Search results

Authenticity and sustainability seem to be unlinked concepts. While sustainability refers to the ability of ecosystems to endure and to flourish, authenticity refers to the ability of the human person to develop its “true” or real self. Some will say that nature as a complex, self-directed evolutionary bio-system remains indifferent to the subjectivity and self-interest of human beings. But the modern search for authenticity is one of the causes of the decreasing sustainability of our ecosystem.

The chapter first explores how the modern concepts of the self and the world have disconnected the human subject from nature. The Cartesian disconnection of human subject from nature made it possible not only to transform nature into a semi-mechanical system but also to consider the self as a rational and autonomous being. Hence, realizing the self and being authentic in the Cartesian context meant becoming independent from and master of nature.

The chapter presents the life and philosophy of Albert Schweitzer as a new experience-based foundation for ethics and found it in the principle of “Reverence for life” (Ehrfurcht vordem Leben) conceived as an unconditional and inclusive respect for life in all its manifestations. Schweitzer’s philosophy implies a new sense of authenticity no longer based on the modern ego-centric notion of autonomy but on the alter-centric notion of respect for life.

The essence of the ecological crisis is not that resources are out of reach, but that the relationship between living beings has deteriorated. For this reason, ecology cannot simply be seen as a scientific matter but rather as a genuine social problem that requires social actions.

The law in its present form falls short of managing ecological problems despite the fact that the right to a natural environment is recognized in most jurisdictions as a basic one and that international covenants have been created to protect the natural environment. Environmental law ought to bring about a reverence for life and promote the cooperation of biotic communities. A legal system given to innovation could offer foresight-based regulation, integration of the ensemble of living beings, and cooperation in the living world. One of the main challenges the law has to meet is the exploration of a theoretically established and practically viable basis for extending its influence to address the problems of future generations.

It’s been thirty years since the original articulation of “Appreciative Inquiry in Organizational Life” was written in collaboration with my remarkable mentor Suresh Srivastva (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987). That article – first published in Research in Organization Development and Change – generated more experimentation in the field, more academic excitement, and more innovation than anything we had ever written. As the passage of time has enabled me to look more closely at what was written, I feel both a deep satisfaction with the seed vision and scholarly logic offered for Appreciative Inquiry, as well as well as the enormous impact and continuing reverberation. Following the tradition of authors such as Carl Rogers who have re-issued their favorite works but have also added brief reflections on key points of emphasis, clarification, or editorial commentary I am presenting the article by David Cooperrider (myself) and the late Suresh Srivastva in its entirety, but also with new horizon insights. In particular I write with excitement and anticipation of a new OD – what my colleagues and I are calling the next “IPOD” that is, innovation-inspired positive OD that brings AI’s gift of new eyes together in common cause with several other movements in the human sciences: the strengths revolution in management; the positive pscyhology and positive organizational scholarship movements; the design thinking explosion; and the biomimicry field which is all about an appreciative eye toward billions of years of nature’s wisdom and innovation inspired by life.

This article presents a conceptual refigurationy of action-research based on a “sociorationalist” view of science. The position that is developed can be summarized as follows: For action-research to reach its potential as a vehicle for social innovation it needs to begin advancing theoretical knowledge of consequence; that good theory may be one of the best means human beings have for affecting change in a postindustrial world; that the discipline’s steadfast commitment to a problem solving view of the world acts as a primary constraint on its imagination and contribution to knowledge; that appreciative inquiry represents a viable complement to conventional forms of action-research; and finally, that through our assumptions and choice of method we largely create the world we later discover.

The purpose of this paper is to re‐examine the views of Freud in his Civilization and its Discontents and compare his idea of civilization with that of other scholars in order to determine if we will ever be able to create a society which will endure in these days of nuclear power. The dangers to humanity are great, the solution difficult to see. Freud emphasized self‐interest and aggressiveness as the failings in man which would lead to the collapse of civilization, summed up in the Latin tag: homo homine lupus. Freud rejected out of hand religion as a remedy for man’s aggressiveness. This view of civilization is compared with that of Albert Schweitzer in his The Philosophy of Civilization. Schweitzer sees the enduring society as one in which man has become ethical and thereby dedicated himself to the good of society and in so doing shows a reverence for life. This study then examines the view of Ortega y Gasset, who finds in The Revolt of the Masses the success of society to lie in the efforts of men of talent, select men who have dedicated themselves to the advancement of society in accordance with the old adage, noblesse oblige. Finally we examine the Civilisation of Kenneth Clark, which is concerned with man’s development in the arts as he removes himself farther and farther from the state of the savage. The views of Arnold Toynbee on civilization are examined. Toynbee finds that our civilization, Western Christendom, will play an ever decreasing role in the global society. Toynbee also fears the coming of a nuclear holocaust but is confident there will be survivors. The possibility of a nuclear war attests the aggressiveness of man. Finally, to illustrate the evil effects of nuclear power, a brief glance is taken at the horrors that overtook the citizens of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki when they were the targets of the atomic bomb in 1945. The only feasible solution to this grave problem appears to be a nuclear‐weapon‐free world. Even then the world is not safe from the aggressive nature of some rogue nation which seeks to take advantage of such a situation and dominate the world. This contingency is commonly referred to as the genie is out of the bottle. The number of genies increased when North Korea, India and Pakistan claimed the addition of nuclear weapons to their arsenal. Man has to control his fellow man’s urge to advance his self‐interest at any cost, if we are to endure. As Freud in his perspicacity put it: homo homine lupus.

