Spirituality, Religion, Culture, and Peace: Exploring the Foundation for Inner-Outer Peace in the Twenty-First Century

This paper is about different spiritual and religious traditions in the world and how they have or could in the future contribute to the creation of a global culture of peace. As the above quotations indicate, almost all of the world's religions, in their own sacred writings and scriptures, say that they support "peace". Yet it is a known fact that war and violence have often been undertaken historically, as well as at present, in the name of religion (as is discussed further below). Yet religions profess to want peace. So what is 'peace'? And how have religions historically helped to promote peace, and how might they help create a more peaceful world in the 21st century? These are a few of the questions that this paper will attempt to explore.

Traditionally many people focus on how wars and conflicts are seemingly undertaken for religious reasons, or at least undertaken in the name of religion. Indeed, it is not difficult to find data and statistics in support of this hypothesis. Quincy Wright, in his monumental study, A Study of War , documents numerous wars and armed conflicts that involve a direct or indirect religious component, (Wright, 1941) as does Lewis Richardson in his statistical treatise, Statistics of Deadly Quarrels. (Richardson, 1960)
As the Cold War has ended and inter-ethnic conflicts have re-emerged in many parts of the world, it has indeed been a popular thesis of different writers to argue that these inter-ethnic conflicts often have a religious component. A few examples of such recent writing include: Samuel Huntington's, "The Clash of Civilizations," Foreign Affairs (Summer 1993); Daniel Patrick Moynihan's Pandaemonium: Ethnicity in International Politics; and R. Scott Appleby, Religious Fundamentalisms and Global Conflict.

Following UNESCO's lead in holding two conferences on "The Contributions of Religions to a Culture of Peace" (both held in Barcelona, Spain, in April 1993 and December 1994), and other interfaith dialogues between different religions that are occurring in a serious way around the planet--including the World Parliament of Religions, in Chicago, August 1993; 1and the ongoing work of the World Council on Religion and Peace--this paper will focus instead on how religious and spiritual traditions can contribute to creating a more peaceful world via an exploration of the foundations for both inner and outer peace in the twenty first-century. The paper will have four parts:

I. Exoteric/Outer and Esoteric/Inner Aspects of Religions

Part I begins by providing a framework for looking at all the world's religions as having a potential spectrum of perspectives, including: the external, socially-learned, cultural or exoteric part --including different religious organizations, rituals, and beliefs, which are passed down from one generation to the next, and the internal, mystical, direct spiritual experience or esoteric part. In considering the external aspects of religion, principles from the field of intercultural communication are used to explore the creation of tolerance, understanding and valuing of diversity concerning different aspects of socially learned behavior or culture, including religion.

Fundamentalism or religious extremism or fanaticism--when religions claim their version of religion is the only one--are seen as an extreme form of the socially-learned aspect of religion and one not conducive to creating world peace. In considering the internal or esoteric aspects of religion, it is noted that all the world's religions began with someone who had a mystical enlightenment or revelatory experience, which they then tried to share with others, leading often to the formation of new religions--even though this was not the intention of the original founder. Parallels between new scientific paradigms and ancient mystical traditions from the world's religions are then noted to illustrate how contemporary dynamic, interconnected, whole systems ways of experiencing and viewing reality can be seen as providing necessary conditions "within the individual" for creating an external global culture of peace in the world.

II. Further Explorations of the Esoteric/Inner and Exoteric/Outer Aspects
of Religion and Culture

Part II continues the exploration of the inner and outer aspects of religion and culture. Here, three different topical areas are explored: first, the work of Pitirim Sorokin on the alternation historically within Western cultures between ideational/spiritual/inner values and sensate/materialistic/outer values; second, the evolution or change historically from female to mixed to male aspects of divinity within different religions and cultures, as this relates to changing values and worldviews; and third, the work of Joseph Campbell and the universal theme of "the hero's journey" (or search for inner meaning) in the myths of all cultures--even though the outer form of the journey can vary from one culture to the next.

III. Inner and Outer Aspects of Peace, the Cultures of Peace, & Nonviolence
(Paralleling Esoteric & Exoteric Aspects of Religion)

Part III traces the evolution of the concept of "peace" within Western peace research, including the recent development of more holistic definitions of peace that are consistent with the ideas explored in Part I of this paper. The conceptual shift involved in moving from peace as absence of war through peace as absence of large scale physical and structural violence (negative and positive peace respectively) to more holistic definitions of peace that apply across all levels and include both an inner and an outer dimension, represents a substantial broadening of the peace concept in Western peace research. Part III then uses the above evolution in the concept of peace as a framework to explore different dimensions of "a culture of peace," as well as different dimensions of "nonviolence." Gandhian, spiritually-based nonviolence is seen as a link between inner and outer forms of peace.

