14 January 2007
Last Friday evening, I attended a short seminar organised
by a friend of mine that I got to know via an organisation of
counselers that I am a member of. The person presenting dealt with
the post-modern society and the need to take a step further into the
Integral level of consciousness in order to get out of the issues
today's society is facing. Well-known territory for whomever read
any of the latest books by Ken Wilber.
There was a thing that bothered me, though. The subject
matter was clear, but it was more the way of delivering that
bothered me. What it was exactly escaped me for a while until I put
it into the context of one of the cornerstones of Neuro Linguistic
Programming (NLP), namely Ecology. The guy just dealt totally
unecologically with his audience.
At the same time, I realised that the word Ecology is
somewhat vague to most people, as it is commonly used to denote all
kinds of environmental issues, from environmental pollution to Al
Gore-type of issues. In NLP, Ecology is used quite differently, as I
will explain shortly. So here is a translation of something I had
written for the book on Integral Counseling that I am writing to
make it more clear what the word Ecology means to me.
The classic definition of Ecology is the one we know from
Biology and the environmental movement. Here, Ecology is part of
Biology that studies the relstionships between the various species
of plants and animals and their environment. A step further, Ecology
is explained as anything that has to do with the (biological)
environment and specifically with the preservation of it. Ecological
agriculture and ecological shops are an example of this definition.
Even further, the means of production of food, the transport of it
and the social situation of farmers are made part of ecology. All in
all, this mainly deals with the biosphere, being the whole of living
creatures and their environment.
In NLP, the definition of Ecology is somewhat different,
for it is not only aimed at the biosphere, but at the human being as
a whole: acting ecologically involves avoiding harming yourself or
others or the environment in which you function. This is what needs
to be kept in mind in anything you do and is also where the
presentor of last Friday's session went wrong. You need to ask
yourself questions such as, “What is the positive intention of my
acts?”, “What are possible side-effects?”, “Is the well-being of
others helped by what I am doing?”, “What are the ethical
implications?”. In this definition, Ecology comes down to having
respect for the other as a human being and keeping in mind the needs
of both yourself and the other and the environment you function in.
A third, and most encompassing definition of Ecology goes
beyond these two and not only sees man as part of the biosphere, viz.
living being among living beings, but also as part of the noosphere,
meaning that we are also with our minds part of a shared whole
of interactive minds. This is what a movement called Deep Ecology
says. But even beyond this, we are also part of the Theosphere, viz.
the spiritual sphere of influence that we are all part of. We all
have spirits that are part of Spirit, being the ground and goal of
life. Being part of something automatically means that you have
influence on it. Therefore, Ecology should be extended to encompass
also these parts of reality and we should
Note, by the way, that these realities are organised in a way in which higher realities transcend and include lower realities, i.e. they are holonically organised. The first definition dealt with the biosphere, which is all living beings. The biosphere includes the geosphere, which is all matter on earth. The biosphere itself is part of the noosphere, which contains all cognitive beings and their cognition. The noosphere in turn is included by the Theosphere, which contains everything created by Spirit. Spirit includes all aspects of life. As long as Spirit is honored in everything we do, we can say we act ecologically at all levels of existence.