Responding to Climate Change is Total Cultural Change and a Call for A New Ethics

A revision from previous article

Fr. Damianus Abun, SVD, MBA, Ph.D

Introduction

Growing concern on the environment is increasing because the world is changing. Thomas L. Friedman (2006) said that the world is getting hot, flat and crowded. The world is flat because of the technology. Technological revolution levels the global economic playing field and enables many people around the world to compete, connect and collaborate. Global/Asian cooperation makes it possible that Asian countries do not need Visa to travel to other Asian countries for a certain period or number of days. This is good not only for travels but also for economy. The market is global not limited to domestic market. There is free flow of goods without barriers or fewer tariffs. The needs of one country can be supplied by other countries. We do not need to cry for lack of supply. That’s good news. The world is also crowded because of the world population is growing. According to UN’s projection, that by 2053, there will be nine billion people on the planet. The United Nations Populations Divisions predicted that there will be an increase of 2, 5 billion over the next 43 years passing from the current 6,7 billion to 9,2 billion in 2050 ((http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/index.htm). Crowded world make it worse to live when the world is hot because our planet is experiencing a warming trend which is over and above natural and normal variations-that is almost certainly due to human activities associated with large scale of mining and manufacturing. These developments concern us all. Crowded world and the hot world are related, one really affects the other. Crowded world could cause a problem of supply and demand. The world resources are limited while the demand keeps on increasing. Consequently there will be time that the natural resources will run out. Before things happen, the time to act is now. The solution is in our hands. Legal solutions are necessary but it may not answer the problem because the cause of the problem is cultural and ethical. Thus it needs cultural and ethical overhaul to respond to climate change. .        
 

In view of the increasing population, energy shifts, resource consumption and pollution, the creation of a sustainable world will need massive change in human attitudes and actions, in fact a ‘‘new ethic’’ for humankind. In short, it is a cultural change; a change of views and behavior, a conversion. Changing views means people need to see environment in new way which is ethical way. Ethical perception or views on the environment must be developed so that new ethical behavior in dealing with the environment is followed. This will call a collective and individual change.  

 

UN’s climate change report, based on input from some 1,500 scientists from around the world, contains data about the alarming effect that human-caused carbon emissions are having upon our planet. The chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says that the report “should jolt people into action.” The time is now not later ((http://www.unep.org/climatechange/).

 

People cannot just ignore with what is happening with the environment. Issues on climate change and global warming is a call for alarm reminding the world to change way of life, or change of culture. The 21st century emerged with a gradually increasing public awareness that the world was entering a troubling age and we had better pay attention if we wanted to be assured of a sustainable future as pointed out by It was pointed out  by Dennis and Donella Meadows (1972) and cited by Thompson (2009)  that there are ‘‘Limits to Growth’’1) and if we were to continue at the then current rate of consumption of the Earth’s resources we would not have a sustainable world in the longer range future. Aurelio Peccei (1984), the founder of the Club of Rome - which commissioned the Meadows’ book - called for a ‘‘New Ethic for Mankind’’. It is a call to change the principles of conduct through change of views. Old ways of doing things or business as usual is no longer the behavior or the argument of present generation in dealing with the climate change. The bottom line of this change is cultural change because it is the culture that affects human attitude and behavior.    

 

If the Golden Age of Greece, from around 500 to 300 BC, was built on the energy of slaves but we are now blessed with energy from an abundant supply of oil and natural resources. However, this will of course not be so in the longer range future. Warning signs are abundantly apparent. We do not need to wait until everything is gone and all species of the world are gone.  We will need to plan now for a true transition to a new age and a new ethic (Thompson, 2009) in solving these problems. Natural resources are limited and the resources that we have now will not be sustainable in the near future. The time to change is now and that change is a call to cultural change.

 

This paper argues that human behavior is influenced by of the culture. Culture is our world views. This is how it works that   the culture affects the mind or the views and the mind affects the attitude and the attitude influences the behavior of the person. Thus change needs a change of culture. 


Cultural Change: What is it?

 Cultural change is changing cultures or changing the old ways of views, behavior and values. The issue here is change. People need to change because the world is changing. We cannot remain the same again as of yesterday, today and tomorrow. This is a challenge. It creates a new dimension and great uncertainty. However such reason should not dampen our spirit to change. Change is inevitable. It is difficult task, if not impossible because how we change what others think, feel, believe and do. But when we are confronted by two choices, between life and death, then we need to take a stand, we have to change, though it is difficult. We choose life, we change our way of life, despite the odds. 

 Before going further, let us understand what culture is from the point of anthropologists.  Here are two good definitions by two people whom we should know. Geert Hofstede as cited by Brown (1995) defined a very common set of models for international cultures, whilst Edgar Schein (1994) is an authority on a several topics and has written one of the best books on organizational culture.

“Culture is the collective programming of the human mind that distinguishes the members of one human group from those of another. Culture in this sense is a system of collectively held values.” -- Geert Hofstede

“Culture is the deeper level of basic assumptions and beliefs that are shared by members of an organization that operate unconsciously and define in a basic ‘taken for granted’ fashion an organization's view of its self and its environment.” -- Edgar Schein

Base on those definitions, culture is playing important role in programming the mind of an individual. Thus the total cultural change is the change of mind, behavior and values of the people who have been formed in a certain pattern of ways of thinking or beliefs, behaving and relating. In this case, it is a call to revisit again our mind, thought or concepts, perceptions and held values  on the environment and evaluate whether those thought, views, values are not the main cause of problem in society. Radical change is necessary. Old ways have to be changed with the new ways. Thus the culture that damages the relationship, the society, and environment, then it is our moral responsibility to change those old views. However building up new behavior and value systems would be a great challenge. However cultural overhaul is not impossible if the members of society determine to change.  