IV. An Agenda for Future Peace Research--Based on the Need
to Focus on Both Inner and Outer Aspects of Peace

Part IV argues that Western peace research has focused almost entirely on outer peace, but that in future it needs to deal with both inner and outer aspects of peace in a more balanced way. In order to do this, it is suggested that peace research elaborate on the different dimensions and levels of inner peace, just as it has done for outer peace, and that it expand its methodology to include other ways of knowing besides social scientific methods only. Finally, peace research needs to redress the inbalance between negative and positive images of peace by exploring not only what it wants to eliminate, for example war and starvation, but also what it wants to create in a positive sense.

Please note that this paper is an ongoing project that will become a book. At present, some sections of the paper are developed more than others, but the basic framework is here. Please contact the writers in the future for later elaborations of this writing. We offer this version of the paper with humility, aware that further revisions and elaborations are necessary.

PART I: EXOTERIC/OUTER AND ESOTERIC/INNER ASPECTS OF RELIGIONS

A. MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE, ORGANIZED RELIGION, AND FUNDAMENTALISM: A FRAMEWORK FOR LOOKING AT ALL THE WORLD'S RELIGIONS

Before considering the external and internal aspects of religion, it is important to note that within any religion, there is a potential spectrum of possible perspectives on the teachings of that particular religion or spiritual tradition, including how those teachings relate to world peace. First, there is religion as socially-learned behavior, i.e., as part of culture--what can be called "organized religion." Here religious beliefs, rituals, and institutions are learned and passed down from one generation to the next, and religious institutions are an integral part of the social structure and fabric of culture.

When religious beliefs take the form of rigid dogma, and the believers' beliefs and behavior are known to be right, while those of non believers, or other religions--or even different variants within one's own religion--are known to be wrong, this leads into what has been variously called "fundamentalism" or "fanaticism" or "extremism"--a global trend in almost all of the world's religions today.

At the other extreme are mystical traditions which are based on direct inner spiritual experiences. Here, such mystical, revelatory, or enlightenment experiences (rather than socially learned behavior and beliefs) constitute an important part of one's spiritual life. Such spiritual experiences have also occurred in mystics from all the world's religions throughout the ages. Indeed, the founders of the world's religions were themselves usually mystics, i.e., people who had revelatory or enlightenment experiences which they then tried to share, as best they could, with others--even though they were often not trying to establish a new religion at the time (which was often left to their followers to do).Given these considerations, it is possible to look at any religion as having a potential spectrum of different forms within it, each discussed separately in the paper, as follows:

MYSTICAL/SPIRITUAL______ORGANIZED RELIGION______FUNDAMENTAL TRADITIONS AND BELIEFS OR EXTREMISM
(direct inner experience)	(part of social learning and culture)	(my dogma/beliefs are right and yours are wrong; also social learning and culture)
Figure 1: Spectrum of Potential Perspectives Within Any Religion

It is interesting that mystics of all religions can usually communicate with each other and appreciate the spiritual or God force operating within each other--no matter what religious tradition the other mystics come from. Organized religion is often tolerant of different religious traditions, as seen in ecumenical movements around the world, but there can be misunderstanding between religions based on differing beliefs and practices. These misunderstandings can be lessened by educational programs focusing on the appreciation and understanding of cultural and religious diversity. But fundamentalism often stresses how one particular interpretation--of religion, scripture, and religious practices--is right and other interpretations are wrong. This difficulty of fundamentalists, from any religion, in dealing with diversity in a tolerant manner presents a major problem for peaceful relations and understanding between religions and cultures and hinders the creation of a global culture of peace.

If the whole world were mystics--who tend to honor the mystical experience in people from all the world's religions--world peace would be easier to achieve than it is today. But mystics are a very small percentage of the world's population and so misunderstandings, conflicts, and wars have often resulted historically, in part at least, over different religious interpretations of what constitutes proper beliefs, practices, rituals, and organizational forms, i.e., over the socially- learned aspects of religion.

B. EXOTERIC/OUTER FORMS OF RELIGION

This section of the paper will look at exoteric or outer forms of religion, i.e., religion as part of our socially-learned behavior or culture--whether it takes the form of traditional organized religion or a more extremist or fundamentalist form, and how principles from intercultural communication and conflict resolution can help people deal constructively with cultural and religious diversity.

1. Religion as Socially-Learned Behavior or Part of Culture

One way of looking at religion is as part of culture through socially learned behavior. "Culture" can be defined as learned, shared, patterned behavior, as reflected in technology and tools; social organizations, including economic, political, religious, media, educational and family organizations; and ideas. In this way, religion is shared by a group of people, learned and passed down from one generation to the next, and is clearly reflected in both religious organizations and beliefs. "Socialization" is the process through which culture is learned, including our religious beliefs and practices. The agents or institutions of socialization include language, (a factor individuals are often least conscious of), politics, economics, religion, education, family, and media.

