The rising culture and worldview of contemporary spirituality

Archive Fire blog alerted me to an article by the above name at this link. It is published in Ecological Economics 70, 2011, pp. 1057 - 1065. Therein Annick Hedlund-de Witt explores the relation of worldviews to different environmental behaviors, and which are more prone to sustainability. This excerpt if from the conclusion:

Some of the primary potentials that the culture of contemporary spirituality holds for sustainable development include an overall rehabilitation of nature, which comes to expression in a preference for organic food and vegetarian diets, natural products and conscious consumerism. This has a double effect: it not only results in less environmental pollution and resource depletion through the greening of individual lifestyles, but it also supports and stimulates (the transition to) a green economy, as it serves as an impetus for companies aiming to win these markets, and a discouragement or even a pounding for companies which are not taking up the environmental challenge. Additionally, the culture of contemporary spirituality tends to result in increased societal support to green political parties, sustainable initiatives and nature- and environmental organizations (see e.g. Dryzek, 2005; Höllinger, 2004). This is significant, as (electorally) supporting environmental policies and initiatives is probably one of the most significant actions individuals can undertake to support changes in a more environment-friendly and sustainable direction (Brown, 2008). Lastly, the culture of contemporary spirituality tends to result in an overall atmosphere of cultural experimentation, renewal and innovation, which may be crucial in creating the needed transitions to a more sustainable society and economy. According to Rogers' (1995) “diffusion of innovations model,” or the idea of social “tipping points” (Gladwell, 2000), the influence of innovators and “early adopters” in the larger process of socio-cultural and economic change is considerable. Overall, the results show that the potentials of the culture of contemporary spirituality are closely aligned with the perspectives of Ecological Economics, and may therefore significantly contribute to the ongoing movement to promote sustainability.

In contrast, one of the main pitfalls is the culture's association with narcissism, which may manifest in egocentrism, a lack of willingness for sacrifices and the refusal to take responsibility for the environment and the health and eco-social wellbeing of others. Moreover, a proclivity to instrumentalize and commercialize spirituality as mere means for self- and wealth enhancement may also be seen as a possible pitfall of this culture. Lastly, the tendency to regress to or
romanticize a mythic, pre-rational consciousness (and society) does not allow the achievements of modernity to be well-integrated — which is likely to result in an alienation of all those who defend the rationalist ideals of the European Enlightenment. This marginalizes its impact in (mainstream) society and potentially contributes to polarization and ‘paradigm wars.’

Introducing a developmental framework may serve to distinguish more regressive from more progressive tendencies within the culture and worldview of contemporary spirituality, thereby potentially providing a deeper insight into the observed potentials and pitfalls. That is to say, I propose that the observed potentials for sustainable development tend to be more consistently associated with more progressive, integrative strands within the culture and worldview of
contemporary spirituality, while the pitfalls tend to be more consistently associated with more regressive, monistic (de-differentiative) strands (see Section 3). However, this analytical lens, when used in the messy practice of everyday reality,will probably not result in a clear-cut, “black and white” picture, as potentials and pitfalls will likely be observed emerging together within individuals as well as within the different strands of the movement. Since I have not researched the (empirical) relationship between those two strands and their association with such potentials and pitfalls myself, it is merely a grounded (hypo)thesis emerging from this research, which needs to be further scrutinized.

Views: 209

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I guess what I'm getting at is that there is really a rather complex interweaving of concerns at work here, and that it is not quite as simple as the two strands outlined in the excerpt given at the beginning of the thread would lead us to think. One point is that social and environmental concerns tend to be conflated as "green." To me they are separate concerns, though someone can have interests in both.

With the term "esotericism" I am referring to the work of Antoine Favre; one can take it as generally referring to perennialism, or primordialism, as well as to esoteric spirituality, transpersonal psychology, etc., all of which are precursors feeding into contemporary "integralism."

Some within "contemporary spirituality," will be broadly speaking conservative in their views, and only be concerned with their own enlightenment.  Nature for them may be something to be transcended. Some, with a Manichean bent, may even find the world evil, or in need of destruction.

Those with a more modern bent of mind may embrace science. Some of these may also be conservative but in another sense of the term. They may have more sympathy toward the concerns of modernity and the Enlightenment, but be skeptical of "global warming" and question the value of saving the whales.They may still believe that Nature is there for their own sake. 

Luddite hippies who burn incense, play bongo drums and hang Tibetan frescos on their walls might tend to have more sympathy toward environmental concerns, but in the end they could still be narcissitic, in the way that the Frankfurters were in the eye of Georg Lukacs.

The "culture of contemporary spirituality" is a broad blanket term like the term "new age." I take it that certain movements like the Whole Earth movement, Findhorn, etc. are being referred to under the umbrella term, just as they are under the term New Age. But to this day what we mean by the New Age movement defies definition. 