 

The challenge would be that “is it possible to change the culture? Some may argue that a cultural change is hard but I would argue that it is possible, there is nothing impossible. If the organizational culture can be changed, then society’s culture can be changed too. It is just that people needs to feel the urgency to change. There must be trigger. In our case, we have global warming or climate change. This is not simple. In this effort, someone or leader of any group should come out to proclaim that urgency and make people feel that the time is now for change. Unless people the urgency, then they would not change. The UN has already proclaimed the urgency. Now people need to reinvent themselves. Reinventing lies not only in marginally changing the current ways of doing things or behaving, but creating a totally new approaches, new views, new behavior and new world because the world is changing and people need to change. Organizational development expert would argue that a static organizational culture can no longer be effective. Thus managers or leaders must be able to recognize when changes are needed and must possess the necessary skills and competence to implement these changes. The society must try to adapt itself to a dynamic environment by introducing new views, approaches, behavior and values on how to deal with the changing world to become more effective (Harvey, Don & Donald R. Brown, 2001)

 

The message of change is urgent. The environment is changing not in the right direction but in the wrong direction. Climate change and global warming is an urgent call to intervene on how to prevent a further damage. This time we need to create a winning culture because it is the cultures that brings us forward or bringing us down. In the companies, it is the culture that differentiates excellent companies and low performing companies. Thus to make a better or excellent company, organization cultural change is important. Therefore, what is important here is how to make the changes happen.

 

Cultural resistance to change is always there. Changing the mind, the behavior, and values of people is not easy. People are not ready to accept new things; they prefer to stay in their comfort zones because of uncertainty of the output what is going to happen. Thus it really takes time for a cultural transformation to take effect. It needs a process to follow. Thus a change agent must identify what particular aspects of culture need to change and explain the need to change. After the identification of the problem and explain the problem and finally inform the people why they need to change or shift their views. Thus information dissemination of new sets of beliefs or views must be disseminated. Media can be the main tools to disseminate new information.   

 

Change our Views and behavior toward the Environment: New Ethics. 

The main question here is how we see the environment. To help us in gaining new ideas on how we see the environment, we can see and read the statement of Pope Benedict in one of his speech before the youth during a rally near Ancona, on the Adriatic coast in September, 2007.

“Before it is too late, we need to make courageous choices that will create strong   

 alliance between humankind and the environment” (Bricker, 2009). 

From this statement we draw an idea that environment is not a mere object to be exploited but equal alliance. An alliance is equal; one is not greater than the other. Both sides are dependent and there is mutual relationship that benefits both sides. Human and environment are equal importance. Human needs a healthy environment and environment needs human, not to destroy but to take care.  In other words, environment is part of the network that human being need to develop in order to survive. In this case, we need to develop an ethical relationship, just like ethical relationship between human and human. We need to treat the environment as we treat human being.    

Ethics is defined in Webster’s dictionary as: "The discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation".  In this case, there are moral standards that we need to apply. There are allowed and not allowed behaviors when we deal with other human and environment. We have a moral duty to do or to protect the environment like what do to other human beings. Moral commands like helping the sick and the poor are also applied to the environment that we should take care and protect the environment. We have no choice, except to implement it.  Such principles of conduct are not only applied to human but also to the environment. The transition from a growth society that the developed countries presently enjoy, to one with a stable world population and economic sustainability, could require the greatest evolutionary change in the history of humankind. The changing conduct and ethical base of the world’s population must indeed change. This is no exaggeration as will be pointed out in the text that follows (Thompson, 2009).

 

Changing conduct and wear a new ethical conduct is a call to all people to have a new view of environment and a new kind of relationship. What is that new view on environment? Anything that surrounds us whether they are trees or animals are independent subject, they are no longer object to be used by human beings. Thus the new relationship between human and environment is no longer between subject and object but it is a subject to subject because of equal importance. Both have mutual relationship and interdependence. Both sides need each other. Mutual relationship is not applied to subject and object but only subject to subject. In the language of Marthin Buber, interpersonal relationship (I- Thou/You) must be applied in which one is treated as independent subject, not an object to be manipulated (I-It) (Maurice S. Friedman, 1955) Dwelling in this concept, consequently human should treat the environment as the extension of himself or herself. He or she herself as part of the environment and destroying the environment means destroying himself or herself. In this case, respect for oneself is equal to respect to the environment.

 

New kind of relationship will always depend on the way how we see the environment. How I treat the tree depending on how I see the tree. In the olden time, people do not just cut down the big trees because they are afraid and they believe that big trees are the house of the spirit. If they force to cut it, something might happen to them, they get sick in return. Enforcing such idea into  the modern mind might be funny for some but if we see in the different perspective, such idea enforce harmony with the environment. Human needs to build a harmony with the environment because damaging the environment can cause harm to the humans. Destroying the environment is destroying the harmony. The idea of Baruch Spinoza may support the argument. He equated God and nature. He disagrees that God alone is perfect and the natural order less than perfect. Spinoza equates reality with perfection. Since it is true that nothing in nature could be otherwise than it is, and all things in nature are a part of God and follow necessarily from his nature, God would not be complete without the whole natural order. Spinoza equated God (infinite substance) with Nature, consistent with Einstein's belief in an impersonal deity. Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings (Nabor Nery, 2007).” Dwelling on this idea, humans need to see themselves as a part of a bigger whole, they are part of a bigger reality which is God and that God reveals himself in the harmony of nature. Building a harmonious relationship with others with the nature is the same with building relationship with God. Destroying nature meaning we are destroying God and in return we are punished through environmental disaster.         