While Anthropologists have often studied one culture, including its institutions, in depth, others have undertaken cross-cultural, comparative studies. More recently the field of intercultural communication has emerged, (Groff, 1992) as witnessed in the emergence of specialist inter-cultural organizations, such as The Society for Intercultural Education, Training, and Research (SIETAR). While cross-cultural studies deal with comparing some aspect of life, such as religious institutions and beliefs, from one culture to another, intercultural communication deals with the dynamic interaction patterns that emerge when peoples from two or more different cultures, including religions, come together to interact, communicate, and dialogue or negotiate with each other. There are general principles of intercultural communication. There are also studies of particular cultures interacting, based on a belief that when persons from any two specific different cultures come together to interact with each other, that they will create their own dynamic interaction process, based on the underlying values of both groups, just as any two individuals will also create their own dynamic interaction process.

A significant problem with organized religion and belief, as this relates to peace and conflict, is individuals and groups often confuse the map (their socially-learned version of reality or culture or religion) with the territory (or ultimate reality), as elaborated below. Thus people believe that their personal or subjective version of reality or religion is valid, while other views are invalid. Instead it can be argued that the many maps are different, but possibly equally valid interpretations and attempts to understand the same underlying reality or territory.

2. Fundamentalism: Taking Organized Religion and Beliefs into Dogma

Fundamentalism seems to be a trend in almost all the world's religions today. The term "fundamentalism" had its origins in "a late 19th and early 20th century transdenominational Protestant movement that opposed the accommodation of Christian doctrine to modern scientific theory and philosophy. With some differences among themselves, Christian fundamentalists insist on belief in the inerrancy of the Bible, the virgin birth and divinity of Jesus Christ, the vicarious and atoning character of his death, his bodily resurrection, and his second coming as the irreducible minimum of authentic Christianity." (Grolier, 1993) More recently the concept has been applied not only to conservative, evangelical Protestants, but also to any Christian group which adopts a literal interpretation of the Bible and to groups from other religious traditions who similarly base their religious views on a particular and exclusive, literal interpretation of their holy book. For example, radical Islamic groups, such as Islamic Jihad, are seen as examples of Islamic fundamentalism, although a different term is preferred. In the Islamic tradition the word fundamentalism, when translated into Arabic, has a completely different and positive meaning. In Arab countries the appropriate word for describing literal religious fanaticism is "extremism." (Al-Dajani, 1993) In this paper the term "fundamentalism" is used in the broad sense to portray any religious group or sect from any religious tradition, which adopts purely literal, as opposed to metaphorical or mythical, interpretations of their holy book, and which denies the validity of other interpretations or religious traditions, believing truth resides with their perspective only.

Because fundamentalists in any religion turn the beliefs of their religion into dogma, and also tend to interpret the scriptures of their religion in a literal way only, thus missing the many subtle levels of meaning as well as analogies with teachings from other world religions, they can end up stressing primarily how they are different from other world religions, and even from different interpretations within their own religion, rather than stressing any commonalities they might share with other world religions. This more limited interpretation of their scripture can then lead to dogmatic views that their interpretation of religion, and reality, is correct and everyone else is wrong.

An interesting and important question for peace research and future studies is why there is such an upsurge in fundamentalism in so many of the world's religions in so many different parts of the world today? Of the many possible explanations for this phenomena, two hypotheses will be explored here. The most obvious hypothesis would argue that people are overwhelmed by the increasing pace of change today, and are desperately seeking something that they can believe in as a mooring to help them through all this change in the outer world which is uprooting their lives and creating great insecurities in their lives. In the case of fundamentalism, this can involve returning to some over-idealized vision of their religious roots, which may never have existed in the idealized form that they remember, and trying to literally enforce that interpretation of reality on all the members of their group. In such situations, people may need time to try to go back to a stringently defined earlier way of life and see if they can make it work, and only when they see that the world has changed too much to return to the past will they then be ready to move forward into the future. This hypothesis is consistent with the view that any religious or spiritual tradition needs to be constantly adapted to the world in which it finds itself--if it wishes to remain a living, breathing, spiritual force that people experience in their lives, rather than become an outdated institution based on dogma or rules.

A second related hypothesis, to explain the rise of fundamentalism in the world today, relates to the dual trend towards both globalism, as well as localism. The globalization process of the last 50 years has led to a dramatic increase in global governance structures, including an expansion of the multi- faceted United Nations (UN) system, an increase in scope of regional economic and political organizations, such as the European Community (EC) and the North American Free Trade Area (NAFTA), and the continuing proliferation and development of International Governmental Organizations (IGOs). The growth in IGOs and the increase in size and scope of United Nations activities, such as the expanded scope of United Nations Peace Keeping operations, has had a major impact on international relations.

