Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics EJAIB

Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 18 (January 2008) 15Evolutionary Thinking,Global Warming, andEnvironmental Ethics- Arthur SaniotisDiscipline of Anthropology, School of Social SciencesThe University of Adelaide, Australia (2 Morgan Street, WestHindmarsh, Adelaide, South Australia, 5007, Australia)E-mail: saniotis@yahoo.co.ukIntroductionGlobal warming will prove to be the most significantphenomenon which will inform the planet’s evolution in theforthcoming centuries. Not since the mass extinctions at theend of the Cretaceous period has the earth witnessed such athreat to biodiversity (Laszlo 1994:xiii). Ervin Laszlo calls thepresent period a grave threat to the biosphere by a terrestrialspecies. While the critical output of scientific analyses onglobal warming has only recently been acknowledged bysocial power brokers, there has been no “sustainableframework for the management of global warming” (Held2005:96). This is concerning due to the natural developmentswhich are currently taking place such as widespread droughtsin Australia, recent heat waves in Northern Europe, meltingice caps in the North and South Poles, and diminishingglaciers in Africa, North India, and Northern Europe. Thesheer volume of scientific studies done on climate changemakes it untenable to suggest that the earth is not undergoingglobal warming. The information confirms otherwise. Thequestion which now faces humanity is whether the kind ofintelligence that it had evolved for is sufficient to guide it intothe future (Laszlo 1994:97). This is both an ethical and anecessary question due to humanity’s rapacious treatment ofthe planet. While human cognition has been an evolutionaryhallmark, its continuous failure to live synergistically withecology is perhaps due to the biological default of Homosapiens (Ehrlich 2000). Whether humans lack the basicbehavioural skills to exist in a non-parasitic manner withnature is a point in question. The social collapses of theEaster Island people, the Maya, and the Mohanjo Daro in theIndus valley point to widespread ecological degradation.Moreover, millennia of fire burning of the Australian habitatand the probable extinction of ancient mega fauna byAboriginal Australians effaced the landscape. For thebiologist Paul Ehrlich, human beings seemingly have apenchant for degrading the environment which otherwiseopposes the plethora of ecological worldviews.Anthropogenic climate change is a continuation of Homosapiens’ ill legacy. This paper will outline a need forevolutionary thinking in response to global warming and itsethical issues. I will argue that global warming is anincreasing ethical issue which demands a new way ofunderstanding earth’s ecology and humanity’s place in itsscheme.Changing Paradigms: Evolutionary ThinkingFor Bateson (2000, 2002), Laszlo (1996), and Capra(2002), human beings have been informed by negativecognitive maps (mental representations) in relation to theenvironment. Bateson refers to negative cognitive maps as“internal incoherence” (2000:173), a process which obviatesfrom internal critique and “external reality” (2000:208). Theprocess of critical awareness is a creative exercise or anevolutionary way of learning as it foregrounds co-operationand networking (Montuori 1993).Here Maslow and Honingmann’s analysis of societies isinstructive. Both authors categorise societies into dominatorand gylanic societies. Dominator societies have low synergybetween individuals, exploit nature, encourage competition,and are not mutually reinforcing. The oeuvre of dominatorsocieties is cognate with Jung’s description of the “OdinArchetype” − the image of cruelty, conquest (Laszlo et al1996:52). Moreover, learning patterns in dominator societiessustain practices for the generation of conflict, therebymitigating conflict resolution strategies (Montuori 1993). Inthis way, learning patterns amplify negative feedback loopsthereby repeating non-corrective mechanisms (Montuori1993). Gylanic societies have high synergy betweenindividuals, view nature as organismic, and have mutuallyreinforcing behaviours (Maslow and Honingmann 1970:324).This categorical schema corresponds with Gert Hofstede’shigh/low masculine cultures (Hofstede 2001). High masculinecultures such as the United States, Japan, China, UnitedKingdom, Australia, and Canada are characterized bymaterial and value achievement, control, and social power(Dysart-Gale 2006). Low masculine cultures found inScandinavian countries are typified by co-operation, lessemphasis on gender roles, and importance of inter-personalrelationships (Dysart-Gale 2006).Laszlo et al’s (1996) analysis of cognitive maps furtherlocate internal incoherence to the mitigation of internal moralstructures. Their tri-partite model categorises three kinds ofmoral maps; pre-conventional morality, conventional morality,and post-conventional morality. The pre-conventional moralstage is characterized by a self serving attitude; the individualis ruled by the dictum, “If it feels good, do it.” In theconventional moral stage individuals comply with groupethical standards and recognize the moral authority of lawand dogma. The top end of this stage is typified by a“legalistic orientation” where individuals may challenge groupauthority via engaging in “citizenly activities” (Laszlo et al1996:46). At the post-conventional moral stage individualsare deeply morally conscious, encourage universalism, andadvocate critical learning skills which are often at odds withother social members (Laszlo 1996:47). The degree ofdivergence between the three cognitive moral maps reflectsthe inability of individuals to work in partnership to solveglobal problems. For this reason Laszlo et al advocate for thedevelopment of new societal and individual cognitive maps fortackling pan-human issues such as global warming(1996:105). A fundamental shift is needed based on learningfrom nature, and not dominating nature (Benyus 1997:2).In relation to global warming Laszlo (1994) Laszlo et al(1996), and Capra (2002) support the emergence ofecoliteracy and sustainability. Capra notes that the changingperceptions of sustainability are a significant ethicaldevelopment (2002:229). Ecoliteracy entails:1. Understanding principles of nature’s organisationalprinciples. In systems theory ecosystems are viewed asbeing autopoiec (self creating), inter-related, and withincreasing complexity. Eco-systems are based on cooperation,co-evolution, and networking. As Capra (2002:232)points out, nascent life on earth originated by networking notcombating.2. Ecosystems have evolved to sustain life andpossess multiple feedback loops in a dynamic balance.The process of ecoliteracy would entail the application ofnature’s organisational principles for the development of newsocietal and individual cognitive maps, and applying these inthe creation of new, sustainable technologies and socioeconomicsystems. Thus, human purposes would work interdependentlywith natural systems. Laszlo et al suggest threeareas in which ecoliteracy can be developed which comprisesocial and ethical dimensions.1. Male/Female RelationshipsProblems such as global warming will necessitate thepartnership of men and women in all social domains. This will