 

Consistent with the above idea, then respect for the environment is not only because of its instrumental value but because of its intrinsic value and its divine intrinsic value. Instrumental value is based on the use of the object for human purpose. In this regard, we protect the environment because it is important for future generation. We protect the plants because it can be used for research and medicine. In other words, if the object, the plants or animal are not useful for human needs or endanger human life, then they can be destroyed. That is an old view of the environment. While intrinsic value and divine intrinsic is the value of thing in itself which is created /given by God, it does not depend on its usefulness to human purpose or needs. We believe that all objects in the nature have its own value in itself and have its own purpose in itself. And something that has value in itself, we have a moral responsibility to respect and to protect (Stanford Encyclopedia, 2002). It is our moral mandate to protect the environment because of its independent value, its own dignity and its usefulness for human needs and future generation. This is a new view of the environment.    

 

 Natural resources have its limits and if there is no intervention in the process, then it will reach to the point that natural resources will be emptied in the future and everything will completely stop. To explain the situation, we can borrow the Queuing theory. Queuing Theory says that a small restriction in supply cannot just slow the process by a small percentage, but that it comes to a complete stop. For example, a busy highway is loaded to capacity but flowing rapidly. Then some car or truck slows down to look at an accident at the side of the road. No obstruction is in the way of the flow, but it has been slowed by a very small percentage and the whole system comes to a dead stop. Similarly, the housewife stocks up on sugar when it is announced that sugar will be rationed. Result: no more sugar on the shelves and the system shuts down. When such a phenomenon occurs to supplying a large city, it may well shut down. A power blackout is an example of such an overloaded system and consequent shutdown. Now, all this is to give a glimpse of what could happen as resources worldwide get in short supply. The urgency is apparent and must be dealt with well before it happens (Thompson, 2009). The answer here is not only through legal solutions in which laws must be established to protect the environment but human behavior. 

 

New ethic is needed to prevent further damage of the environment. We need to change our behavior in dealing with the environment by adopting new understanding of the universe that we are not the master of the universe but we are steward to cultivate and to take care of the earth. Genesis 2:15 clearly said that the Lord God then took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden to cultivate and care for it. Thus the order to subdue the earth (Genesis, 1:28) is not everything, there is a limit. The earth and everything in it is the source of food for human kind, not only for the present human kind but future human kind. Emptying everything would mean killing the future generation which is immoral. The current crises need response from all of us.         

Collective and Personal response to climate change

Days are getting warmer and warmer and we keep on complaining why it is getting warmer and warmer. The climate has changed. It means that if there is no intervention to prevent further damage, then there will time that everything will be gone, the planet would be simply a desert and no human species would live on it and everything would be dead. All of us do not want these catastrophic consequences. Thus, instead of complaining, it is time to get action collectively and individually to prevent further damage in the environment. Climate change affects everyone, rich and poor. 

 

Nowadays we are facing two crises: first there is a limited supply of fossil fuels. The consumption has been growing every year and definitely the earth’s resource will start to dwindle. Such situation will cause price instability. When the supply continues to be limited, the price will continue to rise. The second crisis is that when the atmosphere reach its limit to absorb carbon without causing rapid increase of energy in the atmosphere and oceans. These two crises are threatening. They are posing a massive challenge to human survival and to modern civilization (McNerney, 2012). The solution is not impossible.

 

As a consequence of the limited resources is war. I am reminded again by jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) that that in the pure state of human nature, Man is a being in constant state of war against all others (http://braungardt.trialectics.com/philosophy/political-theory/rousseau). Human beings are motivated by self-interest. This war will be caused by limited resource available in the nature. Countries will look for more resources outside of their own territory to support their industry survival and of their people. One in front of us is China. Its population and its industry are bigger than the supply and the resources are getting limited and as a consequence they are desperate to look for more natural resources outside their own territory. Other Asian countries are under threat because China is desperate looking for more natural resources to support their industries and the survival of their people. Islands that are claimed by other countries would be claimed by China. Military power would come into play. However, war may not be our concern here but our concern would be how we are going to prevent the environment disaster as the consequence of the use of the fossil fuel.    

 

In terms of war as one of the consequences of limited energy can be prevented but climate change as a consequence of human behavior toward environment and the use of fossil fuel cannot be prevented unless humans change their behavior or lifestyle. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its Fifth Assessment Report, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, which concludes the warming of the climate system, is unequivocal, human influence on the climate system is clear, and limiting climate change will require substantial and sustained reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.  This declaration comes as no surprise to anyone who has been paying the least bit of attention of what is happening in the climate change. However, it seems that first declaration was not successful enough to encourage everyone to get involved in preventing climate change. The first IPCC report, issued in 1990, came to virtually the same conclusion, while in the interim a great deal of energy and greenhouse gas emissions have gone into debates over how many degrees the planet will warm and how many inches the seas will rise, while efforts to substantially and sustainably reduce greenhouse gas emissions have languished (Jim Baird, 2014). This time the declaration is to reiterate again the concern over climate change. Would it be good to ignore? The answer is not. The time is near and transformation is needed. How are we going to get involved?

 

The current economy functions more like a knockout monopoly tournament, where the objective of the game is to bankrupt everyone else, and only the strongest is to survive the game. It is no longer an intellectual games but the game of money. Money is the capital and not the intelligence.  Money plays the game in order to succeed. This game is really motivated by greed and self-interest. These game results to only few are rich and majority of the world population are poor and almost half of the world’s wealth is now owned by just one percent of the population. It is ridiculous. One might legitimately ask, to what end? It would be one thing if that one percent was marshalling their wealth on behalf of mankind but for the most part they are not. They are more likely to be found trying to summit the Forbes Billionaires list –likely as not through the acquisition of shares in fossil fuel companies - than tackling climate change and when the latter becomes a life threatening situation things are likely to get very ugly.  

