A New Story for our Field

By Mark Skelding, Psychotherapist, facilitator M. Ed (Social Ecology)

The conversation on the CPA-NA email listerv is always rich. Sometimes it feels like it lifts into another dimension altogether. Various theoretical, geographical and spiritual spaces between us seem to crackle with potential: familiar elements move around each other; and, together, we stare into the vastness of the universe as if for the first time. In that moment, the universe meets our gaze and whispers “Are you ready?”.

Such a moment happened following an email drawing our attention to the American Geophysical Union’s (AGU) ejection of two scientists from their conference, the biggest event of its kind on Earth. NASA climate scientist Peter Kalmus tweeted that around 25,000 people were involved with the event where “Talks and posters detail the breaking down of our Earth in real time. They are terrifying.” He and ecologist Rose Abramoff “stepped outside extremely strong norms and urged scientists to take a stand” as a plenary event was about to start. 

Unscheduled, the pair took a banner onto the empty stage and called on attenders to take their information “Out of the Lab and Into the Streets”. They were evicted from the stage, ejected from the conference and told that if they returned organizers would view them as trespassers and call the police.

“How strange that we might be in trouble for failing to speak out when a client is in danger of smashing up an ex-partner’s car or damaging their house in a terrifying attack, yet we are unsure how to question actions that are known to exploit vulnerable communities, destroy whole bioregions, and push species towards mass extinction. ”

Whilst they broke with accustomed attendee behavior, their call was in line with what IPCC scientists and communicators have long been asking of scientific institutions and the wider community. The AGU is certainly aware of this. It seems as though messengers are being punished for reminding the conference (and the world) that our current predicament debunks notions of “business as usual,” and challenges personal and institutional identity.

Those on the CPA-NA listserv expressed dismay and concern at this summary treatment of highly-qualified persons suggesting that the terrifying detail of their science calls for a co-ordinated public response from their profession. This led to questions and uncertainty about the assumptions and norms embedded in our own profession, and how these may shape our practice in ways which are no longer best suited to the context of our times.

For example, we operate within a socio-economic system that assumes that infinite growth is possible. We have allowed corporate structures to operate with similar freedoms to those of private citizens and to pursue almost any objective so long as profit is returned to shareholders. These same shareholders bear no responsibility for what is done in their name, even though the evidence is clear that this process is destroying our planetary home and undermining the care and cohesion within our communities - and doing so primarily because there are no social or legal structures or boundaries to question or prevent this.

If we were to question the sanity or wisdom of our clients engaging with the system we could - rightly - be accused of having an agenda. On the other hand, if we learn that a client is intent - or even in danger - of harming themselves or another, or of extreme or criminal acts that will do major damage, we are obliged to report it in an effort to prevent this happening. 

If we fail to do so we are open to professional censure, social outrage and legal retribution. And, within the relationship itself, attending to our client’s desire to do such harm to others - and the attendant harm it will also do to themselves - is clearly a rich area for reflection, exploration and potential healing.

How strange that we might be in trouble for failing to speak out when a client is in danger of smashing up an ex-partner's car or damaging their house in a terrifying attack, yet we are unsure how to question actions that are known to exploit vulnerable communities, destroy whole bioregions, and push species towards mass extinction. There are emerging studies suggesting that the macro-situation affects the well-being of individuals within it, causing stress responses which feedback upon the larger system in a perpetual cycle.  Climate anxiety and eco-inequity are both  elements and symptoms.

“An emergent “new story” can build on previous understanding in ways that affirm the visceral experience that so many people have, of our world as an intelligent system”

As demand for psychological support increases significantly, these complexities are concerning. They arise primarily because our profession remains constrained by a narrative of human place, purpose and potential that is more rooted in Victorian values, science and worldview than most of us like to think. To be fair, this is the same narrative that we are led to think shapes our socio-economic system, a reductive parody of Darwinism represented by the amoral aphorism "survival of the fittest". 

This pithy throwaway subtly slides over a raft of inconvenient and very uncomfortable truths involving colonization, multiple forms of “othering” and unquestioning hegemonies of power. The neoliberal wave of the 70s and 80s took Milton Friedman’s emotionally disengaged economic approach to extreme heights. The award-winning docu-movie, The Corporation, found that global corporations could be diagnosed as sociopathic, if analyzed with the DSM. . (The sequel 2 years ago suggested that they have become  fully psychopathic….).

