years ago, as the time that humans began to move away from the earth-connecting practices that functioned healthily for our species for over 100,000 years. This was the point at which humans began breaking away from a psychologically and ecologically healthy relationship with the Earth community. Metzner quotes Shepard as saying: “By aggravating the tensions of separation from the mother and at the same time spatially isolating the individual from the non-humanized world, agriculture made it difficult for the developing person to approach the issues around which the crucial passage into fully mature adult life had been structured in the course of human existence.”³⁴

While ecopsychologists generally acknowledge a sickness caused by disengagement from our true embeddedness in nature, they understand it as a condition which can be remedied. Not to return to a pre-civilized “state of nature,” but to reintegrate an embodied Earth-honoring ethic of care into communities and civilizations across the globe. Many things need to happen politically, culturally and economically to create and represent this shift. The most essential ingredient needed to bring our global civilization into balance with Earth systems is to understand ourselves ecologically by integrating the reality that everything is connected.