English law recognizes the defense of necessity. When one is genuinely at risk of immediate harm or danger and there is a situation of overwhelming urgency then a person has the right to respond in an otherwise unlawful manner (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Necessity+defense). Climate change brings us risks and natural human reaction would necessitate us to respond in order for us not to be killed.  Climate change will soon cross that threshold and some might say, as in the case of Typhoon Yolanda, at least thousands of people dead in the Philippines alone, it already has. However, reactive behavior may not be needed in responding to climate change because it might be too late like in the Yolanda typhoon case. Preventive action is needed.  

 

We know who the actors in environmental problems are; they are the capitalists or the one percent of the world total world population. They are the developed countries that had amassed the resources of the world for their economy. Logically they should be the one to solve the climate change problem. Unfortunately they are the ones who are crying around the world to solve environmental problems. Why other people should be bothered? The consequence of what they have been doing is all human kind, though the benefits are theirs. We are not also staying away and pointing fingers to them because we all are dying, rich and poor.   

As our world slowly and belatedly makes the complex transition from fossil fuels to renewable-energy sources, leading climate-change scientists give us a mere five years to radically change how we power our industrial civilization without causing runaway global warning.

We may get confused on what to do in this situation. However, staying without doing anything is to allow the deterioration of the environment. Some proposal can be forwarded:

Collectively All citizens must become global warming activism. This is an invitation that all citizens must support for policies designed to reduce the risk of global warming. In this case all citizens must participate together with the environmental group to propose activities and recommend to the policy makers to write laws to protect the environment. Substantively, global warming policy will only succeed if citizens support these policies in a variety of political venues, and are also willing to implement these policies by engaging in recommended environmental behaviors (Mark Lubell Æ Sammy Zahran Æ Arnold Vedlitz, 2007). The unity principle plays a key role by linking individual and group actions to make a great impact. If the individual believes that group unity is necessary for success, then the individual expected value of collective action is conditional on the behavior of the other group members.

 

Individually There must be a change in individual behavior. Each individual should not stay idle and doing nothing. Engaging in personal environmental behaviors that influence global warming is a must. Individual must make a difference in adapting behaviors that help preventing climate change. Behaviors that damage the environment must not be continued. Definitely views or philosophies that are not supporting for the reduction of global warming must be changed. In the individual level, it is a total transformation. All citizens need to wear new ethics, new behavior and new relationship with the environment. Everyone should see the environment, the livings things and non living things as subject, not as an object. They are all good and have value in themselves even though they may not be useful for humans. Everything that has value in themselves, humans have moral responsibility to respect, not to destroy.

Adopting new behavior is necessary. Green behaviors are the immediate answer on the personal level. Everyone should consider behavior that would not contribute to the pollution and the damage of the environment. It is the imperative to drastically reduce our own and our family’s carbon-dioxide footprint. This is something people can do regardless of the slow response by many business and political leaders to the serious planetary changes expected as climate change speeds up.

 

In the coming decades, energy production will need to be more localized, gasoline usage will shrink — perhaps as much due to the peak-oil phenomenon as to climate change mandates — and air travel will decline. People will need to work toward producing more of the energy and goods they need closer to home. Recycling will become even more important than it is today — as will using the collected recyclables as a feedstock for local industries. The amount of energy consumed by transporting current volumes of world trade is simply not sustainable.

 

Reducing their consumption accordingly, others of us have already been voluntarily simplifying our lives and our consumption patterns in order to reach a more sustainable level of usage of the planet’s resources (forests, minerals, fossil fuels, agriculture, water, etc.). Our greediness to consume and to use many things contributes to the damage of the environment. Life style has to be scrutinized if that life style contributes to the climate change.    

 

Collective and individual respond to climate change must be immediate and it does not need to be expensive. According to UN report on Climate Change conducted by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that catastrophic climate change can be averted without sacrificing living standards. The report concludes that the transformation required to a world of clean energy is eminently affordable. The cheapest and least risky route to dealing with global warming is to abandon all dirty fossil fuels in coming decades (IPCC, April 14, 2014). This requires a shift in mind set of countries and people who are used to use fossil fuels to a renewable energy. Such report dismisses the earlier speculations that slashing carbon emission would cost much to the economy. According to the report diverting hundreds of billions of dollars from fossil fuels into renewable energy and cutting energy waste would shave just 0.06% off expected annual economic growth rates of 1.3%-3%, the IPCC report concluded. The report is a wakeup call. The action must be now. The more we wait, the more it will cost and the more difficult it will become. This is not only a call to the countries, companies but also to individual persons to shift life style by reducing the use fossil fuels or not depending on fossil fuel. It means that people need not to use private cars for travel and for their daily kitchen operation.   

 

Conclusion

Solving environmental problems is more complex. It is not just the absence of laws that protect the environment but it is more than that. Human behaviors are influenced by their culture and their culture affects their minds or their beliefs and their values and their belief affect their behavior. Those beliefs and values are formed by the existing culture in which they live and such culture has been in existence for centuries. This is to remind us that changing such cultures might take time and a tedious process but it is not impossible. My argument is that solving environmental problem is a cultural issue. In this case, total cultural change is necessary. This is not an easy job but it is not an impossible one. Culture can be changed even though is considered to be hard. We need to reexamine our own beliefs and values and ask ourselves whether those beliefs and values are helping us to protect the environment.

 

If the old view, we look at the environment as an object to be manipulated or to be subdued but the new view is that environment is a subject. It is an alliance of human being. As a subject, it is equal with human beings. Thus our relationship with the environment is subject to subject. We need to respect one another.

 

Respecting the environment is not just because of its instrumental value or because of its usefulness but because it has its intrinsic value. It has intrinsic value in itself. And something that has intrinsic value in itself, then we have the moral duty to respect.

