Пожалуй, самым тяжёлым психологическим потрясением для современного человечества было научное установление того факта, что несмотря на всю свою техническую вооружённость и мощь, человек по-прежнему остаётся всего лишь одним, пусть бы и самым высокоорганизованным, из биологических существ. И осознание этого факта вселяет некоторую надежду на то, что человек сумеет и, главное, успеет принять превентивные меры по спасению природной среды от полной деградации.Впрочем, говоря о высокой организованности человека как биологического вида, надо сразу же подчёркнуть, что как социальное явление человечество в лице свой наиболее цивилизованной части, продемонстрировало скорее анархизм мышления и поведения, нежели подлинную разумность и самоосознание. Потребительская цивилизация постепенно подводит нашу планету к гибели – вот основной рефрен резолюций международных экологических форумов, проходивших (Рио-де-Жанейро – 1992 г., Копенгаген – 1994 г.) под девизом – «Повестка дня – XXI век». То есть, экологический кризис наших дней во многом, если не в первую очередь, связан именно с психологией тех или иных – социально-политических, социально-экономических и социально-этнических – групп общества, а не с их технологией как таковой. И вряд ли мы выкарабкаемся из этого кризиса, если не сумеем разобраться в своих собственных морально-нравственных критериях. Среди которых бережное отношение к природе и к использованию её ресурсов только-только начинает занимать подобающее место. А разбираться всё равно придётся, ибо времени для разработки и принятия решений по рациональному освоению природной среды «отпущено» всего полтора-два десятка лет.

127

В связи с этим особую остроту приобретает проблема коренных народов Севера. Причём не столько даже в плане элементарного их выживания, сколько в том, что опыт северных народностей по освоению природных ресурсов может и должна послужить моделью (одной из) предельно рационального природопользования для всего человечества.

Правомочность этого утверждения основывается на двух основных посылках. С одной стороны, психология современного потребителя – неважно, отдельный ли это индивидуум или социум в целом – ориентирована на покорение природы и базируется на примитивнейшем кредо: мне (нам) так хочется. А с другой стороны, исконная психология северных этносов в их отношении к природе зиждется на неразрывном слиянии с природой, на предельно бережном отношении ко всем её проявлениям, элементам и компонентам.

Конечно же, жизнь человека на Крайнем Севере крайне трудна, ибо требует больших затрат сил и энергии даже в обычных для этих регионов условиях. А во время разного рода стихийных бедствий и техногенных катаклизмов и вовсе трагична. И, тем не менее, в ответ на закономерный вопрос – ну что это за жизнь? – можно привести свидетельство того же С.П. Крашенинникова, который отмечал, что коренные жители Камчатки отличаются (отличались) весёлостью и живостью нрава, детской непосредственностью чувств и своеобразной культурой. Довольно высокой, добавим от себя, образцами которой – одеждой, утварью, снаряжением – мы не только восхищаемся, но и пользуемся в качестве базовых моделей при освоении северных территорий. И всё же, по большому счёту, кроме этого очевидного, хотя и модернизированного с учётом современных технологий, подражательства в отдельных сторонах бытия коренных народов, общество мало продвинулось в осмыслении самого главного достижения этих национальностей – их тысячелетнего опыта сотрудничества с природой.

 

Кстати, восприятие этого опыта, хотя он и позволяет осознать главное – нашу причастность к природе – отнюдь не означает возврата к дикой природе. Более того, он – этот опыт – не означает и того, что целью современного общества является сохранение самого опыта и последних его носителей как средства поддержания многообразия природно-социальной системы Земли. Он – этот опыт – означает, что многообразие природно-социальной системы нашей планеты, без которого система приобретает тенденцию к саморазрушению, определяется не только и не столько числом составляющих её элементов и компонентов, сколько качеством и теснотой взаимодействий между этими элементами и компонентами.

 

128

 

То есть, если выразиться проще, опыт коренных народов Крайнего Севера настолько бесценен, что мы вправе говорить не о сохранении этого опыта в разного рода резерватах и рефугиумах, хотя, повторимся, и это весьма важно с точки зрения сохранения многообразия взаимосвязей и взаимоотношений современного социума, а о воссоздании модели традиционного природопользования как полноправного (а в некоторых случаях и как единственно допустимого) способа хозяйствования.

Тем не менее, понимание необходимости сохранять теснейшую взаимосвязь как между экологическими, социально-экономическими и психологическими отношениями внутри общества с одной стороны и не менее тесную взаимосвязь между самим обществом и природной средой с другой ещё только-только пробивает себе дорогу в сознании большинства индивидуумов и всего социума в целом.