It’s been nearly 30 years since the original articulation of Appreciative Inquiry in Organizational Life was written in collaboration with my remarkable mentor Suresh Srivastva (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987). That article generated more experimentation in the field, more academic excitement, and more innovation than anything we had ever written. As the passage of time has enabled me to look more closely at what was written, I feel both a deep satisfaction with the seed vision and scholarly logic offered for Appreciative Inquiry (AI), as well as well as the enormous impact and reverberation. Following the tradition of authors such as Carl Rogers who have re-issued their favorite works but have also added brief reflections on key points of emphasis, clarification, or editorial commentary we have decided to issue a reprint the early article by David L. Cooperrider and the late Suresh Srivastva in its entirety, but also with contemporary comments embedded. To be sure the comments offered are brief and serve principally to add points of emphasis to ideas we may have too hurriedly introduced. My comments – placed in indented format along the way – are focused on the content and themes of furthermost relevance to this volume on organizational generativity. In many ways I’ve begun to question today whether there can even be inquiry where there is no appreciation, valuing, or amazement – what the Greeks called thaumazein – the borderline between wonderment and admiration. One learning is that AI’s generativity is not about its methods or tools, but about our cooperative capacity to reunite seeming opposites such as theory as practice, the secular as sacred, and generativity as something beyond positivity or negativity. Appreciation is about valuing the life-giving in ways that serve to inspire our co-constructed future. Inquiry is the experience of mystery, moving beyond the edge of the known to the unknown, which then changes our lives. Taken together, where appreciation and inquiry are wonderfully entangled, we experience knowledge alive and an ever-expansive inauguration of our world to new possibilities.

This article presents a conceptual refiguration of action-research based on a “sociorationalist” view of science. The position that is developed can be summarized as follows: For action-research to reach its potential as a vehicle for social innovation it needs to begin advancing theoretical knowledge of consequence; that good theory may be one of the best means human beings have for affecting change in a postindustrial world; that the discipline's steadfast commitment to a problem solving view of the world acts as a primary constraint on its imagination and contribution to knowledge; that appreciative inquiry represents a viable complement to conventional forms of action-research; and finally, that through our assumptions and choice of method we largely create the world we later discover.

The impact of globalization is undeniable; yet, it is so pervasive that we as researchers are still seeking answers to its impact and how to bring it to use most effectively. This chapter studies the role of global values in higher education of Pakistan and the amalgamation of global values in the practices of higher education institutions (HEIs) of Pakistan. For this purpose, 18 educational leaders and institutional heads of public and private HEIs of Pakistan were interviewed. Through thematic analysis, it was found that the educational leaders of Pakistani HEIs believe that global values such as integrity, creativity, fairness, unity, freedom, connection, sustainability, empowerment, reverence for life, human rights, civil rights, mutual trust, and honesty are responsible for harmony and peace in the world, and that universities are the best centers for promoting these values. However, they had concerns regarding Colonization by Western Values and conservation of national, regional, cultural, and religious values within a nation state.

In this world of complexity, disruption, multi-layered crises and insecurity, people seek orientation, stability and meaning. This desire exists in everyday life, in working environments and even more in vacation time. Therefore, the way we see the world and how we interact with each other and with nature should also be reflected by tourist destinations. ‘Destination Conscience’ seems to be a promising conception that offers the desired contemporary design of destination realities and travel experiences. Accordingly, destinations and their products should be characterised by authenticity, meaning, sensitivity and humaneness on all levels. In this chapter, the concept of ‘integral ecology’ as a holistic worldview and new paradigm is presented. Integral ecology can be a source of perception and wisdom that enriches the ‘conscience’ of a destination and all its actors. Hence, this chapter addresses the question of how integral ecology can contribute to Destination Conscience. The essay uses the methods of literature review, application, transfer and case study.

Firstly, the concept of integral ecology will be presented. In the second part, this worldview will be applied to destinations. The enrichment of Destination Conscience by the principles of integral ecology can manifest in the destination's self-image and in the interaction in business relations and business actions. It can find expression in the operational management, organisation and development of a destination and in the design of the touristic services and products. In the third part, the case study of a Catholic monastery in the Altmühltal will be presented for further illustration.

Plato and Aristotle would have found the modern effort to fuse ethics and ecology to be incomprehensible. Despite the fact that oikos—meaning house or household—is a Greek word, Greek science did not entertain a concept of ecology. Nor did Greek philosophy regard nature as morally considerable. Etymology aside, the word ecology in anything like its modern sense of “biospheric house” did not appear in European thought until 1873 when Ernst Heinrich Haeckel, a German biologist and philosopher, used it, with the spelling “Oekologie,” in his The History of Creation. Furthermore, the words “ecology” and “ecological” always had exclusive reference, until quite recently, to a scientific discipline and not to a branch of philosophy. As with the Classical Greek philosophers, so it was also with modern thinkers. Ethics, they held, were concerned solely with interpersonal relations. They could not, therefore, recognize a duty to nature. That we do owe a duty to nature, however, is the carefully considered conclusion of most of the environmental ethicists.

Spiritual ecology explores the interface of religions and spiritualities on the one hand, and environments, ecologies, and environmentalisms on the other. As an international environmental movement, spiritual ecology involves a multitude of diverse leaders, organizations, and initiatives. They share a common concern and commitment to pursuing the vital role of religion and spirituality in environmentalism to complement secular approaches to environmental problems and issues from the local to the global levels. Here, after some background, spiritual ecology as a component of the phenomena of international environmental movements is exemplified through three cases: the Green Belt Movement beginning in Kenya, the Green Patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Alliance of Religions and Conservation affiliate of the World Wide Fund for Nature (formerly World Wildlife Fund).