 

Global warming is our issue at hand as a result of environmental problem. These environmental problems are caused by the wrong belief, and wrong values of human. Thus the answer to solve environmental problem is to change our attitude or our beliefs and values.

 

Who are responsible for solving such problem? It is a huge problem. The world has been asking the industrial countries or developed countries like USA, UK, Germany and other European countries to take the lead in solving the problems but little move to be seen. These countries were the first one to destroy the environment because of their industries. Waiting for them to solve the problem might be too late. It is time for us to go hand in hand collectively and individually in our way to contribute what we can do to solve environmental problem.   

 

 

References

Baird, Jim. 2014. The Burning Question: Who is Up to the Climate Challenge? http://theenergycollective.com/jim-baird/337696/burning-question-who-climate-challenge. Retrieved, April 10, 2014

Brown, A., Organizational Culture, Pitman, London, 1995

Bricker, Woodeene Koenig. 2012. Ten Commandments for the Environment. Paulines Publishing House: Manila.

Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2002, 2008. Environmental Ethics. http://www.stanfordencyclopedia.com. Retrieved, April 2, 2014.

Friedman, L. Thomas. 2006. Hot, Flat and Crowded: Why we Need a Green Revolution. FSC: USA.

Gleick, James, Chaos - Making a New Science, Penguin Group, New York, N.Y., 1987 (see formula on Page 70 of "Chaos")

Harvey, Don & Donald R. Brown, 2001. An Experiential Approach to Organization Development. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, New Jersey

IPCC. 2014. IPCC climate change report: averting catastrophe is eminently affordable. http://www.edie.net/news/6/IPCC-climate-change-report--averting-catastrophe-is-eminently-affordable/ Retrieved, April 15, 2014.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau and his Philosophy.  http://braungardt.trialectics.com/philosophy/political-theory/rousseau/ Retrieved, October 5, 2014.

Mark Lubell, Sammy Zahran & Arnold Vedlitz, 2007.  Collective Action and Citizen Responses to Global Warming. http://www.des.ucdavis.edu/faculty/lubell/Research/GlobalWarming.pdf. Retrieved, April 10, 2014      

McNerney, Jerry & Cheek, Martin. 2012. Clean Energy Nation. AMACOM: New York.

Maurice S. Friedman. 1955. Martin Buber: The Life of Dialogue by Maurice S. Friedman. The University of Chicago Press

Meadows, Dennis and Donella, Limits to Growth Potomac Associates, Washington, D.C., 1972

Necessity. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Necessity+defense. Retrieved, October 5, 2014.

Schein, E., Organizational Culture and Leadership, (Jossey-Bass Psychology Series, 1994

Thompson, G. Fred. 2009. A New Ethic For Humankind: Searching for solutions

in a troubled world. Futurescan Consulting:  Ottawa, Canada.

UNEP: United Nations Environment Program. 2014. Climate Change. http://www.unep.org/climatechange/. Retrieved September 30, 2014.

Waterlow, Charlotte, The Hinge of History The One World Trust, Great Britain, 1995. World

World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision. http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/index.htm, retrieved September 30, 2014.

Peccei, Aurelio. 1984. The Alternative of Human Future. http://philpapers.org/rec/PECTAO. Retrieved, August 5, 2014 

 

 

 

 

 

 

           

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

Building a Proper Relationship between Teacher and Students: A relationship that Helps Students/Children Grow.

Damianus Abun
Introduction

Teachers are often called heroes. They are in the front line of helping citizens become functional members of society. They are not paid much but their job is the most important in laying the foundation of a great nation. Without teachers, man cannot fully be developed as a human and functional human in society. Thus the job of a teacher is not just simply to teach and fill the head of the students with a lot of information which may not be relevant to the life of students but the job goes beyond teaching. It is also about building a proper relationship to develop other aspect of human life.

Learning can happen not only by accumulating knowledge they receive from teachers inside classroom but through relationships or associations with their teachers or the adult. Many things can be learned through informal relationship. Character formation cannot be just developed through information that they got from teacher in their class but it is through modeling or example that teachers is showing to their students. Thus the behavior of teachers matters much to the development of students.

Effective teaching is often time not measured by how well the teacher prepares the subject but how well teachers relate their life to the life of students and it cannot happen only inside the classroom but outside classroom. Their life must touch the life of students. It happens only in relationships. Thus the relationship goes beyond the wall of classroom. In such case   teacher has to be open and available anytime to help the students outside the classroom, anywhere and anytime when the students need them.  

Since teachers are teaching not only the things that they learned from the books but also through their life example which they reveal in the relationship, thus the question for a teacher is how and what kind of relationship that they need to develop with the students. Since the issue is the relationship between teacher and students, thus the relationship may not be any kinds of relationship. Thus, we need to explore different kind of relationship that may or may not help the students. We need to know these different relationships in order for us to know the nature of man and to know what kind of relationship that a teacher must develop with the students.      

Interpersonal relationship

Interpersonal relationship is an association between two or more people that may range from fleeting to enduring. This association may be created by different reasons such as having a common interest, having a regular business interaction, love, like and some other type of social commitment. The persons go into interpersonal relationship believe that through such relationship, certain aspect of their needs can be satisfied. Interpersonal relationships take place in a great variety of contexts, such as school community between teachers and teachers, teachers and students, in the work, clubs, and other forms of association.

Interpersonal relationship is created on the voluntary basis and it is not regulated and there are no external forces to set the rule of engagement but only the persons who have the relationship. If the reasons for their relationship are met, then naturally the relationship may continue to grow or disappear. Thus it cannot be predicted the length of such relationship because it is only the individual person can measure if his needs have been or have not been fulfilled yet.     

