Key thinkers in ecopedagogy and eco-education, such as Richard Kahn and C.A. Bowers, argue that the transition of Western consumer culture to a more sustainable, eco-friendly lifestyle depends upon a deep transition of the way we see ourselves in relation to nature (and the universe). Ecological problems such as anthropogenic climate change are thus seen to be rooted in the Western mindset, described in the literature by a range of terms, e.g. anthropocentrism, cartesianism, the Christian notion of stewardship, modernism, technical-instrumental rationality, extractivism, individualism, atomism and so forth.

According to Bowers, these (biased) forms of knowledge are dominant in schools and universities in many parts of the world, while knowledge forms that characterize cultures in ecological balance, such as most indigenous cultures, are regarded as inferior. Thus, the key to unlock the attitude that divides us from nature, he argues, is to see how cultures that have shown themselves sustainable over time can inspire transitions in the currently dominant, unsustainable forms of knowledge.

Taking Norway as its example, the paper argues that the Western mindset of today – especially in a rich, oil-producing nation – is ridden with paradoxes and denial, as shown by sociologist Kari M. Norgaard (2011). The way forward, however, is not entirely clear, since denial, paradoxes and certain forms of irony may, more than anythig else, be a symptom of an incapability to invest psychological energy in any kind of strong belief or commitment. Thus the problem may be not so much a wrong kind of knowledge, as a disinvestment in the idea – the meaning and value – of knowledge itself.

Two questions will be discussed on this background. First, to what extent is it clear that Western forms of knowledge are unsuitable in addressing ecological problems and climate change? I question especially Kahn’s claim that the ancient Greek notion of paideia leads to later divisions between the realms of human beings and nature (the Greek terms are nomos and physis). The second question follows from the first: Can we still find resources in the Greek co-creation of philosophy and democracy – which Castoriadis calls the project of autonomy – that can help us address the problems connected to climate change in meaningful and creative ways? In other words, are there still resources in the Western tradition that are worth our attention in these questions, or must we start again from scratch? The discussion draws on the eco-political philosophy of Cornelius Castoriadis as well as contemporary research on the political and educational significations of climate change. 

Bowers, C.A. (1997) The Culture of Denial. Why the environmental movement needs a strategy for reforming universities and public schools. New York: SUNY press Castoriadis, C (1987) The Imaginary Institution of Society. Cambridge, Mass: MIT press Castoriadis C (2004-2011) Ce qui fait la Grèce, tome 1-4. Paris: Seuil Kahn, R (2010) Critical Pedagogy, Ecoliteracy & Planetary Crisis. New York: Peter Lang Norgaard, K.M. (2011) Living in Denial. Climate change, emotions and everyday life. Cambridge, Mass, MIT press