The author wonders if his dichotomy between the two strands provides enough anayltical power, but the term narcissism as Lasche used the term, could refer to both the Yogi and the Commisar (Koestler), or the hippy and the New Left rabble rouser at Berkeley.

So, these things are kinda complex.



theurj said:

kela, I'm not quite getting how that relates to the two broad spiritual categories in the main article. It seems the progressive wing does not devalue nature or want to dominate but the opposite. They also do not value strictly instrumental reason, since it leads to the utilitarian attitude you depict; it sees beyond this to environmental and social relations is a wider matrix, with humanity's place within, no over, it. Hence it is also not narcissistic, contrary to some claims about so-called green. And I don't see them as a particularly "esoteric" scientific community. Scientific yes. but unless spirituality can be broadly considered esoteric I'm not so sure.

ok i'll shut up. :-)

Ciao Kela

 

The neo-freudian psychoanalyst Heinz Kohut defines narcissism in his book "Transformations of narcissism" as having two poles, a bipolar self. Amazingly this book also served as master template for Wilber´s "Transformations of consciousness". Kohut underscores a positive narcissistic pole in the individual which evolved under the life course toward lesser narcissistic forms of behaviour.

kelamuni said:

I guess what I'm getting at is that there is really a rather complex interweaving of concerns at work here, and that it is not quite as simple as the two strands outlined in the excerpt given at the beginning of the thread would lead us to think. One point is that social and environmental concerns tend to be conflated as "green." To me they are separate concerns, though someone can have interests in both.

With the term "esotericism" I am referring to the work of Antoine Favre; one can take it as generally referring to perennialism, or primordialism, as well as to esoteric spirituality, transpersonal psychology, etc., all of which are precursors feeding into contemporary "integralism."

Some within "contemporary spirituality," will be broadly speaking conservative in their views, and only be concerned with their own enlightenment.  Nature for them may be something to be transcended. Some, with a Manichean bent, may even find the world evil, or in need of destruction.

Those with a more modern bent of mind may embrace science. Some of these may also be conservative but in another sense of the term. They may have more sympathy toward the concerns of modernity and the Enlightenment, but be skeptical of "global warming" and question the value of saving the whales.They may still believe that Nature is there for their own sake. 

Luddite hippies who burn incense, play bongo drums and hang Tibetan frescos on their walls might tend to have more sympathy toward environmental concerns, but in the end they could still be narcissitic, in the way that the Frankfurters were in the eye of Georg Lukacs.

The "culture of contemporary spirituality" is a broad blanket term like the term "new age." I take it that certain movements like the Whole Earth movement, Findhorn, etc. are being referred to under the umbrella term, just as they are under the term New Age. But to this day what we mean by the New Age movement defies definition. 

The author wonders if his dichotomy between the two strands provides enough anayltical power, but the term narcissism as Lasche used the term, could refer to both the Yogi and the Commisar (Koestler), or the hippy and the New Left rabble rouser at Berkeley.

So, these things are kinda complex.



theurj said:

kela, I'm not quite getting how that relates to the two broad spiritual categories in the main article. It seems the progressive wing does not devalue nature or want to dominate but the opposite. They also do not value strictly instrumental reason, since it leads to the utilitarian attitude you depict; it sees beyond this to environmental and social relations is a wider matrix, with humanity's place within, no over, it. Hence it is also not narcissistic, contrary to some claims about so-called green. And I don't see them as a particularly "esoteric" scientific community. Scientific yes. but unless spirituality can be broadly considered esoteric I'm not so sure.

Ok, I understand you now kela. True that there are many strands under this general rubric. And I can certainly see the esoteric (aka metaphysical) aspects of kennilinguist perennialism, as it tends towards the narcissistic concern with individual enlightenment with little of enviornmental and social concerns. And yes, there is also some narcissism in certain varieties of the "hippie" movement.

But it seems to me there are also some varieties of contemporary spirituality which are truly moving into, for lack of a better term, an integrative framework, e.g., the progressive "cultural creatives." While Kennilingus uses Paul Ray's data to point towards his own narcissistic, creamy 2% there is some truth to the data. Rifkin sees this trend also and is working toward enacting social and environmental consciousness through his empathetic "spirituality." Arnsperger is using his scientific and "spiritual" * economics to move us toward more sustainable politics. And it is this actual--as opposed to inflated, esoteric, metaphysucal--"integralism" in which I'm interested, and of which the leading article gets a glimmer. Again, it's a legitimation battle for what is a qualitatively better, postmetaphysical integralism.

* And yes, this requires a new, expanded definition of spirituality, but that's what this forum is for.

