I've posted about a talk I attended by Brian Swimme over on my blog. An excerpt:
Swimme opened by letting us know that he has been influenced by his mentor, Thomas Berry. Berry’s message that the environmental destruction around is happening because we have forgotten the sacred dimension of nature was a key part of the talk. Swimme, as a scientist, has explored how science has contributed to this forgetting. Rooted in 18th century thought, science sees the universe as a machine, and its parts as lifeless (mechanism). Religion was also affected by this form of thought, forgetting the presence of the divine throughout the natural world.
Swimme called this a tragedy, and I would certainly agree. “If the universe is just stuff, then it’s there for us to manipulate – a resource.” Viewing everything that makes up our planet – sparkling rivers running through a forest, salmon returning home, the skin of sea otters, trees older than human memory, a mountain created millions of years ago, the muscles and milk of herbivores, the labor of humans – as a “resource” belies its sacredness, its divine presence, its life. The use of the word “resource” shows how the universe is viewed – something Swimme suggested would amaze and disgust future generations – and he preferred to call it the “r-word.” Every time I have come across that word since his talk has given me a moment’s pause, and something to reflect on. Try this yourself, and see how pervasive it is.
Swimme mapped out the challenge that we now face:
- To awaken to the current unraveling, to re-evaluate what we are about. He noted that it is not easy to eliminate a species, and given how often that is happening, there is something deep and pervasive going on.
- To find a way to experience directly the immanent presence of the divine. The universe, Swimme argues, is permeated with divine light, that wants to create, to do something.
Very interesting stuff Laura.
ReplyDeleteQuestion: so if it has been the scientific management of natural systems that he created a gap in our relationship with the anima mundi (see Anise's recent post), it order to best connect with this deeply seeded doxa, is it best to meet people along convention (science-based frameworks ) or push forward into a a more deep ecological ideal?
That's a good question. I don't feel like I'm far enough along in my inquiry to have an answer ... but I think the answer may be both, and. For some people, the conventional/scientific ideas are deeply rooted enough that discourse would have to address that. For others, it may be easier to move into a different, deep ecology doxa. One part of my inquiry is to learn to communicate better with people coming from different perspectives.
ReplyDeleteThe book I'm reading now - and I'll post more on this soon - is looking at the emerging desire for a "reenchanted" world, one that harkens back to a time when nature was recognized as sacred. There is a sense that this is a rising doxa.