A similar expansion of activities can be seen in the work of various international scientific, educational and cultural organizations, as indexed by the continued growth in International Non Governmental Organizations (INGOs). Millions of individuals are routinely engaged in the work of INGOs, whose activities span the whole range of human experience, including agriculture, art, communications, economics, education, environment, health, music, politics, religion, sport and transportation. Additionally, the world has witnessed the growth of an increasingly integrated global economy, as manifested in interdependent national economies and the evolution of multinational corporations (MNCs) and transnational corporations (TNCs) operating in just about every country worldwide. Many of these companies are economic giants, dwarfing all but a few of the world's national economies.

An apparently contradictory worldwide trend towards local identity and ethnicity has also emerged as a major factor shaping events in the world today. In the wake of the end of the old East-West Cold War confrontation, we are witnessing a worldwide increase in local ethnic conflict, sometimes nonviolent but too often violent and very bloody, and often involving a religious dimension. These "local conflicts" are often proving to be intense and intractable, embedded in centuries of mistrust and hatred, and too often crystallized around and sanctioned, implicitly or explicitly, by particular religious institutions.

This localization process is every bit as profound as the overarching trend towards globalization, and in fact it is perhaps best conceived as neither in opposition to, nor separate from, that process. Globalization and localization are so interconnected and interdependent that localization is best conceptualized as an essential complement of the globalization process. This view suggests that the integration of the big system, the creation of a new world order, requires a sense of meaning at the local level, requires human beings to experience coherence and balance within the local socio-cultural context. The rise of fundamentalism, it can be argued, is associated with this interdependence of the globalization and localization processes and the resulting pressures to achieve coherence at the local level in the face of the vast scope of the global supersystems.

The coherence in individuals' lives is, to a greater or lesser degree, associated with culturalization, with what the world means and how meaning in life and death is interpreted. Multicultural interpretations of the globalization - localization interdependency argue, as a consequence, that religion should not be the same in all societies, that it will and must have personal, local and global dimensions that manifest themselves in a rich variety of cultural forms and expressions.

This paper will subsequently further argue that the diversity of organized world religions--if also recognizing a deeper spiritual unity that connects this outer diversity--is a necessary requirement for the creation of a new culture of peace in the 21st century. If, as many believe, the underlying spiritual reality of the world's religions is the same, it can be argued that the cultural expression of that reality in the material world, the world's organized religions, must necessarily be different, in tune with the rich tapestry of our many global cultures, if we are to sustain the dynamic globalization-localization balance in a nonviolent, multicultural form.

3. Principles From the Fields of Intercultural Communication and Conflict Resolution: Tools to Help Deal with Cultural and Religious Diversity

As noted above, intercultural communication deals with what happens when people from different cultures, including religions, come together to communicate, interact, and even negotiate with each other. Individuals each carry around some different version of "reality" or culture in their heads, based on socialization (or learning) by the different agents or institutions of socialization in their culture, including religion, and based on different individual and collective life experiences. This worldview provides a sense of values and meaning about life. The way that this reality is known is through one's perceptions of it. Unfortunately, perceptions based on evidence from one or more of the five senses are often distorted. Individuals also selectively perceive ideas and information, often accepting information which fits with their preconceived worldview and blocking out information which challenges that worldview--a worldview that they have spent a whole life time putting together.

It is often the case that in everyday interactions individuals, even from the same culture, can misperceive each other. When they come from totally different cultures, including different religious traditions and belief systems, the danger is even greater. It is thus a basic tenet of intercultural communication that "The message sent is often not the message received" It is understandable that individuals tend to expect others to behave the way they would in a given situation or say what they would say in that same situation. When they do not, there is a strong tendency to interpret the motivation or meaning behind the behavior of the other person in terms of what that behavior would mean in one's own culture rather than in terms of what that behavior actually means in the other person's culture, since the other's culture is not really understood. The next step can involve taking a mistaken interpretation of the other person's behavior and then evaluating or judging that behavior, often negatively. This process thus involves moving from a simple factual description of the behavior of someone from another culture, to an interpretation of the meaning of that behavior (often a misinterpretation, based on what that behavior would mean in the individual's own culture, not in the other person's culture.) A final step in this model involves a move to evaluation or judgment of that behavior, as good or bad, in turn often based on an incorrect interpretation. This description, interpretation, and evaluation sequence of events, which individuals do quite often without even realizing they are doing it, is often called DIE for short.

A related theory is Attribution Theory, which hypothesizes that individuals attribute meaning to the behavior of someone from another culture, often based on what it would mean in their own culture, rather than in the context of the other person's culture or religion. As long as an individual remains uninformed about another person's culture or religion, that individual remains vulnerable to repeating this problem over and over in their intercultural and inter-religious interactions. One important component of a solution to this problem is to become better informed about another person's culture and religion so that it is at least possible to interpret another's behavior and words in the proper cultural and religious context within which they occur. Such a strategy will also contribute to an appreciation of the rich cultural and religious diversity that exists in this world and help to counteract the tendencies to judge other's actions and words incorrectly and negatively.