Why does human need relationship? It is one of our needs as human being. It is originated from our nature of men as a social being. As a social being, humans have a natural need and tendency to relate themselves to other human beings. They depend on other human being to fulfill certain needs. In such case, humans may not be complete without other humans. It is only by living with other humans, they can perfect themselves.

Dependence on others is not only in terms of physical needs but also psychological needs. As an individual person, he/she cannot fulfill all his physical needs by himself/herself, but he/she needs other people to fill the gap. As a social being, he or she needs to belong to the group and to be recognized. Abraham Maslow perfectly described hierarchy needs of human beings as physiological, safety and security, belongingness, self esteem, and self satisfaction needs (Stoner, 2000, McShane, 2000). After Maslow, Clayton Alderfer as cited by McShane (2000) also supported the idea of Maslow that humans have three different needs such as existence, relatedness and growth needs. Related needs is the same with belongingness needs of Maslow that human as social being need to relate himself or herself to other people. It is a deep human need to relate and to be belonged to a group, to be accepted and to be recognized. The same theory of needs is also presented by John W.

Atkinson as cited by Stoner (2000). Atkinson argued that humans are motivated by needs for achievement, need for power, and need for affiliation or close association with others.

Human beings are innately social and are shaped by their experiences with others. Such innate social need motivates an individual to relate himself or herself with others and such need must be satisfied because it will continue to push the person to fulfill it until it is fulfilled. There are multiple perspectives to understand this inherent motivation to interact with others. In fact, the need to belong is so innately ingrained that it may be strong enough to overcome physiological and safety needs, such as children's attachment to abusive parents or staying in abusive romantic relationships. Such examples illustrate the extent to which the psychobiological drive to belong is entrenched.

The theories that we have pointed out are just indicating that interpersonal relationship is born out of human needs. Those are basic needs that need to be realized in order for a person to grow as a human being and a social being. These basic needs are strengthened further by the fact that interpersonal relationship brings benefits to both parties. Individuals seek out rewards in interactions with others and are willing to pay a cost for said rewards. It is in this case, people are willing to sacrifice other things in order to maintain the relationship. People could not afford to lose a beautiful relationship because it would be considered a lost on both sides.

Studies also pointed out that persons who are going into interpersonal relationship are not just simply to meet their physical needs but as we have emphasized that human are social creature and as social creature, there is a need of attachment, a need to be loved as Insel (2001) argued that attachment requires sensory and cognitive processing that lead to intricate motor responses. As humans, the end goal of attachment is the motivation to acquire love, which is different from other animals who just seek proximity. Based on his study, there is neurological basis for attachment and further emphasized that pro-social emotions and behaviors are prerequisite for a healthy relationship. The social environment, mediated by attachment, influences the maturation of structures in a child's brain. This might explain how infant attachment affects adult emotional health.      

Based on what we have discussed above, we cannot deny then that teachers and students are all social animal, then the need to be associated with or to be belonged to, the need for attachment has to be realized in the school context or campus. Thus, school and teachers should promote a healthy interpersonal relationship with their students. Promoting such kind of relationship would help students to grow mature not only as an individual person but also a social person. They definitely learn how to deal with people in their work, organization and in society as a whole. There must be some kind of relationship between teachers and students because it is important for social, emotional, and cognitive development of both.

Base on our argument that human being is social beings and relationship need is innate need, thus both parties in the relationship are in need of each other. Both parties are benefited from the relationship. There is mutuality and reciprocity.    

Thus in summary, we may conclude that interpersonal relationship is a symmetrical relationship, a relationship between the equals. Both are there to share their life and to enrich one’s lacking needs. In this case both are growing together and learn from each other. Therefore this kind of relationship is only applied between the adult, not the adult and the child. Such presentation indicates that interpersonal relationship may not be proper relationship that teachers develop with their students.

Contractual relationships: a danger to avoid

It is a legal relationship between contracting parties evidenced by (1) an offer, (2) acceptance of the offer, and a (3) valid (legal and valuable) consideration. Existence of a contractual relationship, however, does not necessarily mean the contract is enforceable, that it is not void or not voidable.(http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/contractual-relationship.html#ixzz3BPWte5Pr)

Contracts are legally enforceable agreements, and any party -- person or organization -- that enters into a contract has a contractual relationship with the other parties. When a party enters into a contractual relationship, it agrees to certain responsibilities and failure to adhere to the agreed upon responsibilities may constitute a breach of contract (: http://www.ehow.com/info_10067138_breach-contractual-relationship.html).

There are three things for a contract to exist: an offer, acceptance and validity. A party is offering a product or services and the second party is accepting the offer. To make the agreement valid and binding, the contract has to be written and signed by both parties which stipulate the duties and responsibilities of both parties. Once it is signed and notarized by public attorney, then contract is legally enforceable. Violating the contract tantamount to a breach of contract and can lead to the cease of relationship or court litigation.     

The relationship emanated from contract is functional. The relationship exists as long as both parties are doing their functions stipulated in the contract. Both parties are bound by the law to implement what has been agreed upon. The focus is the content of the contract and the services to be delivered. There is no human relationship. Any actions done by both parties are only superficial and it is done to enhance the functional relationship. 

Applying such kind of relationship between the teacher and students means that the relationship is established because there is an offer or product to be sold to the students and the students, after come analysis of cost and benefit, accept the offer or purchase the product. Both parties are only allowed to do their duties and responsibilities within the prescribed contract. Violating the contract means the relationship ceases to exist. Teachers are doing their duties as teachers which are to teach and the students are paying tuition fees for their salaries. The problems of whether the students are listening, understanding to their subjects are no longer their concern. If students listens, understands and then they can pass. If they do not pass, they are terminated or repeating the subject. The concerns of why students do not understand and do not pass the exam are no longer their concern. Looking into the reason behind of students’ failure and trying to fix the problem are beyond their functions. No concern for the students.  