As another sample of the direction I'm pointing is the School for Wellbeing in Thailand, which link I found at Arsperger's blog. From the former's about page:

The ‘School for Wellbeing’ is an independent think-tank being shaped by an international network of dedicated academics from diverse disciplines, practitioners and policy makers, primarily inspired by the concept of Gross National Happiness....nurtures an evidence-based research-platform guided by ‘critical holism’* in order to explore alternative development paradigms. It enables (young) researchers to undertake related action-research initiatives.... The focus...is on empowering people who are engaged in a much needed shift towards wellbeing-driven public policy development.

*Critical Holism is an uncommon synthesis. Criticism and holism refer to different modes of cognition. This makes it a welcome synthesis: without a critical edge, holism easily becomes totalizing, romantic, soggy. Without holism, criticism easily turns flat, sour.

Jan Nederveen Pieterse in Development Theory.

I found this reference to the emerging church in the cultural creatives link. Again it's a broad, general term that encompasses a plethora of pluralism, yet still has defining characteristics more specific than the broader "contemporary spirituality" movement, and more in line with my focus. For example:

The emerging church (sometimes referred to as the emergent movement or emergent conversation) is a Christian movement of the late 20th and early 21st century that crosses a number of theological boundaries... Participants seek to live their faith in what they believe to be a "postmodern" society. What those involved in the conversation mostly agree on is their disillusionment with the organized and institutional church and their support for the deconstruction of modern Christian worship, modern evangelism, and the nature of modern Christian community.... The emerging church favors the use of simple story and narrative. Members of the movement often place a high value on good works or social activism, including missional living. While some Evangelicals emphasize eternal salvation, many in the emerging church emphasize the here and now*.... Key themes of the emerging church are couched in the language of reform, Praxis-oriented lifestyles, Post-evangelical thought, and incorporation or acknowledgment of political and Postmodern elements. Many of the movement's participants use terminology that originates from postmodern literary theory, social network theory, narrative theology, and other related fields.

*Recall our discussion of apocalyptic v. sapiential eschatology here, and how the former is more aligned with the metaphysical while the latter goes somewhat postmeta.

I believe this website is organized by some Emerging Church folks:  Darkwood Brew.  They've got some interesting (video) discussions and interviews there.
Note that my buddy Caputo "has an interest in interacting with the working church groups like ikon and the Emergent Church." For ikon see this link.

There are really very many socially and environmentally active religious groups out there, but one that comes to mind for me is Samir Selmanovic's Faith House, which, while it isn't associated with "Integral" thought, nevertheless is a good example of a progressive-thinking, contemporary spiritual organization of the sort that Hedlund-de Witt is describing.  (Selmanovic describes himself as an "Atheist Muslim Jewish Christian.")

 

~*~

 

Mission

We are an experiential inter-religious community that comes together to deepen our personal and communal journeys, share ritual life and devotional space, and foster a commitment to social justice and healing the world.

Vision
In order to achieve this mission, we are growing five aspects of our local community in New York City:

1. Living Room Gatherings
Twice a month, Faith House hosts Living Room gatherings where we share holy days, learn new spiritual practices, and address current cultural and social issues. Each gathering has a specific theme and hands-on, participatory elements.

2. Religious Spaces NYC
Once a month we step out of our comfort zones and enter new sacred spaces in New York City. In the safety of community, on pre-arranged “field trips,” we visit diverse religious services as well as lectures, rituals, concerts and other events.

3. Serving Together
In synergy with other faith-based and interfaith organizations, Faith House provides opportunities to spread awareness and work together to fight poverty, increase environmental justice and sustainability, and promote peacemaking in New York City and around the world.

4. Nurture Relationships between Local Faith Communities
Faith House welcomes other faith communities to plan Living Room Gatherings, as well as host Faith House "field trips" at their regular places of worship, collaborating to serve together and form relationships across boundaries.

5. Islamic Involvement
At this historical moment, we place a special emphasis on the value of leadership and participation of diverse local Muslims in all aspects of the life of Faith House.  In years to come, other groups may hold this place of focused involvement.

Principles
To guide our relationships and the life of our community, these principles of inter-dependence describe not what we hold as sacred or central but how we hold it:

COMMON JOURNEY, DIFFERENT PATHS:  We are sojourners who gratefully acknowledge that every faith has its own mystery.

RE-INTERPRETATION: We continually seek deeper levels of understanding by interpreting and re-interpreting our texts, traditions, and practices.

GRACIOUS COMMUNICATION:  We do not insist that others have to change their language or categories in order for us to hear them, while we strive to translate our concepts to those outside our traditions.

GIVING THROUGH RECEIVING: We strive to learn more than to teach as we are called to receive, discern, and treasure what others have to give.

FREEDOM FROM FORCE AND FREEDOM TO CHANGE: We do not believe in proselytizing; we do believe in personal choice and transformation.

POST-CYNICISM:  We believe a new kind of community is possible.

I think Joanna Macy's work also deserves a mention here.