In terms of conflict resolution, it can be argued that if an individual is not conscious of their own cultural or religious socialization or programming--which influences people to a much greater extent than most individuals realize, then their behavior will in many ways be preconditioned, and on automatic pilot: they will be acting out their cultural or religious programming, without being conscious that there are other cultures or religions or ways of experiencing reality. If an individual begins to become conscious of their own cultural or religious programming, often by exposing themselves to other cultures or religions, then they can for the first time come back to their own original culture or religion and begin to see it for the first time, since they now have some basis with which to compare it. Such an individual can begin to act consciously in the world and start to appreciate the rich diversity of the human experience, including the many different outward forms, rituals, and beliefs that have emerged in different religions as human beings have sought different paths for bringing a spiritual force into their lives.

A central problem in intercultural communication, including interactions between peoples from different world religions, is to confuse the map (one's own particular version of culture or religion) with the territory (an ultimate experience of "Reality" or "God" or "Spirit," as opposed to the relative or limited experiences of daily life). Becoming conscious of being socialized into different religions and cultures, coupled with an awareness that individuals as a consequence carry around different versions or maps of "reality" in their heads, can contribute to becoming more tolerant of the different maps or versions of reality that others also carry around in their heads, while also recognizing that something much more basic and essential underlies all the apparent outer diversity.

In looking at diversity, it should also be noted that it is a basic principle of systems theory that the more complex a system is, the more diversity there needs to be within the system for it to maintain itself. The discussion of globalization and localization in the first part of this paper suggests the evolution of a more complex global system with increasing diversity within it. It is a thesis of this paper that such diversity is ultimately a strength, not a weakness, but only if it is consciously dealt with. Otherwise, we will expect people from different cultures to think and behave the way we do, and when they do not, we will tend to misinterpret and then judge their beliefs or behavior negatively (the Description, Interpretation, Evaluation problem discussed above), thus creating misunderstanding and conflict between peoples. Nonetheless, cultural diversity in the global system, like ecological diversity within an ecosystem, is ultimately an asset, if it is valued and contributes to openness to learn from other groups and cultures. Another thesis of this paper is that every culture, just as every religion (or species), has something important to contribute to the world, and no culture has all the answers. Thus every culture has both strengths as well as weaknesses. There are thus important things that we can each learn from each other--if we are open (and humble enough) to do so.

C. ESOTERIC/INNER FORMS OF RELIGION AS DIRECT INNER MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE

1. The Inner, Mystical Path to Spirituality: Many Paths to God

According to mystics, the mystical experience focuses on a direct inner experience of God or spirit, in which a person becomes one with the ultimate, invisible, creative force and divine intelligence at work in the universe or with the infinite void beyond creation. Via such an inner experience of enlightenment, God, oneness or spirit, one has an inner "knowing" that cannot be adequately described in words (indeed, "the Tao that can be named is not the Tao"). This experience totally transcends the world of outer beliefs--which we learn from our social and religious institutions. This inner knowing occurs on a much deeper level of one's being and is not vulnerable to all the distortions of our regular five senses, on which we depend for all our learning in the world.

It is interesting that almost every one of the great religions of the world originated with someone who had such a direct, inner revelatiory or enlightenment experience. Jesus who became the Christ, Buddha, Moses, Zoroaster, and various other evolved beings are obvious examples. After achieving enlightenment, such persons (who usually did not themselves intend to start a new religion) have always returned to society to minister, teach, and share their spiritual experiences and enlightenment as best they could with others. Eventually, the original teacher/ Master passed on and the followers were left to interpret, and later record, the original founder's teaching. But these followers have often not had the same enlightenment experiences themselves, and so with time, the original teachings became codified as beliefs, rituals, even dogmas. In this way, an original esoteric, mystical experience is changed over time into an exoteric form of organized religion. Nonetheless, since most people begin their spiritual path with some exoteric form of religion, it can be hoped that with time, at least some of these people will eventually turn inward to seek and experience the truth of God or spirit within.

While all religions usually began with someone who became enlightened, it is also interesting that mystical traditions continue to be dominant in Eastern religions, but were often overshadowed, though not lost, in Western religions by a focus more on organized religion and learned beliefs and principles to live by in the world. Nonetheless, there has been an interesting recent revival of interest in mystical/spiritual traditions in the West, along ironically with equally strong or stronger fundamentalist movements. Perhaps this indicates the great desire in people to find some deeper meaning to their lives, amidst all the changes in their external lives and in the world, although by sometimes very different paths. Such a hypothesis would be consistent with the globalization-localization hypothesis discussed earlier.

