 |
|




Michael
Gurian is a psychotherapist, educator and author of seven books
including the critically acclaimed national bestsellers:

and

Order On-line
Michael
has served as a consultant to families, therapists, school districts,
community agencies, churches, criminal justice professionals and
policy makers.Traveling to approximately twenty-five cities a year,
Michael leads seminars, consults and is a key note speaker at
conferences. He has lectured at the New York Open Center, the Naropa
Institute, and the Harvard Gender Issues Forum. His training videos
for parents and volunteers are used by Big Brothers and Big Sisters
agencies in the United States and Canada.
Visit:
Michael Gurian's Home Page

|
|
 |
Guest Article... |
A New Social Theory
by
Michael Gurian
© 2002

In the twenty years that I have been
researching human nature, I have come to understand that a new social
theory has been developing, one that was not possible before the new
neural and genetic sciences allowed human civilization to make huge
leaps in the exploration of questions of our human origins, identity
and society.
In a number of my books, I have briefly mentioned this new
theory. In
BOYS AND GIRLS LEARN DIFFERENTLY!, for instance, it is identified
as "brain-based theory," and in
THE WONDER OF GIRLS as "nature-based
parenting." In a future book, it will be fully delineated as
"nature-based theory." What is this theory? Can we talk about it in
a nutshell?
I think we can. Though the nutshell might be a few paragraphs
long! It is worth talking about freely and openly in as many circles
as possible, because Nature-Based Theory is poised to alter these
disciplines:
 | psychology |
 | the social sciences |
 | education |
 | parenting |
 | urban policy |
 | business |
 | corrections, juvenile justice and law enforcement
|
 | medicine and physical health |
In short, Nature-Based Theory is poised to affect
nearly every aspect of human life and human civilization-building.
There have been two previous and distinct stages of human
social theory.
The first, which included millions of years of our development,
was Reactive-Survival Thinking. The brutality of nature was the
primary action to which our nomadic tribes, then agricultural groups,
then burgeoning civilizations were the reaction. By use of the human
body and mind, we "tamed" nature to a great extent, or at least
learned to create societies that protected masses of people from
nature's tornadoes, storms, floods, droughts. While this
Reactive-Survival social theory is still necessary in many parts of
the world, especially where people live in impoverished and very
vulnerable conditions, most people have evolved their thinking to
Stage 2.
The second stage of our human social theory, which has guided
us over the last few thousand years is Ideological Thinking. By
ideology we mean, "A theory about how all human beings can best
thrive." An ideology generally develops because something is seen to
work among a statistically small group of people. That group of
people says, "Hey, look, let's start thinking this way. If everyone
thinks the way I think, we'll get really good results." Both by
telling the truth and by utilizing effective rhetorical and persuasive
strategies, the ideology spreads. And it does not generally stick
around if it isn't found to be useful.
The three most distinct forms of Ideology we can probably think
of are:
 | monolithic religions, including all the
organized religions |
 | political and economic theories, like communism,
capitalism, democracy |
 | dominant social philosophies, like the
patriarchy or feminism. |
Since human population exploded between 5,000 and
10,000 years ago, the human brain has, collectively, generated diverse
ideologies from all over the globe through which to organize,
motivate, and protect human beings. In some countries, religion
dominates socio-moral life; in others, a combination of political,
economic, and social philosophies dominates us. In all cases,
however, when we look at the moral edict of the religion (i.e. "The
Koran or Bible says you must act this way and so you must"), or of the
economic theory ("i.e. one vote per person assures a secure and
balanced society"), or the social philosophy (i.e. "women are
oppressed and men are privileged--there can be no security or
happiness for anyone until this basic injustice is righted"), we find
that we are basing our society-building on a fixed set of ideas. We
also find that each of these ideas become more rigid as we go along,
and each began with laden assumptions and personal or small-group
agendas.
As we've said, these ideologies don't generally stick around
unless they're useful. Furthermore, once an individual critiques an
ideology, he or she must realize that he or she is probably now
preparing to present his or her own ideology as "better," or "best."