 

From her website:

 
All living systems--be they organic like a cell or human body, or supra-organic like a society or ecosystem--are holons. That means they have a dual nature: As both systems and subsystems, they are wholes in themselves and, simultaneously, integral parts of larger wholes.

In this step-wise organization of living systems, emergence is a universal and striking feature. At each holonic level new properties and new possibilities emerge, which could not have been predicted. From the respective qualities of oxygen and hydrogen, for example, one could never have anticipated the properties that emerge when these elements interact and make water.

From the systems perspective, mind or consciousness arises by virtue of feedback loops that permit living systems to self-correct, adapt and evolve. Self-reflexive consciousness seems to emerge only at the level of humans and some other large-brained mammals. Here the system's internal complexity is so great that it can no longer meet its needs by trial and error. It needs to evolve another level of awareness in order to weigh different courses of action; it needs, in other words, to make choices. Decision-making brings about self-reflexivity.

Self-reflexive consciousness does not characterize the next holonic level, the level of social systems. In tightly-knit organizations with strong allegiances, one can sense an "esprit de corps" or group mind, but this mentality is still too weak and too loose for direct response on its own behalf. The locus of decision-making remains within the individual, susceptible to all the vagaries of what that individual considers to be of "self-interest". Yet might not survival pressures engender a collective level of self-interest in choice-making--in other words self-reflexivity on the next holonic level?

Fearful of fascism, we might reject any idea of collective consciousness. It is important, therefore, to remember that self-organization of open systems requires diversity of parts. A monolith of uniformity has no internal intelligence. Healthy social systems require a plurality of views and the free circulation of information. The holonic shift does not sacrifice, but instead requires, the uniqueness of each part, the distinctiveness of its functioning and its perspective.

It would seem that such a holonic shift is necessary for our survival. Since Earth's carrying capacity is limited, and since the ecosystems supporting us are threatened with collapse, we must learn to think together in an integrated, synergistic fashion, rather than in fragmented and competitive ways. Present modes of collective decision-making, like the ballot-box or consensus circles, are simply too corruptible and too slow for the swift, responsive self-guidance that we as societies need now.

In what ways can we help? How can we as individuals promote a holonic shift and take part in it? The following guidelines are composed in collaboration with my colleagues in the Work That Reconnects, and offered to invite further reflection.

1. Attune to a common intention. Intention is not a goal or plan you can formulate with precision. It is an open-ended aim: May we meet common needs and collaborate in new ways.

2. Welcome diversity. Self-organization of the whole requires differentiation of the parts. Each one's role in this unfolding journey is unique.

3. Know that only the whole can repair itself. You cannot "fix" the world, but you can take part in its self-healing. Healing wounded relationships within you and between you is integral to the healing of our world.

4. You are only a small part of a much larger process, like a nerve cell in a neural net. So learn trust. Trust means taking part and taking risks, when you cannot control, or even see, the outcome.

5. Open to flows of information from the larger system. Do not resist painful information about the condition of your world, but understand that the pain you feel for the world springs from interconnectedness, and your willingness to experience it unblocks feedback that is important to the well-being of the whole.

6. Speak the truth of your experience of this world. If you have persistent responses to present conditions, assume that they are shared by others. Willing to drop old answers and old roles, give voice to the questions that arise in you.

7. Believe no one who claims to have the final answer. Such claims are a sign of ignorance and limited self-interest.

8. Work increasingly in teams or joint projects serving common intentions. Build community through shared tasks and rituals.

9. Be generous with your strengths and skills, they are not your private property. They grow from being shared. They include both your knowing and your unknowing, and the gifts you accept from the ancestors and all beings.

10. Draw forth the strengths of others by your own acknowledgment of them. Never prejudge what a person can contribute, but be ready for surprise and fresh forms of synergy.

11. You do not need to see the results of your work. Your actions have unanticipated and far-reaching effects that are not likely to be visible to you in your lifetime.

12. Putting forth great effort, let there also be serenity in all your doing; for you are held within the web of life, within flows of energy and intelligence far exceeding your own.

(World Business Academy, 1994)

Remember this one?

 

Mindwalk

 

 

Yep!

Reply to Discussion

RSS

What paths lie ahead for religion and spirituality in the 21st Century? How might the insights of modernity and post-modernity impact and inform humanity's ancient wisdom traditions? How are we to enact, together, new spiritual visions – independently, or within our respective traditions – that can respond adequately to the challenges of our times?

This group is for anyone interested in exploring these questions and tracing out the horizons of an integral post-metaphysical spirituality.

Notice to Visitors

At the moment, this site is at full membership capacity and we are not admitting new members.  We are still getting new membership applications, however, so I am considering upgrading to the next level, which will allow for more members to join.  In the meantime, all discussions are open for viewing and we hope you will read and enjoy the content here.

© 2024   Created by Balder.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service