Итак, вопрос выживания человека в современных условиях стоит, буквально, ребром – жить или не жить? И как бы это не было обидно, но от такой постановки проблемы уже не уйти. Тем более, что, как это ни прискорбно и обидно осознавать, человек сам себя своей чрезмерной прагматичностью поставил в такие жёсткие условия.

 

129

 

ECOLOGY AS A REFLECTION OF PSYCHOLOGY

Valery Bykasov

 

The present-day ecologic crisis is connected mainly, if not first of all, to a psychology of one or another social group. We are hardly to overcome negative crisis consequences if we are unable to conceive our own moral criteria. It is of vital importance to conceive them because unfortunately we are short of time to elaborate all neccessery protective measures.

It’s a pity that we haven’t yet done it, whereas dozens of native people generations from different regions of the planet have been living for centuries in harmony with nature, but not in the state of permanent struggle against it. They are perfectly adapted to nature conditions forming an organic part of it and not suffering from torture caused by our eternal dilemma: to be or not to be?

Naturally, this can be objected: it is impossible to imagine human existance now out of the limits and demands of modern civilization. It’s strange, but we, civilization supporters, have been convinced for centuries and thousands of years that our mode of life is the most preferable. And at the same time we always envy “natural” life of aborigenes of Asia, Africa, America and Australia, let us recollect, for example, Russeau and Volter. We have been oppressing Indiands, Africans, Malaysians for centuries and at the same time have been dreaming of “paradise” life of Maugly, aborigenes and robinsons. We have been exhausting natural resources of colonial countries and areas for hundreds of years creating the basis of our prosperity. But now «suddenly» realized that such primitive model of development can destroy the whole mankind in the nearest future. For centuries the idea was spread that our civilization is the highest, but at last we begin to realize that the loss of only one, even little civilization, for instance, that of Itelmen, Evens, Eskimos, Tungoos, Koryaks, may turn out to be the reduction of the whole anthropogene system diversity and, as a result of it, mankind may be doomed to inevitable degradation.

Unfortunately the conception of necessary preservation of close relations between ecologic, economic and social aspects of human activity is obvious up to now only to scientists and politiciains who proposed to consider 1993 as a year of aborigenes and native populations. In any case disapproving attitude to ecology in our country, especially in the regions of north aborigenes inhabitance, makes it possible to affirm that we are psychologically unprepared to regard the life of these natives as original and independent civilizations.

This is first of all felt in our psychology of consumers because everything in our life is finally determined by our needs. It’s exactly due to them we produce more and more various goods and that’s why it is so difficult to break this vicious circle when production volume is permanently increasing for the sake of needs satisfaction, and new and new goods are contrived in order to increase needs. So quite naturally our worship of consumption is converted into a sort of narcomania. In both cases it is extremely difficult to stop it as well as to confess our own guilt and defectiveness.

But the most sad is that consumer’s psychology as well as narcomania are based on the most primitive credo: I want it to be so! And the main argument of those who are eager to get civilization friuts is as follows: we want to live in modern society. Actually, why shouldn’t we desire it? But on the other hand, why souldn’t we coordinate our desire with those who don’t want to live in this modern civilization? Moreover, why passionate civilization supporters don’t ask a permission of the natives for exploration and exploitation of natural resources of their lands? Why those who possess power in our country make on the lands of aborigenes whatever they want hiding under demagogic slogans of freedom of activity? They don’t care if their free activity does harm to the mode of life of natives. What a strange manner to reject rights and dignity of other people only on the basis of the fact that they recognize other values and priorities! And it is still a question whether our priorities are actually valuable. May be just on the contrary, for instance, natives of Kamchatka, have spiritual, moral, ethical and ecologic norms and rules worthy to be followed by us, who are trying to «benefit» natives by friuts of our civilization by all means. Let’s try to understand it.

Of course, life of a person closely related to nature is not so easy, it takes much energy and efforts, and it is really tragic during natural disasters and catastrophes. Nevertheles, as it was noticed by S. P. Krasheninnikov, natives of Kamchatka were always gay and cheerful, with childish spontaneity and original culture. Now we admire and make much fuss about models of their culture: clothes, ornaments, utensils, fairy-tails etc. And now let’s have a look at ourselves, proud nature conquerors, and we’ll see sad, gloomy and even malicious persons. No wonder, as we have created consumers culture, in other words, though more rude but precise, the culture of «stupid absorption».