Such relationship implies that knowledge is a commodity. The teachers are only to deliver the knowledge or information and the students listen and pay. It is only by listening they can understand and gain some skills and therefore their investment can have some return. If they do not listen and understand, they lose their investment. It is no longer the problem of teachers why students failed.

 Following such line of thoughts, the relationship between teachers and students are business relationship. The teachers are producers and students are customers. The focuses of teachers are how to produce quality product or services so that they can retain the students not to go away. The teachers’ concerns are preparing their lesson and delivering it well in the class from their own perspective. This is the only way how to maintain their customers’ loyalty. All activities done by the teachers are only to attract the students to enroll their subject and they can have money in return.

Relationship is just superficial and impersonal. Smiling, laughing and talking with the students are not sincere because in this kind of relationship, relationship is a business strategy to have a personal attachment with the customer and to retain them not to go away and enrolling in other subjects or other school. The relationship is between the subject and object. Teacher is the subject and students are object. Students are used so that the teachers can teach and earn their living.

The relationship is between buyer and seller. A buyer and seller bind themselves into a legal agreement to provide each other with specific needs. Sellers must often give products, services or tailored consultation to the buyer, while the buyer gives monetary reimbursement or other valuable benefits. Buyers and sellers can be a part of one project or many, and the seller's objectives can change during the contract's lifestyle, such as first being a bidder, then a selected procurement source and later becoming the contracted supplier.

What we have mentioned is being practiced in the school environment in the post modern education. Education is a commodity and is no longer an instrument of character development.  It was lamented by Jean-François Lyotard (1979) that there has been a significant change in the teacher-student relation. This is now no longer seen as a pedagogical relationship but a contractual one. Students, in paying ever higher fees for the privilege of attending an educational institution, expect good value for their (private, self-interested) investment.  When the services they 'purchase' do not measure up to expectations be threatened with legal action for breach of an implied contract.  He further reminded the institutions tertiary institutions must be 'accountable' for what they do, and when they fail to 'deliver the goods', they should pay a (legal and/or financial) price for this.

In conclusion we may argue that contractual relationship is not a proper relationship to be developed between teachers and students because in such a relationship, students are treated as customers, buyers and not as persons who have the personal needs such as psychological needs. Those needs cannot be fulfilled or satisfied if there is no pedagogical relationship.

Pedagogical relationship

Before going deeper into our discussion on pedagogical relationships, I want to share my own experience in secondary education. When I was in secondary education, the subject that I hated most was English subject. Every time a teacher came to the class, I felt nervous because he was used to punish the students who could not give the right answer in English when he asked questions. What made it worse was the fact that it was not only English subject that was being feared but also the teacher. The subject was hard and the teacher was hard. I was afraid to ask questions because the teacher might punish me again if I asked the wrong questions. I was not going any further in my subject, the ignorance continue to rule. I almost quitted but for the sake of finishing my study, I endure the situation.

Things changed when I was in second year level of secondary school. The teacher for English subject was changed. He was an ex-seminarian. He encouraged students to ask questions and correct the mistakes but did not punish the students. The feeling was that it was ok to make mistakes. The excitement was growing. Not only that, he allowed us to ask question anywhere and anytime. He was always ready to answer us. Such openness allowed us to develop relationships. I became friend to him and he helped me a lot in my English subject. I was no longer afraid to ask questions and to make a mistake because I know that he was there to guide me. The result of such relationship was that I love English subject and I was always longing to see my English teacher. Not only love to the subject but I usually confide my personal problems to the teacher and he was there to listen and to guide me. Such a wonderful experience inspired me a lot and may the teacher rest in peace.

The experience that I shared is just a simple application and explanation of pedagogical relationship. The pedagogical relation refers to special kind of personal relationship between teacher and student or adult and child that is different from other interpersonal relationships. The pedagogical relation is discussed by more recently in English by Max van Manen (1991). Manen think that educatorship is at least partly based on the ethical responsibility to offer oneself constantly to be available to the child as a kind of instrument or mechanism. Thereby the educator is assumed to act in such way that s/he produces the results that s/he immediately feels (believes) the child to intend in his/her own action. It is not about conscious calculation, but a task that opens up to the educator as an immediate requirement and responsibility. This relation between child and parent/teacher is symbolized by 'living with the child in loco parentis'. Van Manen means by this the normatively loaded interaction between adult and child which is permeated by the adult's responsibility to take care of the child's life and growth into a responsible person.    

As we have discussed above, teachers are holding big responsibility. The job is not only to master the subject and deliver it correctly with the correct strategy of teaching. It takes more than knowing the content to be a good teacher. Teachers are not only in words but also in action, their behavior in dealing with the students. One of the most important aspects of teaching is building relationships with their students. Teacher-child relationships influence how a child develops. The relationship can relate to a wide range of school adjustment outcomes, including liking school, work habits, social skills, behavior, and academic performance.

When teachers are open and communicate with their students, not only inside classroom but also outside classroom, they are transmitting not only knowledge but also values that students need in their life. As Stonkuvienè ( 2010) emphasized that when we communicate with each other we are not only transmitting messages, but also enriching experiences, perceiving emotions and cultivating attitudes, values, ways of being with others and the world. We are co-building people. Educational context is a privileged environment for communication, particularly interpersonal communication. Postic (2008) criticizes theorists who support the study of teaching on the forging of “teaching machines” and underrate the interpersonal influences of the pedagogical context, as supported by Rogers (1985) and other authors. In a dialogical and teleological human sense of education, communication is a transversal element to all cultures. Communicating is a bio-psychosocial act; conducted by the body, it involves personalities, roles and emotions.