There is a  growing reality gap between the ideas and concepts of the psychological mainstream and the living world we encounter. To address this,  it would be valuable to reconsider the Victorian crucible framing our work, and our identities as objective communicators and neutral observers. The power dynamics largely rest on a shaky tower of cards, held in place by the desire of both parties to achieve a place of greater wholeness and healing within a fairly  unquestioned frame.

One could compare this to the way that medieval cosmologists had to come up with increasingly complex models to demonstrate how what they were observing matched a dominant world-view that placed Earth (and especially Man) at the center of the Universe. This elaborate geometry had a certain pleasing wholeness, but in reality became too awkward to be of further service. 

Perhaps the broad frame of psychology is in danger of becoming similarly constrained? Might it make sense, given suggestions from biology, quantum physics, neuroscience and more, to treat the dynamic spectrum of sentience as if it is somehow broader than the human psychological frame? 

In so many ways, including psychological thinking, we recognise that patterns repeat and reform at different levels and with different intensities and outcomes. We recognise visible light or audible sound as a particular range of a larger spectrum and we accept that other species respond to stimulus apparently outside our human range. Latterly, science suggests that information on these other frequencies do impact us, and, most often, we filter them out or explain them away.

“We should not approach the prevalence of climate anxiety primarily as a problem. It’s certainly uncomfortable and frightening, but surely it is also feedback. ”

What if self-reflective consciousness were another example of human experience that exists on a much wider spectrum? This would require a new story about human being-ness. I suspect that a more inclusive, more dynamic and more enlivening story can be developed that barely changes the remarkable healing processes and approaches that we have developed. Trauma, developmental, attachment and transference theories, for example, can expand into a more comprehensive psychosphere fairly  easily  

An emergent “new story” can build on previous understanding in ways that affirm the visceral experience that so many people have, of our world as an intelligent system. Perhaps sentience (albeit on a much larger scale) can be understood as playing an important role in the homeostasis of our planet? 

From this perspective, we should not approach the prevalence of climate anxiety primarily as a problem. It’s certainly uncomfortable and frightening, but surely it is also feedback. When we include this dimension within our work we are acknowledging that individuals are designed to pick up information non-verbally about the well-being of the wider system around them - earth transference, perhaps? 

Our indigenous forebears took this as a matter of fact, and a significant part of cultural glue arose from affirming an individual's personal access to the big picture, while weaving it together with others from the community to build common understanding and shared approachIn our current context, perhaps there are things we can learn from our cultural forebears and elders.

In the remarkable book, Radical Hope , Jonathan Lear examines how the Crow nation navigated a period when he socio-cultural anchors upon which their purpose, meaning and values rested had been nullified and emptied of relevance and meaning. Perhaps our European ancestors had a similar experience when their medieval worldview was overtaken by history, technology and simple observation. The remarkable Crow leader, Alaxchíia Ahú (known as “Plenty Coups”) initiated a policy that sought to cooperate with the changing circumstances, surrendering familiar cultural anchors without letting go of the qualities associated with them.

Increasingly we in the dominant culture of the North find ourselves in the same position. Our systems rely on a worldview that our observation and direct experience challenges. Even without the feedback from climate change, there is no way that we can globally consume beyond planetary capacity year on year.  The ways in which we measure success, value and purpose are unsustainable, unconvincing, and perpetuate the predicament. The consequences of ongoing denial and avoidance are greater  distress and dispossession for more communities,, an increase in social, ecological and psychological instability, and a decrease in the very qualities and outcomes that the worldview purports to represent.

The Medieval response to changed circumstances unleashed a wave of pain and exploitation that continues to reverberate. Today’s challenge involves how to navigate an even greater transition without repeating such pain and dislocation - this time with far more powerful technology.

Along with  artists, philosophers and spiritual leaders, psychology can offer sufficient breadth to midwife this context into the collective.The growing numbers of climate anxiety and eco-grief surely speak to the yearning need for such a new story.  We can do this without breaking ethical or legal constraints. 

But I'm sure we can't do it without working together to recognise, question and gently deconstruct our assumptions and norms.  Without a commitment to such a shared endeavor, the bodycount will continue to rise. But if we approach this challenge  together in a spirit of trust, compassion and goodwill, it may be liberating, enlivening, inspirational and - even - fun.