It is also interesting that while the traditional, exoteric religious path requires learning about different practices and beliefs, the mystical, esoteric path often involves unlearning or using various meditative techniques to clear the mind of thoughts about the external world, so that it is possible to come to a place of inner stillness or emptiness of the external world--what Zen Buddhists call "No Mind." This still, inner state enables individuals to experience the godforce, spirit, or pregnant void within, without the distortions of everyday needs, beliefs, and limited consciousness intervening, and thus to go beyond the limited self or ego so that spirit can make itself manifest in their lives. Thus many mystical traditions focus on ways to quiet the overactive mind in meditation, and thus bring one's inner self to a state of peace.

In such spiritual traditions, only true inner peace within the hearts of people can bring about true outer peace in the world, because if individuals are plagued by inner conflicts, doubts, fears, and insecurities, they will tend to project them outwardly onto others, blaming others for their problems, without even realizing what they are doing. It is thus necessary for all of us as individuals to 'wake up' and become increasingly conscious of our own thoughts and feelings, and how these are creating certain results or consequences in the world, so that we may each become increasingly responsible for the type of world that we are creating--including whether this world is a peaceful one or not.

2. Parallels Between New Scientific Paradigms and the Mystical Experience

There are a number of new paradigms, or overarching worldviews, under which scientists conduct their research, in science today. These paradigms can be seen as differing versions of a dynamic, interdependent, whole systems worldview, which various writers have suggested parallels the mystical, spiritual experience of mystics from different religions around the world. (Capra, 1991; Capra, 1982; Chopra, 1990; Davies, 1992) In effect, mystics experience this dynamic, interdependent, whole systems worldview on the inner planes, while scientists have used scientific methods and analysis of the external world to arrive at related conclusions. It can be argued that the scientific and the spiritual paths are just two different ways of trying to study or know the same ultimate reality; that one can go infinitely outward scientifically into space and infinitely inward spiritually in meditation, and that ultimately these two paths converge with parallel worldviews. Nonetheless, it needs to be pointed out that physics or science can only study or measure reality within the space-time framework of the created, physical universe. Science itself cannot provide the mystical experience of the mystery or ultimate beyond space & time, which may be one reason why the greatest scientists all eventually became mystics themselves, including DeBroglie, Einstein, Eddington, Heisenberg, Jeans, Plank, Pauli and Schrodinger. (Watson, 1988; Davies, 1992)

The old, Newtonian paradigm in physics saw reality as a clockwork universe made up of separate parts, existing within a static or equilibrium model of reality, which operated by fixed laws that could in theory predict how A effected B. This paradigm sought the ultimate physical building blocs of matter and was based upon the assumption that science, in principle, could arrive at total truth or understanding of reality within its' materialistic, reductionist, mechanistic worldview. In contrast, the New Physics has a totally new worldview, based on Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity and then later his General Theory of Relativity, followed by Quantum or Subatomic physics. With regard to quantum physics, however, it is interesting that Einstein himself could not totally accept Heisenberg's "uncertainty principle," expressed in Einstein's famous saying: "God does not play dice with the universe" or allow unpredictability. Thus Einstein himself only accepted part of what has come to be called "the New Physics."

Before noting further characteristics of the new paradigm view of reality in the New Physics, it should be noted that this new paradigm does not negate the Old Physics paradigm. Instead it says that the old Newtonian worldview works within certain parameters, and is thus still valid within those parameters, but beyond those parameters a new paradigm is necessary. Likewise, with the other new scientific paradigms (discussed further below), there is a tendency at times to conclude that they make the older scientific paradigms totally obsolete, but this is seldom the case and needs to be stressed. The old paradigms still work within certain parameters and under certain conditions, while the new paradigms work beyond those parameters, when the underlying conditions change. Recognition of this fact is part of creating a balance between different world views, and knowing when each is appropriate, that is a primary thesis of this whole paper.

The characteristics of this new paradigm--which in physics exists especially on the very macro level of the whole universe and on the very micro subatomic levels--are as follows. The New Physics (according to Capra, Davies and others) includes a dynamic, interdependent, whole systems worldview, where matter is concentrated energy and there are no ultimate building blocs of matter to find. In addition, one cannot predict an absolute relationship between A and B, and one cannot predict ahead of time whether something will, for example, be a particle or a wave. Unlike the old paradigm where the scientist was a pure, theoretically objective, outside observer, the new paradigm admits that the scientists' presence in the situation, in making a scientific measurement, can affect the outcome of the measurement, and thus there is no such thing as a purely detached objective, scientific observer anymore, instead one's mere presence in a situation can effect the outcome. The new paradigm is thus holistic, dynamic, and interdependent; there are no separate parts, only relationships; and reality is not totally predictable, except in terms of statistical probabilities. The old paradigm focuses on analysis of separate parts and either/or thinking (beginning with Aristotle), while the new paradigm focuses on synthesis and dynamic interrelationships, as well as both/and thinking.

