Antonio Guterres, UN Secretary-General on his speech at the Petersberg Climate Dialogue, in Berlin, Germany, Tuesday, April 28, 2020 challenged world leaders to use the coronavirus pandemic to “rebuild our world for the better” by also working together to tackle other global threats such as climate change. The outbreak that has resulted in at least 200,000 deaths and almost 3 million infections globally caused widespread economic hardship as countries impose lockdowns to prevent the spread of the virus.
“It has exposed the fragility of our societies and economies to shocks,” the United Nations chief said, adding that “the only answer is brave, visionary and collaborative leadership. He continued: “Let us use the pandemic recovery to provide a foundation for a safe, healthy, inclusive and more resilient world for all people”.
FDAI intends to contribute to the discussions on what should the new economy look like. FDAI lifts from the chapters/pages of the book titled Full Humanity Development: A Discourse on Ends and Means written by its Executive Director, Rex T. Linao, PhD.
This is 3rd of the series, featuring Chapter 7 of the Full Humanity Development book. The graphics above is lifted from https://destinationksa.com/taking-care-of-your-spiritual-welfare/
DEVELOPMENT as we know it today owes its intellectual roots to scientific heritage that assumes that all natural, psychological, and social processes can be fully explained by material and physical processes. It is from the same scientific heritage that luminaries such as Rene Descartes, Francis Bacon, Isaac Newton, Galileo Galilei, Charles Darwin, Adams Smith, Karl Marx, Auguste Comte, John Maynard Keynes, Sigmund Freud, B.F. Skinner and others came from (1).
The materialist conception of the world has played a powerful educational role. It trains peoples’ minds to see the world clearly. It develops precise habits of study and interaction with nature and society (see also Box 10). It plays a tremendous role in the transformation of the planet. It becomes the basis in the engineering of the economic, political, cultural, and natural changes that have shaken the world. Industrialization, capitalism, socialism, communism and the like are few examples of the same mindset’s fullest expression in the society.
The same materialist conception envisions development as the accumulation of material wealth, powered by atomistic, self-seeking enterprises. Public policy initiatives are thought of and implemented according to the “carrot-stick approach” of the behaviorist social psychology of B.F. Skinner. Education is mostly geared toward training the masses to be absorbed in the engines of industrial production. Politics and economics, implicitly following the dictates of Charles Darwin, are viewed as the arenas where the fittest struggle to overcome and survive the challenge of the opponents. Nature is considered as a mechanism to be exploited and plundered to serve the short-term goals of the development process.
The above-described instrumental approach to nature and human beings continues to be successful in the inorganic sciences, the realm of dead substances where it is appropriate. It laid and has continued to provide the foundation for the scientific and technological revolutions that have created the physical structures of modern industrialized societies.
It turned out that the potency of industrial systems is overwhelming. No culture in the world has been able to resist the allure, convenience, ease and wonder of the same. Industrial corporations have overturned thousands of years of beliefs and practices, sometimes overnight. Anywhere, economics has moved into the very center of public concern. Economic growth, performance, expansion and so forth have become the obsession of all people. Economics plays a central role in shaping their activities and it now becomes the sole meaning of their existence. And they who have lost any consensus and ultimate meanings and values in life, steer themselves mainly by economic and financial signals serving as pseudo-values.
Indeed, the same materialistic approach has brought wonders to the world to the joys and conveniences of human beings. Not without costs though. In fact, a few years back, a painful realization came out: humanity itself is threatened; as they are confronted with the problems of environmental decay, economic disorder and dehumanization, among others. There was a sense of panic for those in the know and humble enough to admit that something is wrong. Identifying the root cause of the problem was considered urgent. Then came a realization that it is in the development approaches, in all their nuances, themselves that lays the problem. The solution: communism, sustainable development, human development, etc.
In Chapter 2, critiques of the offered ‘solutions’ were already presented. For purposes of the current discussion though, the point raised by Paul Streeten of Boston University (2001) regarding human development is relevant. He argued that human development can be regarded as redundant. He declared: with whom else is development concerned but human beings? Surely not with stones or animals. Taking to heart Streeten’s declaration appears a right thing to do.
But, first, a very important question should be asked: If development is essentially for human beings, does current development paradigm have a full understanding of what truly human being is? Raising this question is crucial because if there is no full understanding of what essentially human being is, there is always the danger of a development paradigm that destroys, instead of develops humanity.
A psychologist, writer and educator wrote:
When we are ready to say that capitalism is the defining characteristic of our nation, we demonstrate a lack of clear vision. We have a serious crisis of values when we, in both political parties and in the independent party, all nod our heads in agreement that the sluggish economy is our biggest problem. Losing economic ground is not our biggest problem, not even the closest problem to home. Losing our sense of purpose, losing our heart is our biggest problem. Closest to home is that we don’t know who we are or what we want so that everything our work, our loves, our worship is kind of empty, kind of meaningless, kind of dull and dulling. We need to consume ever more stimulating entertainment to make us feel alive, find ever more health care and varieties of therapy to ease our discomforts, own ever more things to feel successful, receive ever more services to feel important (Benvenuti, 1994, p. 36).
