Integral Ecology

 Integral Ecology

In his work, Francis offers a theological antidote called the “integral ecology.” This antidote focuses on protecting the “wilderness” as something completely separate from human civilization and posits that “everything is connected,” unlike secular environmentalism as a whole. When viewed this way, an individual's relationship with the environment is intertwined with their relationships with other individuals and with the divine.

Ryszard Sadowski, an ecophilosopher, has noted that Pope Francis has expanded the term “ecology” to include the human, social, and cultural dimensions. The human spirit and social structures simultaneously begin to degrade as the technocratic paradigm degrades the environment. This can be most evidently found in what Francis calls “the cry of the earth and the cry of the poor." Within this theological framework, it is nearly impossible to address climate change without also addressing global poverty. 

These two issues both stem from the mere refusal to even acknowledge the interconnectedness of all life. Similarly, Lucia Silecchia observes that this creates what is known as a “vocation to protect” and moves environmental responsibility into a fundamental moral obligation.

While I have begun to analyze the technocratic paradigm (something I didn’t know existed before this), I have found myself thinking about how the “utility-first” mindset has changed my view of reality. When reading through Andrea Spina’s work, she suggests that the technocratic paradigm has begun to evolve into a “digital age” version of internal ecology, which is where our lives are increasingly being lived in the "augmented reality”. I believe that we often want more information to solve problems, but even with more information, there is a growing sense of isolation that just doesn’t seem to go away.

When I reflect on the philosophical critiques of the “subject-object” relationship, I tend to see how the technocratic mindset applies to how we as humans treat time, but also each other. We live in a society where efficiency is optimized and “presence” becomes a luxury that seems so hard to reach. Growing up, we are told to view our environment, education, and relationships as assets we must optimize to reach a future goal. This causes us to stop viewing these experiences as inherent goods that should be cherished in the present. It then becomes a spiritual goal to answer the encyclical’s call to “slow down” and to resist the culture we were raised in, which simply values us for what we can produce and consume. Now the question is whether we can see the pure, intrinsic value in a tree or a stranger, or whether we have already succumbed to the technocratic paradigm?



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sarah Chapman- Homelessness Countering the Destruction of Home by Kip Redick

Iroquois Creation Story Paper Presentation (Amanda Capper)

Kip Redick Introduction