In addition to the New Physics, there are other new scientific paradigms in science that also exhibit this dynamic, interdependent, whole systems worldview, as opposed to the old paradigm view of reality as a static, equilibrium model, which saw reality as made up of separate, unconnected parts, in a mechanistic, reductionist worldview. (See Figure 2) Some of these other new scientific paradigms follow below.

Whole, dynamic systems and living systems paradigms are illustrated in the work of the Society for General Systems Research. Evolutionary paradigms--such as those of Teilhard de Chardin, Peter Russell, Barbara Marx Hubbard, Erich Jantsch, John Platt, Erwin Lazlo, and Stephen Jay Gould's Puctuated Equilibrium Theory in biology--see change within a system as sometimes taking quantum jumps. Ilya Prigogine's Nobel Prize winning Theory of Dissipative Structures--which reconciles the entropy of physics with the increasing order and complexity of biology--shows how open systems can change via perturbations or new energy of some kind within a system, which can cause that system to break down, releasing the energy of that system to be reorganized at a higher level of order and complexity.

Rupert Sheldrake's Hypothesis of Formative Causation, or Theory of Morphogenetic Fields, hypothesizes that the universe operates more by habits, that build up over time, than by fixed laws. Under this theory, the first time a member of a species does something new is the hardest, but each successive time this new behavior becomes easier, until finally a critical mass is reached, and then suddenly everyone in the species knows how to do that new behavior. James Gleick's Chaos Theory hypothesizes that everything in the universe is interconnected--a butterfly flapping its wings in one hemisphere can effect the climate in another hemisphere, for example--and there is always order emerging out of chaos and chaos emerging out of order in the universe.

It is significant is that all of these new paradigms and scientific theories are versions of a dynamic, interdependent, whole systems worldview, just as the New Physics is. In medicine and health care, new notions of health, healing and treating the whole person are fast gaining ground. (Chopra, 1992) In environmental science, the Gaia hypothesis presents a new paradigm where the Earth as a whole is seen as a living entity, a self-regulating system of which we humans are a part. (Lovelock, 1991) In the life sciences, new thinking is challenging traditional notions of biological evolution and developing new interdependent conceptions of what constitutes a person and a society. (Watson, 1988) In each of these cases, as well as in many other examples of the development of new thinking in areas such as management and economics, (Wheatley, 1992; Hawley, 1993) the relationship and interaction between parts and the whole has been reconceptualized. Holistic paradigms, where the overall pattern of interaction between the parts is as important as the parts themselves, have emerged across a broad spectrum of disciplines and issues.

3. How a Dynamic, Interdependent, Whole Systems Worldview (of the Mystic or Scientist) Can Help Contribute to a Global Culture of Peace

The relevance of "new thinking" or a shift in consciousness--as seen in the dynamic interdependent, whole systems views in the new scientific paradigms and experiences of mystics from different religious traditions--to world peace can be seen as follows. Once our consciousness shifts from seeing the world as divided up into separate, unrelated parts (whether individuals, groups, nation-states or whatever), where the goal is to win for one's own self or group or nation, without adequate concern for others, to a new more dynamic interdependent, whole systems worldview, where everything is interconnected, and whatever happens in any part of the system effects all the other parts of the system--it becomes apparent that the only way that individuals or separate parts of the whole can "win" is if other peoples and parts of the whole also win. A fundamental shift from win-lose to win-win thinking then ensues, which seems a fundamental prerequisite and framework for creating a global culture of peace.

PART II: FURTHER EXPLORATIONS OF THE ESOTERIC/INNER AND
EXOTERIC/OUTER ASPECTS OF RELIGION AND CULTURE

A. ALTERNATION BETWEEN IDEATIONAL/SPIRITUAL/INNER AND SENSATE/MATERIALISTIC/OUTER FORMS OF WESTERN CULTURE: THE WORK OF PITIRIM SOROKIN

1. Functional and Logico Meaningful Integration of Cultures

The previous section of this paper described some of the new paradigms, which are emerging in a range of areas. It can be argued that it is no accident that these holistic paradigms have developed at this time. Indeed, one of the founding fathers of peace research, Pitirim Sorokin, suggested some 60 years ago that this would be the case. (Sorokin, 1933) Sorokin, in his classic text, Social and Cultural Dynamics, elaborated a theory of socio/cultural evolution that can be summarized as follows.

