Page 108 - ECOlogic Book

That said, we must also admit to their intrinsic value, apart from what they
can do for us. When Kellert speaks of “the human experience of the trout in
its stream, the eagle soaring on high, the grizzly bear in its wilderness, all
feed(ing) our craving for discovery, adventure and accomplishment,” 129
we wonder if we are worthy of these gifts. A sensitivity to Otherness
challenges us to know as well that the eagle soars for its own purposes; the
trout has its own motivations for leaping.

Other Humans
One might well ask the question, “How can we be sensitive to the Otherness
of animals when we can scarcely do so with other humans, whose DNA is so
like our own? Walter Christie, assistant chief of psychiatry at the Maine
medical Center, has observed that the illusion of separateness we create in
order to utter the words, “I am” is part of our problem in the modern world.

For centuries we justified our abuse of animals with the belief that they feel
no pain, no loneliness. Now we have to revise that view. Likewise, we
humans have demonized and dehumanized each other, and continue to do
so. Dehumanization only speaks to our contempt for animals. If a human
can be reduced to the status of a “mere animal,” we do not have to deal
with him or her on human terms. We are, free, by the assumptions of the
old paradigm, to exploit, enslave, abuse, and torture them, just as we have
felt justified in doing so to animals.

Contemporary psychology calls into question the effectiveness of
confrontation and demonization in our efforts to bring about change in our
economic and political systems. Whitley Striber notes that the word demon
is derived from the Greek Daemon, which is roughly synonymous with soul.
“The Daemon,” he says, “was part of person that could gain knowledge and
become transformed.” 130

Perhaps if I remember this when I’m tempted to demonize a perceived
enemy, I might be able to be in a dialogue with them. Only when we can
encounter ourselves in the Other can there be hope for transforming
dialogue. As long as we keep the other the prisoner of our image, label, or
stereotype, such dialogue remains impossibility.

Robert Thurman speaks of an “engaged Buddhism” in which there is no us,
no them, only an awareness of the interdependence of all, which he calls

129 IBID>

130 Striber, Whitley, Transformation (Avon Books, N.Y., 1988).

108