The relationship may not be symmetric but asymmetric; it is a relationship between unequal, teacher and students. Teacher and students are not really equal friends and their relationship is a relationship of an adult and a child. Therefore in such a relationship, teacher is still teacher who is in the presence of students who need help and guidance. As M.G. Pietyin (2013) pointed out that your students are not your friends. She is right because there’s a certain responsibility in a pedagogical relationship. A teacher must never confide in a student, or look to a student for emotional support. It is perfectly appropriate for a student to do these things, however, with a teacher. A teacher stands in loco parentis. Most college students are young people who have not yet made their way in the world but who are going to college as part of their preparation for that. They are more than their student numbers. They are inexperienced adults who occasionally need support and guidance when contemplating life’s larger questions, or simply how to survive a term in which they are taking too many courses in order to minimize their student-loan debt.

It has been always emphasized that to be an effective teacher is not a matter of knowing the subject very well but it is more than that, it is more on our approach to students, how we view and deal with the students. Students come to school with their different situations, they are not coming to receive the information from the teacher which they can get it in the internet but they are looking for something that could change their life and it may not be given through the lectures but through our behavior that we show them every day. The subjects that they learn every day may not inspire them and bring them happiness, it is not even helping them to become mature person in the future and help them in their pursuit of “the good life” in the classical sense. But that can be done only by teachers who are willing to engage with their students as human beings and who can draw on their own humanity, and not simply their intellects, in those relationships.

The call of duty as teacher is not easy after all. The job is going beyond preparing class and teaching well. Ordinarily, nobody likes to occupy their time entertaining students who come to your office just to see their good teachers. No one likes to worry about the life of other people but the call of duty as a teacher reminds all teachers that it is one your duty to build a pedagogical relationship with the students. They may not learn values and good behavior in the classroom but they learn it when they are dealing with their teachers. They cannot confide the personal problems and aspirations in the classroom, in front of other students, but they can confide their life through their relationship with their teachers. Listening to their aspirations and desperations will inspire them to define their own life of what kind of life they are going pursue. Teachers need to know their students because by knowing them, teachers know how to deal and help them. As Nel Noddings (2007) pointed out that teacher must know about students prior experiences and build on them with new learning experiences.  He continued that as the child’s teacher, you know more about the child than the writers of the book you are teaching from. You can adjust the way you teach based on how your students learn and what they take interest in. The curriculum and content being covered will be much more meaningful if delivered in a way the students favor. Teaching methods would be enhanced by a curriculum that contributed to the relevance and interest level of students work and learning experiences. When students are forced to go through material that they are not engaged in they will lose interest. Students need to connect with what they are learning through engagement. Curriculum approaches that promote combined social as well as emotional intelligence of students are much more effective (Noddings, 2007).

As a summary on the idea of pedagogical relationship we may point out some characteristics that mark the difference between interpersonal relationships. In the pedagogical relationship, the adult is directed toward the child and the relation is asymmetrical, a relationship between unequal. The adult is there for the child and the child is not there for the adult. The purpose of such kind of relationship is to help the child grow becoming a better person in the future. This kind of relationship ends when the child grows up and matures. 

 
Conclusion

After discussing three kind of relationship, now we know what kind of relationship that a teacher needs to develop with their students. Relationship is a need, and it is not only true to the adult or teachers but also child or students. All have needs to be able to relate themselves to one another. It is a social needs and it is inborn. Because of such inborn needs, building up interpersonal relationship is the fulfillment of such needs and it is a must. But this kind of relationship is between adult or symmetrical relationship, between the equals, because both are there to fill the vacuum of each individual’s needs. There is mutuality and reciprocity.     

Therefore, interpersonal relationship may not be qualified for the relationship between adult and the child or teacher and students. It has to be pedagogical relationship, a relationship that is educational in nature, a relationship that is oriented toward the growth of the child. It is asymmetrical, relationship between the unequal. The teachers are there to help the students. It is the student who is in need of teacher.

Definitely contractual relationship has no place in educational context, though; it may be prevalent in the postmodern education as lamented by Lyotard (1979). Such kind of relationship is considered as subject and object relationship. Both are using each other for individual interest at the expense of the other. 

 
 References

1.    McShane, Steven L. 2000. Organizational Behavior. McGraw-Hill: New York.

2.    Stoner, James A.F., Freeman, Edward. Gilbert, Daniel R. 2000.  Management. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

3.    Insel, Thomas. 2001. The neurobiology of attachment". Nature Reviews Neuroscience . http://www.neurosciencereview.com Retrieved, September 3, 2014. 

4.    Contractual Relationship. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/contractual-relationship.html#ixzz3BPWte5Pr, retrieved, August 15, 2014.

5.    Contractual Relationships in Project Management. http://www.ehow.com/info_8545790_contractual-relationships-project-management.html. retrieved, September, 8, 2014

6.    Jean-François Lyotard. 1979. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Routledge: London and New York.

7.    Stonkuvienè. 2010. Communication as an essential element of pedagogical process. Methuen & Co: London.

8.    Postic, M. 2008. A Pedagogical Relationship. Padrões Culturais: Lisboa

9.    M.G. Pietyin, M.G. 2013. The Pedagogical Relationship on Teaching. Drexel University. http://mgpiety.org/tag/the-pedagogical-relationship/ retrieved August 25, 2014

10.                       Noddings, Nel. 2007. Critical Lessons: What Our Schools Should Teach. University Press: Cambridge.   

11.                       Manen, van Max. 1991. The Tact of Teaching: The Meaning of Pedagogical Thoughtfulness. http://www.maxvanmanen.com/biography/ retrieved, September 8, 2014.