Many Implications of Service

Last week I had the privilege to go with a group of students down to South Carolina and participate in Alternative Spring Break. I could not be happier with the experience I had—doing service AND making so many wonderful connections with people I never would have talked to otherwise. This made me think that one important aspect of service is that it brings different kinds of people together. There are so many different facets surrounding service: those receiving, those giving, the umbrella organization one is working with, and everything in between such as feelings, personal interactions, sense of community, etc.  In being involved in community service, I have been a part of building community through service.

During ASB, we did a lot of reflecting as a group. We made meaning of the things we were doing, whether it was exploring our larger impact in the community, talking more deeply about homelessness, or elaborating on how the work had influenced our lives. Often times, reflecting can be difficult, because seeing the disparity frequently leads to feelings of guilt around our own lifestyles. Mostly as a group, we talked about what more we could do to change the current situation of homelessness and poverty. This allowed for us to put aside our feelings of guilt and know that what we were doing was beneficial. In talking this through as a group, we built a whole web of connections with each other. Working together for the same cause, bonding over a specific activity and then reflecting upon experience is such a wonderful way to unite.

In participating in community service projects you can learn a lot about yourself and the group you work with, whether it is the volunteers you’re working alongside or the people you’re serving. Community service is a learning opportunity, and many sources I’ve looked at have assured that fact. “The shadow of poverty, under which many of the students learned significant aspects about themselves and others, also provides the backdrop for my life and struggle as a student and as a scholar” (Rhoads, 1997, p. 207). Service allows us to think more deeply about our personal lives as well as educates us about the lives of others. In delving into service, you learn much more about the type of person you are and the types of people you work well with. For instance, working with the homeless is not for everyone, but they can explore other service realms to find there are other ways to be involved. Community service gives us the opportunity of experiential learning—being out in the field, hands-on, living and learning. “I learn more from volunteer work than I ever do from any of my classes at school. Talking to people from diverse backgrounds provides so much insight that people just can’t imagine” (Rhoads, 1997, p. 209). This type of experience allows us to get to know ourselves in ways we cannot in a strict classroom setting.

In experiencing the wonders of Alternative Spring Break, I learned so much about myself as a leader and as a volunteer. I made connections with beautiful people while working for a greater cause. Community service not only affects the person who is utilizing the service, but it does a whole lot of good for those who serve. In the next upcoming weeks I am hoping to look for personal accounts, both scholarly and on my own, which will give me some more insight into how service affects those who do it.

ASB Columbia, SC 2013

References: Rhoads, R. (1997). Community service and higher learning: Explorations of the caring self.  Albany: State University of New York Press.

Why We Can't Go Back

            In reaction to our current ecological crisis I have come across people who say the only way to get ourselves out of the whole mess is to "go back" technologically.  The line of logic is that man-made technology is the cause of the destruction of the environment and the only solution lies in humanity renouncing the use of our most modern technologies.

            I would argue that this is not the answer.  Not only because it is impractical and won't happen, but also because this answer goes against our nature as evolving beings.

 

"... one is hardly conscious of the extent to which "nature" acts not only as a driving force but as a helper - in other words, how much instinct insists that the higher level of consciousness be attained.  This urge to a higher and more comprehensive consciousness fosters civilization and culture, but must fall short of the goal unless man voluntarily places himself in its serve" - Carl Jung  (Jung, 1996). 

            This "driving force", or "helper" quality of nature, seems to be synonymous with syntropy - the tendency in the universe for things to become more complicated, more whole.  In relation to animals (including the human), it is the general force of evolution.  Beings are always becoming more and more complex while adapting to their environment.

            Carl is saying here that the natural instincts within us are always pushing us toward higher levels of complexity.  He states that "civilization and culture", which must inherently include the technology that has come about because of them, has been a result of this tendency.  However, the key is when he says our syntropic tendency "... must fall short of the goal unless man voluntarily places himself in its serve".  Although our ever-evolving nature has driven us to create all of the technology we have, this nature is still "falling short" as we are not yet fully acknowledging it.  What exactly does this mean?

            I would say, because man is a product of nature, and technology is a product of man, ultimately technology is a product of nature even if that technology is harmful to nature.  Our current technologies, and the modern mind which relates to them, is just as valid a part of humanity's syntropic evolution as any other stage.  However it is time to recognize that the syntropic tendency of our world, of our environment, is calling humanity to evolve to another level. 
 

            Evolution happens when changes in the environment cause the way of being of a species to become obsolete in the context of the newly emerging environment.  The species in question must then develop a new way of functioning which is appropriate within the environmental context.  If the species does not, then it will inevitably die out.  However, if the species evolves and adapts to the environment, it will continue life in a new form. 

            It is clear that currently our environment is being changed by the way humanity is functioning.  But the environment is being changed in a way which will demand change of our way of being.  The wide-spread adoption of a lifestyle which consumes so much has resulted in well-known environmental consequences.  These consequences demonstrate that humanity's current way of being is not appropriate in the context of our environment.  This demands that we change the way we function, or we die out.

            I believe the "instinct" Carl says we must voluntarily place ourselves in service of is the part of our instinct connected to the environment.  Although we have survival instincts to keep ourselves alive, which utilize our ego, I would argue there is a more intuitive instinct within us that connects us with our context - with our environment.  Most modern humans have lost touch with this instinct as it has been so long since we needed it.  But I would imagine this instinct has its roots in the same instincts animals tune into when they predict a major storm and are naturally driven to find safety.  There are also records of modern indigenous peoples who's senses are keenly attuned to the natural world.  Reconnecting with these kinds of instincts could give us an intuitive understanding of our urgent need to evolve.  Recognizing our connection to our environmental context and acknowledging the messages our environment is sending us would force us to begin changing our lifestyle - changing our way of functioning.

          It seems to me that the message syntropy is trying to give us is that over-using our rational, logically-oriented parts of the mind leads to behavior which is insensitive to the overall context, to our environment.  The over-development of these parts of the psyche has led to an enormous technological capacity without nearly enough responsibility to use it.  These functions of the psyche are best used in conjunction with the more intuitive instincts inside ourselves that, in the modern world, we hardly realize need acknowledgement and development.  All in all it is most important that we change our behavior - our way of functioning - so that we save ourselves from environmental catastrophe.  But for a true syntropic step of evolution I believe a change in the way we use our consciousness must also occur.

            As I stated before I do not believe the change in functioning we are being called to would be a renunciation of human technology.  In fact, I would say the development of new technology would play a very major role in our evolution.  There is much promise held in sustainable technology efforts currently being made.  The fact that we have come as far as we have with technology - and with culture at large - shows us that the syntropic forces of our universe made the possibility of developing these inherit in the human being.  This seems to be evidence enough of their validity.  The question is whether or not humanity will recognize it's need to evolve - it's need to use technology and culture in a responsible and appropriate way within the context of the natural world.  And ultimately, whether or not we will develop the intuitive sensitivity needed to fully recognize our responsibility as highly-evolved beings in the natural world.

 

References

 Jung, C.G. (1996).  The practice of psychotherapy. In RFC Hull (Trans.), Collected works of C.   G. Jung (Vol. 16).  Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.