THE ENVIRONMENT AL PHILOSOPHY OF CHARLES BIRCH. SIMON WINTER MASTER OF SCIENCE AND SOCIETY (HONOURS) 1993 Table of Contents Page Acknowledgements I Introduction 1 Bibliography of L. Charles Birch 15 Literature Review 26 Chapter 1. The Demise of the Mechanistic Model 36 Chapter 2. The Mind of Matter 49 Chapter 3. An Ethic of Intrinsic Value 62 Chapter 4. The Immanence of God 83 Chapter 5. A New Natural Theology 97 Chapter 6. An Ecological Model 119 Chapter 7. The Conclusion 132 References 136 Acknowledgments I would like to acknowledge the generous assistance given to me by my two supervisors, Dr Bruce Kaye and Assoc. Professor David Oldroyd. They have both provided valuable assistance throughout this project. The major burden of supervising my work, however, has fallen to Bruce Kaye and I am indebted to him for his patience, encouragement and wisdom. I would also like to thank Charles Birch for assisting me with his bibliography and for some helpful discussions at the beginning of the project. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the support of my wife, Christine, who provided me with the opportunity and the love to see this project to completion. Introduction The problems of global management are all connected. You can no longer do only one thing. Resource shortages, unemployment, inflation, environmental deterioration, population explosion and even crime are all interconnected. This network of problems won't be solved by any one expert or any number of experts. It is one problem and has to be tackled as one. Charles Birch, On Purpose. Charles Birch argues that the universe is more akin to a life than a machine. This concise statement is the cornerstone of his environmental philosophy. It is revolutionary in its implications, not only for ecology, but also for ethics, politics and theology. His ecological model of the universe has been called "a new way of thinking for the new millennium". He is an Australian who is both a scientist and a Christian theologian. He has risen to considerable prominence in both the Club of Rome and the World Council of Churches. He is scathingly critical, not only of the traditional Christian Church and mechanistic science, but also of Western social and political institutions. He predicts an eco-catastrophe with dire consequences unless we redefine how we interpret human progress. Birch says, Indeed scientists say we have another 30 to 40 years in which to turn the situation around. If we don't do that, the environmental degradation and resource depletion will be in an unbelievably irretrievable tail spin (Birch, 1991, p. 73). I For all this, Charles Birch remains a man of faith and of hope. His ecological writings unceasingly point toward a solution. The catastrophe can be avoided if we learn to view living entities as subjects and not mere objects. Then, Birch argues, we can develop an ethic of intrinsic value for all life that may preserve what remains of our world. The Purpose of this Study. The broad purpose of this study is to investigate the environmental philosophy of Charles Birch. It is impossible to separate Birch's ecology from his religious thought because the two coalesce entirely for Birch in the philosophical tradition to which Birch belongs namely Process philosophy. The importance of Birch's thought and the rationale for studying this philosopher will be discussed, in detail, later in this section, however, it is important to note that the scope of this study encompasses a somewhat wider investigation than Birch's published works alone. The thesis will also consider the intellectual antecedents of Birch's philosophy. This is important for a number of reasons. First, an examination of Birch's philosophy clearly indicates his indebtedness to Process philosophers such as Alfred North Whitehead, Charles Hartshorne and John Cobb. These philosophers provided Birch with the philosophical argument that is the foundation for the ecology that he postulates. All of Birch's philosophical publications are intended for an audience untrained in philosophical dialectic. There is a simple yet significant reason for this. Birch has a message for all people. Indeed, part of his argument is that a global crisis requires a global response. Birch's formal philosophical argument is therefore less developed than would be ideal for a rigorous critique of his philosophical thought. That is not to say 2 that critical analysis of Birch's philosophy is unwarranted. A critique of the work of these important antecedent philosophers, therefore, needs to be included to test the validity of the arguments at the heart of Birch's philosophy. Secondly, it is a serious mistake to assume that Process philosophy began with Alfred North Whitehead. In the history of ideas there are links between the Process metaphysics of Whitehead and philosophers such as William James, C.S. Pierce, Hegel, Kant and Plato. Although