Even further, when human beings look at their own lives and say, "Oh,
I see the ideology by which I'm living," they will probably discover
that they feel an instinct to react against the ideology, or at least
re-vision it. It is innate to the human spirit to want to be
free--free of dominance by the destructive power of nature, and also
free of dominance by ideology. Human beings want to be able to get
along with nature and societal ideas, but not be slaves to them.
In the last four decades, we have been fully realizing the root
of human identity, which is the search for freedom. Our understanding
of this, of course, began millennia ago, but it was a difficult
concept to fully realize until we had gained majority survival, longer
life-spans, the relative end of civilizations conquest-wars, the
exploration and settling of the planet as a whole. In other words,
there was a lot we had to do that needed Reactive-Survival Thinking
and Ideological loyalty. And there are still some areas of the world,
as well as within a given civilization, when strict adherence to
ideology (whether religious, economic, political or personal), just
like strict adherence to a Reactive stance, is still important and
useful.
However, much of the world is also ready to glance fully at
(and, over the next generations, to achieve) the full possibility of
human freedom. This cannot be done if we remain in a strict
Reactive-Survival stance, nor if we "buy into" one or more ideologies
and give up free thought to them. What, then?
Since World War II, a third Stage has begun to evolving in our
social thinking, one that needs to be better noticed if we are to
advance as a civilization. This third stage absorbs Reactive-Survival
Thinking ("We must never forget that we have to protect ourselves and
our children") as well as Ideological Thinking ("This idea I live my
life by has done pretty well for me so far, and I don't need to give
it up") but even while absorbing the past, this third Stage lies at
the growing edge of the future, a future based in bringing together
both scientitic and spiritual thinking, into Nature-Based Thinking.
Previous to this last century of explosive human exploration,
we simply did not understand nature or ourselves well enough to
flourish outside survival and ideology baselines. Concomitant with
world wars--wars in which we understood that economic conquest, not
military, is the only kind of conquest we'll be able to survive in the
future, given the fact that worldwide military conflict will lead to
annihilation--we were developing sciences in all human categories by
which to leap forward in human consciousness.
We are now able to do what our ancestors could not do: map
human identity.
We are able to travel in space and, soon, in time.
We are able to understand, neuro-chemically, what the human
soul looks and acts like. We are able to discover how nature
works.
Before this last hundred years of human discovery, we feared
nature (and all of us, of course, knowing the reality of death, still
fear aspects of it); or we bypassed it by creating ideologies by which
to organize ourselves in spite of it. Meanwhile, some among us
decided to study nature itself. Darwin and others studied natural
evolutionary systems, Freud and Jung and others began the study of the
brain, Einstein and others studied how the universe works. The list
is small but long of those who began to set forth the possibility of a
third stage in human social thinking. In the last decades, not only
because of obvious leaps like rocket science and aerodynamics, but
perhaps even more so, because of less public leaps in brain and
biological sciences, we are able to mapnot only the stars, but also
human nature. We have the chance not only to react to nature, nor to
bypass it, but in fact to live out human nature fully, and thus to
finally become free.
It is in this last statement that we can intuitively feel the
connection of science and spiritual life. What spiritual and
religious thinking has shown intuitively throughout our religious
development, scientific thinking has shown in the last century: that
we yearn to be free, organized beings living in concert with our
natural surroundings and, especially, with ourselves.
Nature-Based Thinking is not a single ideology but a vision of
human freedom that struggles to gain from our ideologies that which is
free truth about them, and measures whether or not it is free truth by
whether or not it fits human nature.
Perhaps one of the clearest examples of how this works comes in
how we think about boys and girls, or women and men. During our
Reactive-Survival stage of human thinking, it was crucial that we
think about sex as reproduction, for it was mainly in the
proliferation of relatively ordered human reproduction that we
survived. In Stage 2, our Ideological phase, we sought to exchange
the word "sex" for the word "gender." Our survival now ensured, our
