A sample entry from the Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature (London & New York: Continuum, 2005) Edited by Bron Taylor © 2005 All Rights Reserved Social Ecology 1569 to focus attention on environmental ethics, defends a Responses to Postmodern Deconstruction. Washington, “harder” realism regarding nature. While acknowledging D.C.: Island Press, 1995. that “All human knowing colours whatever people see, Williams, Raymond. “Ideas of Nature.” In Problems in through our percepts and concepts” (1997: 38), Rolston Materialism and Culture. London: Verso, 1980. believes that we can still know nature “out there” in a See also: Callicott, J. Baird; Environmental Ethics; Rolston (relatively and locally) accurate manner. Thus, comment- III, Holmes; Wilderness Religion. ing on Neil Evernden’s description of nature as “a cat- egory, a conceptual container” (Evernden 1992: 89), Rolston contends that we invent the category nature and Social Ecology put things into it because “there is a realm out there, labeled nature, into which things have been put before Social ecology is a contemporary social theory that we arrive” (Rolston 1997: 42). The word “nature” thus investigates the interrelationship between social institu- emerged in response to the need for a “container” to tions and the natural world. A major project of social eco- match the non-human “forces and processes” that exist logical analysis has been its attempt to demonstrate that prior to and apart from human intervention. Even if local, regional and global ecological problems are created terms like “nature” are not universal, they may still have by authoritarian, hierarchical and exploitative social real referents, which we can come to know in a mean- institutions. As a political ecology, social ecology has been ingful way. concerned with promoting social changes that could end For many religious thinkers and practitioners, nature exploitation and domination within human society and has objective reality because it reflects divine powers and establish an ecologically sound relationship between processes. To believe that creation has value or meaning humanity and the natural world. only as a result of human activities, in such religious per- Philosophically, social ecology has adopted a holistic spective, is thought to entail arrogance about the power and dialectical position, while its politics have tended and significance of humans in relation not only to nature toward communitarianism, decentralism, anarchism and but also to transcendent or sacred dimensions of life. Thus libertarian socialism. Its dialectical roots can be found in for the study of religion and nature, strong versions of the tradition of Hegel, Marx and critical social theory, social constructionism might need correction not only while its holistic and organicist dimension is in the tradi- from naturalistic perspectives but also from theological tion of thinkers such as Elisée Reclus and Lewis Mumford. ones. The goal might be to appreciate but not over- Political theorist Murray Bookchin is its best-known con- estimate the significance of human symbolic and dis- temporary proponent. Although some have used the term cursive activity in regard to nature. generically to describe all leftist political ecology, and there is also a rather eclectic interdisciplinary academic Anna Peterson field of social ecology, the present discussion focuses on social ecology as a political ecology with a libertarian and Further Reading communitarian social perspective. Berger, Peter and Thomas Luckmann. The Social Construc- Social ecology has gained widest recognition through tion of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Know- the writings of Bookchin. Although Bookchin once ledge. New York: Doubleday/Anchor Books, 1966. expressed sympathy with various forms of spirituality, he Evernden, Neil. The Social Creation of Nature. Baltimore and his collaborator Janet Biehl have over the past decade and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992. developed a strongly anti-spiritual and anti-religious posi- Haraway, Donna J. Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The tion. On the other hand, some commentators (such as Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge, 1991. David Watson, Joel Kovel, and John Clark) have argued Moran, Emilio. “Nurturing the Forest: Strategies of Native that various forms of ecological spirituality are not only Amazonians.” In Roy Ellen and Katsuyoshi Fukui, eds. compatible with the values of social ecology, but also can Redefining Nature: Ecology, Culture, and Domestica- make an important contribution to its further theoretical tion. Oxford and Washington: Berg, 1996. development. Peterson, Anna L. “Environmental Ethics and the Social In his earlier work, Bookchin emphasized the ecological Construction of Nature.” Environmental Ethics 21:4 dimensions of many spiritual and religious traditions. He (Winter 1999), 339–57. praised the nondualistic worldview of tribal societies (and Rolston, Holmes III. “Nature for Real: Is Nature a Social specifically their concept of the “way”) for uniting custom, Construct?” In Timothy Chappell, ed. The Philosophy morality, sensibility and nature. He suggested that ani- of the Environment. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University mistic imagination offered modern society an outlook that Press, 1997. is not only complementary to that of science but also more Soper, Kate. What is Nature? Cambridge: Blackwell, 1995. “organic” than the latter, and looked forward to a “new Soulé, Michael and Gary Lease, eds. Reinventing Nature? animism” based on a respect for and symbiotic relation- 1570 Social Ecology ship with other living beings. He also praised the liber- Despite the campaign by Bookchin and Biehl against tarian, communitarian and ecological values of various spirituality and religion, a number of theorists who are radical Christian sects from the Middle Ages and early sympathetic to social ecology as a general perspective modern periods. And he wrote of a telos and a “latent have argued that it is compatible with certain spiritual and subjectivity” in substance that led it to develop in the dir- religious traditions. Joel Kovel, for example, argues that ection of mind and intellect, concepts that from the stand- social ecology should pay attention to what can be learned point of mainstream philosophy have obvious connections from mysticism, which he holds to be in touch with a with idealist metaphysics and spirituality. primary, pre-linguistic relationship to nature that is Beginning in 1987, Bookchin began to attack what he unavailable through ordinary consciousness. Kovel rejects saw as irrationalist, anti-human, regressive tendencies in what he sees as an overly simplistic ecological outlook the Deep Ecology movement. His criticism soon broadened that conceives of the relationship between nature and into a general indictment of what he typified as “mystical” humanity purely in terms of “unity in diversity.” He con- and “spiritual” ecology. For example, he characterized tends that such an outlook, which has been advocated by ecofeminist Goddess spirituality as an attempt to depict Bookchin, overlooks the irreducible negativity within women as naturally superior to men and to replace male human experience and the necessary tension between chauvinism with female chauvinism. In addition, he con- humanity and the larger natural world. Kovel dis- demned “mystical ecologists” for a multitude of evils, tinguishes between an ego that is associated with domin- including rejecting political activity, fostering passivity ation of the other, rationalization of experience, and and fatalism, promoting neo-Malthusianism, encouraging dualistic splitting of the self, and spirit, which refers to the anti-immigrant feelings, exalting irrationality, opposing individual’s experience of relatedness to larger and deeper civilization and technology, devaluing humanity, and realities, including the whole of humanity and the whole believing in an illusory “pristine” nature unaffected by of nature. The concept of spirit, according to Kovel’s for- human beings. mulation, expresses a negation of the dominance of the Some have questioned the objectivity of such attacks. It ego and connects the problem of human emancipation to has been pointed out that in dismissing ecological thinker the question of humanity’s relationship to larger realms of Thomas Berry as “misanthropic,” Bookchin cites Berry’s being. In Kovel’s view, an awareness of this connection reference to humanity as a “demonic presence” while fail- was at the core of the insights of Lao Tzu, Jesus and ing to note that this depiction of human destructiveness Gandhi. was part of a larger discussion recognizing humanity’s In making a case for a “deep social ecology,” David capacities for joy, wonder, and celebration of the universe. Watson argues that the spirituality of many tribal societies Boookchin’s use of such selective quotation and the kind has embodied a view of reality that is more social and of sweeping generalities mentioned above have led critics more ecological than that of civilization. Watson contends to charge that his attacks on spirituality and religious that social ecology must pay more careful attention to the thought are without scholarly merit. voice of nature as expressed in the myths, rituals and Bookchin’s collaborator Janet Biehl is also a harsh critic shamanistic practices of tribal peoples. He sees tribal spir- of spiritual and religious thought. Biehl contends that the- ituality as an integral part of the egalitarian, cooperative istic spirituality