Rewilding Philosophy part IV
In simple terms: a philosophy is a chosen, reflected upon, and conscious worldview.
Our worldview is something we inherit during our upbringing from our parents, friends, and society at large. It shapes how we think about the world, what is right and wrong, good and bad, what is true, what the future should be like, how we come to know the world, and what we think our role is in the world. Worldviews refer to the overarching, collectively shared, ‘big stories’ through which humans make sense of their experience and world. As our worldviews define what is possible, valuable, and expected, they shape our lives and world to a great extent. In the words of cultural historian Richard Tarnas: “worldviews create worlds.”
Our worldview acts as a lens through which we perceive and interact with the world. It serves as the blueprint that shapes not only our thoughts but also the actions we take and the systems we construct. Our economies and infrastructures are deeply intertwined with the worldview we hold.
Our worldviews are often considered to be both the root causes of humanity’s crisis and the deep leverage point for addressing it.
In my philosophical journey, I encountered two contrasting worldviews: the mechanistic worldview, characterized by rationalism, reductionism, empiricism, dualism, and determinism, and the relational philosophy, which emphasizes interconnectedness and complexity. The latter acknowledges that the truth of our world lies in the interrelations and dynamics among its parts. The former currently dominates our Western industrialized world.
As the name gives away, the main idea of a mechanistic worldview is that the world functions as a machine. We assume that we can look at one part of the world, like global warming, and isolate the sources of it without looking at the whole. We literally have been approaching global warming — for the most part — like we are reassembling a car in which the combustion engine is broken. We think that’s the best way to find solutions.
The mechanistic worldview has the following main implications:
The idea is that humans are able to control nature. Because we can understand it like a machine, we assume we can control it. Because of that, we believe that we can control global warming and, therefore, don’t need to worry. The idea that humans are separate and above nature. Nature becomes an object we can exploit: “Nature is there only to fulfill our needs.” Because of this assumption, we have over-exploited resources, and hundreds of species go extinct daily. The idea that the whole is the sum of its parts, making life, like everything else, ultimately no more than mechanical particles in motion. Humans become meat suits for well-functioning machines. The mechanistic worldview leaves life meaningless for many of us: if it’s nothing but a machine and bio-physical-chemical coincidence, what’s worth pursuing anyway? Already, Nietzsche predicted that when “god is dead,” we fall into nihilism. In short, the mechanistic worldview is characterized by rationalism, reductionism, empiricism, dualism, and determinism.
It hinders sustainable development and is one of the leading causes of unsustainable practices. It also poorly represents reality. We now know that the world is a complex system and not a machine, that we are nature, that it’s impossible to control nature, that Newtonian physics is insufficient to understand the world, and instead, that quantum physics makes the world a lot weirder than we think.
Because our worldviews are so fundamental to everything, individually and collectively examining our worldviews and finding a philosophy - that more adequately represents reality and is more enlivening - offers potent pathways forward. Such as relational philosophies, which emphasize interconnectedness and complexity and acknowledge that the truth of our world lies in the interrelations and dynamics among its parts.
Having a worldview is inevitable. Having a philosophy is a choice. Ideally, a philosophy offers practical ethical guidance for navigating life’s complexities so as to inform moral decision-making, helping us confront and address ethical dilemmas effectively.
We want to consciously choose a philosophy to live by based on the best available knowledge. This includes empirical data and reasoning-based knowledge (science), as well as contemplative knowledge (insight), intuitive knowledge derived from cumulative experiences (intuition), instrumental knowledge (how to do things), ethical knowledge (values, beliefs), and aesthetic knowledge (experiences that define beauty).
At its core, the quest of finding a philosophy to live by is a transformative journey. Discovering a new philosophy demands dedication and effort. It necessitates breaking free from the constraints of the reductive materialist worldview and constructing a coherent, holistic philosophy. This process is ongoing and often involves synthesizing elements from various theoretical systems. Philosophy, in this context, transcends abstract contemplation; it becomes a transformative practice guiding us toward wiser ways of understanding, being, and acting within the Anthropocene’s complexities.
However, developing a philosophy is not enough; the real challenge lies in translating it into daily practice. This demanding task entails reshaping our lives, often involving discomfort and resistance. Societal structures may not always align with our chosen philosophy, making the journey even more demanding. That’s why we need a practice.