The difference between culture and psychology of aborigenes and newcomers is mostly obvious in their attitude to nature, to ecologic problems. We may say that natives living in harmony with nature are more ecologically educated than even founders of scientific ecology. Though, of course, it is non of their merit, just their usual mode of life. But exactly due to it, if it is possible to say so, intuitive ecologic knowledge of natives is after all more productive and intergrated.

We, so called civilized people, are actually proud of our achievements in nature conqest. However any technical accident, economic or political catastrophe remind us of the existance of the conquered nature, and the price of such conqest is extremely high. Chernobyl tragedy is a convincing example of this statement. To tell the truth, it is always difficult for natives in any region of the world to keep harmony with nature: cold, hunger, heat and ilnesses always follow them.

But the situation with civilized nations is not at all better. For example, the number of healthy new-born children in Russia in 1991 was about 4% whereas in 1970-es it was about 70%. It is extremely high price for neglect of ecologic demands, isn’t it? And isn’t aborigenes civilization more preferable in this case when only healthy children survived and sicky were doomed to early death? Of course, natural selection is cruel and doesn’t agree with civilization basically. But in any case it is free from hypocrisy of civilization when the whole planet population is doomed to ilnesses, including genetic ones, and finally to degeneration.

The first of the «ecologic qualities» of the natives is for sure their unwritten but stricktly followed rule : not to take from the nature anything spare, unnecessary. It should be noted, that this rule – not to produce unnecessary things – just begins to penetrate into the civilized person consciousness. Even famous ecologist B.Commoner didn’t include this rule in his list of basic ecologic laws.

By the way, as far as Commoner’s laws are concerned, it may be said for sure that natives were always aware of them and used in their everyday life, at least, four of these ecologic laws: everything is related to everything; everything should be utilized; nature knows better; nothing is given for gratis. The life of aborigenes itself was a natural keeping of these laws. Let’s add to them the natives own law: nothing spare (in modern conception: don’t make harm producing spare things) and let’s show our respect to ancient wisdom of the people who have been living for thousands of years according to the laws stated by our civilization only in the second half of this century. But infortunately they haven’t yet become guidance and norm of human activity up to now.

It is interesting to notice that aborigenes of the North have successfully decided energetic problem due to their life according to the basic ecologic laws. The only possible way for our civilization to survive is to waste all energetic resources at a very high level. On the contrary, the natives of Extreme North have solved energetic problem unusually simply. They created a dwelling – jaranga of Chukchi or Koryaks, igloo of Itelmen, semi-dug-out of Eskimos – which doesn’t need any heating. These dwellings keep heat perfectly, practically not emitting it outwards and that’s why are heated only due to light source and hearth for preparing food and also due to the warmth of inhabitants own bodies. So two opposite problems – necessity to survive in extremely severe conditions of the North and absence of fuel – were solved in the most reasonable and natural way.

It is noteworthy that lately our technocratic civilization having met energetic problem and realizing that heating of the outdoors doesn’t do us credit, also followed the way of the natives. Now in many civilized countries they build individual dwellings so heat-insulated that even in severe frost they are heated quite sufficiently only by lightning and work of common home devices.

We may go on enumerating examples of sustainable use of nature resources by natives. But not only these examples are important for us. Obviuos basic fact that humanity, tried in the furnace of civilization, was forced to fix its eyes on the mode of life of aborigenes is more important. It is no wonder that we did it at last taking into account that Kamchatka Itelmen culture has existed in its main counters for at least five thousand years. Two powerful civilizations of Mesopotamia – Kushan Kingdom and Sogdiana – had vanished during this peroid of time because of ecologic catastrophes (soil salting). They vanished as well as many peoples of the Earth who were unable to realize that the struggle of a man against nature always leads to a man’s defeat.

 

And at last, as it became clear, it is necessary to preserve about 30–35% of all landscapes and ecosystems of the planet, including ices of Antarctica and Greenland, in their natural state for human survival as a biological species. Only one example to confirm this statement: about a quarter of a total oxygen volume used by mankind in its activity is spent by USA. But 90% of this oxygen is produced by Amazon and Siberia forests. Both of these areas are inhabited by the natives. That’s why placing of these areas at the disposal of authentic owners once and forever will save the whole humanity of oxygen starvation. As it turnes out to be, it is not us, civilized mankind, who benefit aborigenes of Siberia and Amazon but, on the contrary, they are our true benefactors due to their sustainable mode of life, they actually save us from suffocation. So reservation and possession of the vast territories of Siberia, Africa, Australia, North and South Americas by the natives is a great achievement for both of us (for us and aborigenes) in our common movement to survival.