By Barbara Baudot
To date the Circle has held three Zoom meetings. The first one held on 24 October 2020 focused on issues relating to Harmony with Nature. The second Zoom meeting took place the 23rd of January 2021. Its subject was the Common Good and Social Justice. The final reports of these gatherings are posted on the Triglav website together with videos of their morning and afternoon sessions.
The subject of the third zoom held 5 November 2022, meeting was Love as a Political Philosophy and Practice; how it may serve as the core of an effective ethical approach to stemming the deterioration of the planet’s biosphere, preserving peace, and improving societal conditions for all.
The choice of this topic is consistent with the original intent of the Circle which is to contribute to the enrichment of the international and global discourse. The word ‘Love’is increasingly finding its place in the public discourse on the current state of the world, the state of nature, and civil society whether at national or international levels. It has also been happening in meetings of the Triglav Circle. Suffice at this point to refer to the reports of our last two meetings. In particular, the report on Common Good and Social Justice which includes a discussion on ethic of love versus ethic of fear.
Thoughts on the topic
The question arises. How can an ethic of love be effectively applied to current global crises? For example: when confronting the demeaning of social freedom and conditions, the overuse and pollution of the land and the destruction life in Nature? In this Anthropogenic age human thinking has the potential to control the material conditions of the earth in terms of its capacity to sustain human life. Thus, the fate of the biosphere demands profound understanding of the forces affecting world views, motives, and actions and to use that knowledge to elicit effective popular support for actions countering trends leading to the destruction of the planet .
Love’ in the Triglav context, suggests the Ancient Greek concept of Agape, ‘universal love for humankind’ and respect for life. Consideration of the role of “agape” as the nature of Love conceptualized by Aristotle in the development of political philosophy is vital to Love in the pursuit of Life. The obvious link with the discussion on the common good is the acknowledgement of the relational nature of human life and ultimately of all life. Love then is the affective affirmation of the relatedness, not as a fate and a limitation of individual identity, but rather as the secret of harmonious and peaceful life. This fundamental relatedness of our existence implies a basic vulnerability which calls for the response of selfless love in the forms of compassion or empathy.
It is extremely is important to place the Western concept of Love among the other main lines of the world’s ethical, philosophical and spiritual traditions. In particular the rich background of Asian philosophical and spiritual traditions rooted in the understanding of the fundamental interrelationships of all beings is essential to this meeting. Eastern cultures emphasize Love as respect in human relationships, with harmony with Nature. One question is : How is Love understood in this context in contrast to Law driven ethics in western culture? The philosophical African traditions in relation to Nature must be brought also into this conversation.
A universal selfless definition of Love is articulated in I Corinthians 13. It portrays Love as unconditional kindness, generosity, patience, humility, understanding, forbearance and goodness As such Love speaks to the heart and appeals to values extending beyond immediate physical circumstances and willfulness. It benefits from inspiration and knowledge drawn from the humanities, the arts, and the sciences . It also offers important insight into the central role of love in maintaining human relationships and bringing them to fruition by responding to the need for reciprocity e.g. Love your neighbor as yourself. Such too is the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you or as inferred in the Chinese tradition: Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you. In summary, the focus on love as the virtue directed towards peace, social cohesion and the affirmation of justice and human dignity is commensurate with seeking the Common Good.
Note: the General Assembly of the World Council of Churches took place in Karlsruhe/Germany from 31 August till 8 September this year, i.e. just prior to the Triglav Zoom meeting, had “love” as the central focus of its theme: “Christ’s love moves the world to reconciliation and unity”.
Currently an ethic of fear is the most common tool used to staunch the continuous destruction of the environment. Using fear to stimulate response to the immanence and dangers of global warming is useful in the short term to motivate rectifying or slowing down increasingly harmful, environmental trends including climate change. History shows that striking the intellect with fear is most effective in times of immanent crisis threatening human life and comfort. But when the degree of danger is disputed and of a long-term nature— not evident or clearly affecting the general public—, it may not be the best strategy. How does striking fear about climate conditions and loss of biodiversity play on the human psyche today, in the light of mounting costs of energy and the need to revert to coal for energy? Is the current sounding of the alarm too much reminiscent of “The Boy who cried Wolf.”? Or irrelevant given the nature of the crisis?
Among fundamental questions addressed:
- How do we define an ethics of Love?
- Is it a globally recognized and accepted concept?
- What sources of knowledge would stimulate action based on Love?
- How practical is this concept? How would it be realized?