Thursday, February 5, 2009
The Epiphany in Nature
I was interested in Kohak's idea that some cultures, for instance hunter-gatherer tribes, believe that nature is divine. His idea of the "Epiphany" when viewing nature reminded me a lot of Mircea Eliade, a Romanian religious historian and philospher. Eliade also believed that God could be expierenced in a nature. An example, would be when a hiker climbs to the top of mountian and sees the valleys and clouds below. This awe that would be expierenced by the hiker is similiar to that of Kohak's "epiphany" theory. I believe that if more people expierenced nature for its spiritual elements then they would be more connected and less likely to destory it. In modern western societies a lot of "leisure" activies consists of playing video games or being on the computer. If more individuals would turn away from technology for a little bit each day, I believe they would have a deeper connection with nature. This could be as simple as taking a walk through your nighborhood. The simple enjoyment of the sound of a song bird could be seen as a spiritual connection with nature that would help the indiviudal live a more ecofriendly life.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Erica,
ReplyDeleteNice connection. Yes, Eliade's account of archaic societies, especially in The Sacred and the Profane, is quite close to Kohak's. I am certain that Kohak was very much influenced by Eliade throughout The Green Halo.
I once read a book called Paper or Plastic?, which compared the value placed on the preservation of nature and natural resources in America, with that in other parts of the world. Very eye opening. It seems that Americans are less considerate of nature for the very fact you mentioned: they allow themselves to be detached. I Sweden, for example, people are much more concerned with the preservation of greenspace and forests than in America, and for their intrinsic value, to boot. The Swedes want forests to have forests. True, outdoor activities, such as hikeing, are very popular there, so perhaps they do take a anthropocentric approach. Then again, perhaps it is the very fact that these outdoor activities are so popular that they are more connected, more in tune with the needs of the natural world around them and, therefore, see the need to preserve it.
ReplyDeleteI think the biggest problem with our consumer society is the fact that we are so detached, so vastly removed from nature, that we often fail to see the work that goes into, the resources used, and the consequences of our consumerism. We take so much for granted simply because there is so much we don't think about. Someone in class made an excellent statement that, in America, you wear the same outfit two days in a row and you're seen as gross and unclean. Honestly, how many people can get away with wearing the same clothes two days in the same week? In other places in the world, having an outfit for every day of the week is considered an extravagance. In some places, the thought of scraping your plate into the trash after dinner, of throwing away leftovers, is simply unthinkable. Why would you throw food away?
It's said that you appreciate something more when you work for it, and I think the reason we are perpetually dissatisfied consumers is the very fact that we don't work for it. True, we work for the money to go and buy it, but if we truly appreciated how much work went into production and distribution, we would have a greater appreciation for our goods. Problem is, our market is such that we don't know the person who grew the flax, who processed it, who dyed and wove the linen. We don't know the person who designed the pattern and made the shirt (and who was paid almost nothing for their labor, because Walmart insists on low prices)and we don't give a second thought about it, when we pay ten bucks for it. There are so many steps that go overlooked and unappreciated. I'm sure these things would change even if we simply sewed our own clothes (never mind growing the cotton, spinning, dying and weaving it).