The quote above echoes the effects of development that does not fully understand human being. For what essentially is human being?
Anderson (1995) observes that the modern world wants people to believe that they are primarily physical beings. They are cells, and groups of cells, physical and material in nature. This is exactly the reason why people could just naturally engage themselves in hedonism.
The modern world wants people to believe that mind holds all the answer. They are what they think. Their mind has unlimited power. People’s attitude determines their altitude. People are then told that they are primarily mental beings.
Still, the modern world wants people to consider themselves as essentially spiritual. People are souls, supernatural beings, endowed with spirit.
In reality though, people are body, mind and spirit. They are three distinct entities, yet these entities are inseparable, one, whole (Anderson, 1995, p. 25). Developing only one entity out of the three inseparable entities is therefore inappropriate as it reduces human beings.
Anthroposophy, the science of the human spirit, has a more elaborate definition of what truly human being is (2). It (anthroposophy) says that human being has a four-fold body (see also Table 3): 1) physical body; 2) etheric body; 3) astral body; and 4) the spiritual body. The physical body corresponds to the mineral components of human existence – one that is also present in all that exist in the physical world such as stones, soils, and so forth, present in all plants and animals. The etheric body corresponds to life giving component, one that is characterized by growth, reproduction, repair and death. It also corresponds to the willing component of human existence. The same body is also found in all plants and animals, but absent in the mineral realm.
The astral body corresponds to the sentient, one that is characterized by emotions, feelings, among others. Hence, it corresponds to the feeling component of human existence. The same body is also found among animals. The Spiritual Body corresponds to the thinking spiritual component of human existence; which is found only in human beings. It is characterized by reflective consciousness, the I consciousness present only among humans.
Obviously, the various folds of human existence have distinct though complimentary needs. And in order to fully develop a human being, all of such needs should be addressed.
It is then wrong for development works to focus only on the physical, material aspects of human beings – the realm of physical body – for even if they are important, they do not approximate their full need (3). Hence, even if human beings experience the best form of economic progress, they would still find life to be kind of empty, kind of meaningless, kind of dull and dulling. They are then forced to the conclusion that they are grounded upon and orientated toward a further reality, an ultimate connection, an ultimate meaning for their lives, a primordial mystery which they may call God or the Great Power. To encounter this God, in mystical experience, is more precious than all else beside. Here is the pearl of great price, for which human beings shall gladly sacrifice everything else in the world (Buhlmann, 1991, p. 135).
The awareness that human beings have spiritual body has significant implications in the way peoples should conduct their lives and for the purpose of this book, the way peoples should view development. It leads into realizations that any development model that is explicitly materialistic or that remains silent on spirituality or erodes it is a betrayal of the essence of humanity itself. This kind of realization is articulated in the results of the study conducted by Dr. Oommen (see Chapter 2): development today has a profound spiritual emptiness so that it is evil and unsustainable.
What role should spirituality play in all of development processes?
It was written:
Analyzed closely and philosophically, the human spirit is the true source of a concern for morality and justice as well as the ultimate wellspring of creativity. If this true spirituality is empowered, a vibrant economy characterized by appropriate productivity and living in harmony with Nature, inevitably results. If true spirituality prevails, then participatory and democratic processes will indeed characterize the political life of the world. In addition, the world will indeed be a “caring”, “diverse yet cohesive” society (Perlas, 1998, p. 39).
If Spiritual Growth: To Be Fully Human is to become one core value of development, will it sound weird, new to the ears of peoples? It is not to be the case. In fact, results of the study of IDRC and Dr. Oommen cited in Chapter 2 saw the need to consider spirituality as integral element in development works. Supporting IDRC and Dr. Oommen were various studies that showed that spirituality does matter for various individuals (see Box 11).
Numerous data do show a huge constituency of development works that value Spiritual Growth – even right at the center of what is touted to be the capital of the modern world [i.e. this is not to mistake, however, that spirituality can just go along with consumerism. For instance, when the studies cited in Box 11 were conducted, there were fifty eighth percent (58%) of Americans who reported more interest in spiritual matters than five (5) years ago an indication that as modernization reaches its peak, people get tired of it. Further, sixty three percent (63%) of the Americans thought that the start of the third millennium should be time for ‘prayer and reflection’ (Ibid)].
It is assumed here that a much bigger percentage of people living in the East profess more spiritual leanings than people in the West, so that adding Spiritual Growth as another core value of development is not alien but perhaps a welcome idea.
But what is spirituality? How is it to be spiritual? Matthew Fox in his book Creation Spirituality wrote:
The Spirit is life, ruah, breath, wind. To be spiritual is to be alive, filled with ruah, breathing deeply, in touch with the wind. Spirituality is a life-filled path, a spirit-filled way of living. Taking a path is different from driving down a highway to work. A path has something personal about it; it implies choice or even mystery … A path is the way itself, and every moment on it is a holy moment; a sacred seeing goes on there.
