 |
|
Michael Gurian is a psychotherapist, educator and author of seven books including the critically acclaimed national bestsellers:
and
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
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 , for instance, it is identified as "brain-based theory," and in 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 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 ---
|
|
 |