Whitehead, himself, gave little indication of those philosophical traditions that provided the foundation for the development of his metaphysics, they are clearly evident throughout his writing. For this reason it is very important to place Birch's philosophy in its historical context, and to analyse the emergence of philosophy, and the contribution of early Process thinkers to environmental philosophy. Thirdly, it is also vital to evaluate Birch's panentheistic concept of God. This concept is central to Birch's thought and conflicts with traditional Christian belief. A Note on the Reference Material. Birch's bibliography reveals a wealth of source documentation. There are, however, essentially three documents which encompass the broad contours of Birch's diverse views. These documents are the books, The Liberation of Life: From the Cell to the Community, written with John Cobb, On Purpose, and the most recent book, Regaining Compassion for Humanity and Nature. The book, On Purpose has been selected as the most significant for this dissertation and will be referred to most frequently of all the available source documents. On Purpose clearly represents the fullest exposition of Birch's philosophical thought. Regaining Compassion for Humanity and Nature does not significantly advance the views already present in On Purpose and there are some obvious limitations to giving prominence to The Liberation ofLife: From the Cell to the 3 Community as it is a collaborative project. Notwithstanding the emphasis placed on On Purpose, all relevant material has been consulted and critiqued as necessary. A Brief Biographical Synopsis. Louis Charles Birch was born on the 8th February 1918, in Melbourne. After attending Scotch College he went to the University of Melbourne where he earned a Bachelor of Agricultural Science in 1939. He then attended the University of Adelaide where he completed a Master of Science degree in 1941. He worked in the Waite Agricultural Research Institute at the University of Adelaide from 1939-1946 after which he earned two CSIRO travelling Studentships, firstly at the University of Chicago in 1946 and then at Oxford University in 1947. On returning to Adelaide in 1948 Birch was awarded a Doctor of Science degree. His long tenure at the University of Sydney began in 1948, firstly as a Senior Lecturer in Z.Oology, then as a Reader in Z.Oology. In 1958, Birch became the Challis Professor of Biology, a post which he held until 1983, when he was made Emeritus Professor. During his tenure at the University of Sydney, Birch held numerous other academic posts. These include Senior Fulbright Research Fellow, Columbia University (1953), Visiting Professor of Biology, University of Sao Paulo (1955), Visiting Professor of Z.Oology, University of Minnesota (1957) and Visiting Professor of Genetics, University of California at Berkeley (1960). From an early age Charles Birch had a passion for Biology and it was certain that he would pursue a career in this field. However, in his adolescent years another passion would also occupy his attention; the search for meaning in his own life. Birch thought he had found this meaning when, as an undergraduate at the University of 4 Melbourne, he became a Christian with, as he describes it, "a fundamentalist faith". These two passions, however, never sat comfortably together. Whilst these passions resided in the same house, it was a house divided against itself. First, the science of biology, with its apparent mechanistic image of reality, had little to say about ultimate meaning and purpose in life. Secondly, there were other forms of Christian experience that were not fundamentalist and which explained God's relationship to the world and the world's relationship to God in a way that was more truthful to the laws of nature which Birch had learnt as a biologist. The resolution to this house divided came in 1946, when Birch was at the University of Chicago on his CSIRO Studentship. Birch was attached to the Department of Zoology studying insect physiology. However, whilst fulfilling his responsibilities in the Department of Zoology, he divided his time across the campus at the Divinity School, where he was reintroduced to the Process philosophy of Whitehead. Birch had been first introduced to the writings of Alfred North Whitehead whilst a member of the Student Christian Movement at the University of Melbourne. It was also at Chicago that he met Charles Hartshorne, who was Professor of Philosophy and a close friend of Whitehead. From Hartshorne, Birch learnt about a new form of natural theology in which God was not a divine manipulator, but instead, an integral and immanent part of nature. These influences forever altered Birch's life, "I now felt I was on a road I would never leave". Almost fifty years later, the fruit of that transformation is evident in four books and over twenty papers on the subject of global ecology.