… While there is something deeply personal about the paths we choose to walk down, Spirituality is also radically communitarian. The spirit is not bound to a path just because we are on it. Pathways beckon us out of their beauty, but they beckon us, not me, not my private ego hoarding my private property or following my private way. A path is a way of solidarity, of sharing the beauty with all the others on the way; it is also a sharing of the pain and the struggle with all the others in the way (Fox, 1991, pp. 11- 12).
Fox went on to explain that because there is only one Spirit, one breath, one life, one energy in the Universe; there is only one path. It belongs to no one but all; everyone shares it. That is why spirituality does not make people otherworldly; rather it renders everyone more fully alive. The path that spirituality takes is a path away from the superficial into the depths; away from the “outer person” into the “inner person”; away from the privatized and individualistic into the deeply communitarian.
Basing from the point raised by Fox, it could be argued that spirituality and politics, for instance, enjoy a mutual reference. Spirituality without politics would be a cheap, surely not together godly, lounging in self-satisfied piety. Politics without spirituality, at the other extreme, could become a reckless careerism, a brutal economic exploitation of the weak, a mighty nation state in which the powerful lord it over the others.
Also, religion without spirituality is very dangerous. Instead of religion becoming a vehicle in which human beings have a chance to be reunited with their God; they become all the more led astray (4). In the same manner, spirituality without religion is also not good. It does not afford a chance for the spiritual person to share with fellow human beings the goodness he/she has in his/her being spiritual.
One important and potent kind of Spirituality that is helpful and needed especially this time is Creation Spirituality. It is introduced by the same Matthew Fox quoted above who wrote that Creation Spirituality is an ancient tradition, the oldest tradition in this planet for it is the basic spiritual heritage of native peoples everywhere; the Celtic peoples of Ireland, Scotland, Wales and the Rhineland in Germany and the native peoples of Africa and Asia, of the Polynesian islands and New Zealand, or the aboriginals of Australia. All these peoples had cosmology as the basis of their worship, prayer, economics, politics and morality. All of them honored the artist in all persons. All expected the divine to burst out of anyplace at anytime. To see the world in this way is to be creation-centered.
Creation Spirituality is not only endemic to native spiritualities everywhere; it is also the most ancient tradition in the Bible. The Yahwist (or J) source in the Hebrew Bible is the oldest tradition in that Bible, and its theology is creation-centered. So too is much of the prophetic books and all of the wisdom literature, which beautifully express the cosmological, feminist vision of Creation Spirituality. These are the scriptures that Jesus knew so well, and so the tradition of Creation Spirituality is carried into the Christian Bible or “New Testament” in myriad places, ranging from the prologue to John’s Gospel to the book of Revelation; from the parables of Jesus so steeped in creation imagery and experience to the preaching of Jesus about the Kingdom of God.
The backbone of Creation Spirituality is its naming of the spiritual journey in the Four Paths, which tell peoples what matters. In Path One, peoples are told that awe and delight matter; in Path Two, that darkness, suffering, and letting go matter; in Path Three, that creativity and imaginations matter; and in Path Four, that justice and celebration, which add up to compassion, matter.
The Four Paths address the following questions: where will God, where will the experience of the divine be found in our time? Fox said that the divine is found in the Four Paths (see Box 12).
Fox believed that when peoples imbibe in themselves Creation Spirituality, they could receive gifts of personal liberation even as they would help bring the same gifts of liberation to today’s world’s addictions that are enumerated below:
- From the secularization of everything to the resacralization of all things;
- From boredom and passivity to wonder, creativity and empowerment;
- From taking for granted to thankfulness;
- From waste to recycling;
- From tiredness to youthfulness;
- From complacency to compassion;
- From art for art’s sake to art for earth’s sake;
- From fundamentalist fear to trust of the cosmos;
- From an “ I think therefore I am” philosophy to “Creation begets therefore we are” philosophy;
- From theism to mystical panentheism;§ From overly institutional religion to living mysticism;
- From sexism to gender justice;
- From unemployment to good work;
- From anthropocentric and non-democratic capitalism to earth-centered economics; and
- From the fantasy dream life of advertising to an authentic eschatology about justice.
Undeniably, today’s world badly needs the enumerated liberations. If Creation Spirituality can lead a way, then its introduction, and other forms of spirituality that have the same effect, to all citizens of the world becomes imperative; if only for development to be vehicle of attaining full humanity.
Indeed, there is a big problem in the mainstream development paradigm. It does not only neglect the spiritual dimension of human existence; it even goes as far as destroying/eroding the same as it introduces values that are hedonistic; as it endeavors to demolish the age-old belief that human beings are basically spiritual entities. But it can’t help but be like that because it is the only way that it can make itself irresistible. Is so doing, Dr. Oommen is right in calling the mainstream development paradigm as evil and unsustainable.
This book is then calling for a development paradigm that considers Spiritual Growth: To Be Fully Human as an intrinsic “end” so that the same could be referred to as good and sustainable.