interest moved logically, and of necessity, to how we should organize
the gender roles of women and men, boys and girls. Words like gender
roles and gender stereotypes became very important (and still are).
As we enter the new millennium, we find that we all still
remember how limited was the Reactive-Survival stage of male/female
relations, and yet we now realize how limited is the Ideological
stage. Most importantly, we intuitively feel that there is something
of even more profound importance now that a limited focus on sex
itself or on gender itself. What I am referring to here is "human
identity." We want to know who we are. We have fought the battles of
survival and the battle of the sexes. Now we sense, as if picking up
a beautiful scent, that we are truly poised for freedom, for the
embrace of our very human identity.
On this website, in my books, in my lectures, and in work that
is burgeoning all around all of us, you will find Nature-Based
Thinking. PET and MRI scans now show us how the human brain builds
identity and freedom. They give us access to visual images of the
human soul and human nature that were not possible in the two previous
stages of human thinking-development.
Books and films that unite science and religion are growing
everywhere. One of these is THE SOUL OF THE CHILD. In these sorts of
human projects, the key to the great doorways of the next century of
thinking are hidden at the point where religion and science meet.
Everywhere we look--especially if we can quiet ourselves from
incessant distraction--we hear conversations between people and in
families about what it means to be human, and to seek an identity that
does not develop because we spurn our own nature, nor because we fear
it, but instead, by fully understanding who we are and what our own
genetics and innate spirit want of us. I hope you will enjoy THE SOUL
OF THE CHILD, or my other books, like a treasure hunter who is not
only participating in a personal and cultural experience through a
book, but also discovers a new love of human nature itself.
The great change that makes possible the third stage of our
evolution in thinking is our embrace of human nature.
Reactive-Survival thinking cannot fully embrace it because it must
fear it. Ideological thinking, too, is based in fear, but instead of
fear of all of nature, it fears only certain aspects of human nature.
Nature-based Thinking is fearless. It borrows from all ideologies and
religions, finds truth in all sources, scurries between both good and
evil to discover our limits and our potential. Where
Reactive-Survival thinking is a response to life seated in the
brain-stem and lower limbic system, and Ideological thinking is a
response to life seated in the lower limbic system and limited brain
centers at the top of the brain, Nature-based thinking is a whole
brain response to the life we live, to our history, and to our future.
It is frightening to give up basing our lives mainly in
reaction and/or mainly in ideology. But it is truly freeing.
Einstein was a nature-based thinker. He was one of the freest, most
compassionate, most powerful people on earth. Mother Theresa, even
while operating from a deep religious base, was a nature-based
thinker. Power, compassion, freedom have been gained, in the past, to
a great extent, by ideologies.
Join me, if you will, in thinking of a future in which they are
gained, mainly, by human nature itself, unafraid, growing, learning
who we truly are. As we embrace this kind of thinking, we will find
our educational systems getting better. Less people will go to
prison. Fewer children will experience crimes against their person.
We will transcend nature vs. nurture debates. Businesses will
discover new opportunities. The field of medicine will expand to
encounter cures it can only now imagine. Ultimately, what we will be
doing is this: seeing directly into human nature and basing human
life on it rather than any other ideological or reactive concoction of
thoughts.
I hope this brief discussion of Nature-Based Thinking has
peaked your interest. In
THE WONDER OF BOYS and
THE WONDER OF GIRLS,
you'll find nature-based thinking and practice regarding all aspects
of raising children. In
BOYS AND
GIRLS LEARN DIFFERENTLY! you'll find this thinking applied to
human education. In many of my other books, you'll find other human
topics covered from this nature-based perspective, especially certain
aspects of adult life. In THE SOUL OF THE CHILD, you'll find me most
boldly laying out a nature-based perspective. In the future, I will
expand nature-based thinking into public debate (something I'll have
to do carefully, so that this perspective does not become yet another
limited ideology).
Feel free to email me your thoughts via this website, or
through
www.gurianinstitute.com. Thank you.
--- Michael Gurian, 2002 ---
|
|
 |