In any society or social system, there are four ways in which integration can occur. Two of these are for our purposes here quite trivial, namely spatial integration (when entities simply occupy the same space and nothing more) and external integration (when two or more entities are linked to each other through some other entity, for example grass and flowers may grow together at the same rate because of the external factors of sun, soil and rain). The third, functional integration, is far from trivial. This, for Sorokin, describes the interlocking interdependencies we now recognize as crucial in complex systems. Indeed for many scientists "functional integration," or its modern cybernetic equivalent "syntegration," (Beer, 1993)--the dynamic interdependence of entities that are in symbiotic interaction with each other--is of the utmost importance. Whole societies, whole systems, are held together by their mutually interdependent functional interactions and, following Wright's model, any changes in one will need changes elsewhere in the system to restore dynamic equilibrium.

Sorokin also proposed a fourth level of integration, which, in his view, was the highest form of integration. He called it "logico meaningful integration," to try to describe the underlying idea that things are held together because of what they mean, because of deep values in the culture. Sorokin argued that this level of integration not only provides coherence in life to individuals through the underlying meanings in their culture, but also results in these deep values being manifest in all aspects of a culture, from science to religion. For Sorokin, a culture at its peak will be integrated in both functional and logico-meaningful ways. He approached the problem of meaning in the following way.

2. Sensate/Materialistic, Ideational/Spritual, and Idealistic/Mixed Cultures

Sorokin argued that the macro cultures in Western Civilization evolved through stages that could be understood in terms of their central meanings. At one end of a continuum, these underlying meanings were essentially sensate, that is reality was defined entirely in terms of the physical world and the truth of the senses. At the other end, reality was "ideational," by which Sorokin meant spiritual in the sense that the eternal infinite spiritual reality is real, while the material world is an illusion. In this case truth of faith is the only truth. Halfway along this continuum was the "idealistic" point, where truth of faith and truth of senses were balanced through "truth of reason." Sorokin identified seven types of culture mentality on the sensate-ideational continuum. Table 1 gives the main elements of the sensate, ideational and idealistic forms.

Note: Sorokin elaborated seven types of culture mentality. The three listed above are the two extremes--Active Sensate and Ascetic Ideational, as well as a middle point, the Idealistic culture type.

Table 2 outlines the logico meaningful consequences of the three types of culture mentality for weltanschauung (or worldview), power and object of control, and activity. For Sorokin, the "logical satellites" are aspects of the culture that follow logically from the central integrating principle of the culture. In Sorokin's words, "each of them (the logical satellites) is connected logically with the dominant attitude toward the nature of ultimate reality." Thus the active sensate culture is based on "becoming", based on a full-blooded sense of life and continual change. Ideas such as progress and evolution are central to such a viewpoint. In addition, the dominant ideas on control stress control of the external sensate reality and hence activity in the outer world. In contrast, the ideational culture is based on "being", stressing lasting value. In addition, self-control and repression of the sensual person and of self lead to a focus on the inner life. Idealistic culture for Sorokin is an attempt to balance both worldviews, to live in both the inner and outer worlds, and balance being and becoming, control of the external environment and control of self.

Table 3 details how each culture mentality affects what is meant by "self" and what is defined as knowledge in each type of culture mentality. Both the sensate and ideational types are highly integrated around completely different reality definitions. The sensate culture is associated with a view of the self as a material entity dissolved (or living totally) in the immediate physical reality. Under this view the material world provides the basis for everything, and materialistic models of reality are likely to be dominant in all compartments of culture. Mechanistic models of the universe and materialistic biochemical models of health are typical examples of the sensate view of reality, a view that stresses caring for the physical body, sensual liberty (for example, sexual freedom) and sensual egotism (for example, cultivating the body beautiful). Such a worldview will naturally develop physical and biological sciences that study and manipulate the external world, and in so doing will develop technology for this purpose. In contrast, the ideational culture type searches for the inner self, which is experienced as dissolved (or existing totally) in the ultimate spiritual reality. The external material world is seen as an illusion, and knowledge of the spiritual, psychical and immaterial reality becomes the basis for knowledge. Using meditation and other self exploration approaches, knowledge of the inner self, including inner peace, becomes central. As in the case of Table 2, the idealistic culture mentality attempts to balance both approaches.

Table 4 illustrates the approaches to truth and to moral values in the three culture mentalities. Thus the active sensate culture is based on "truth of the senses," where truth is validated through observation of, and experimentation with, the external environment. The five human senses are ultimately the basis for establishing truth, and inductive logic is used to relate the evidence from the senses to models of reality. The moral value system of the sensate culture is relativistic and utilitarian, based on maximum sensate happiness. In contrast, the ideational worldview is based on "truth of faith," whereby the inner experience of the ultimate reality, the mystical experience discussed above, is achieved through concentrated meditation, intuition, revelation, or prophecy. This ideational culture mentality is based on absolute, transcendental values, values that are God-given, imperative, everlasting and unchangeable. The idealistic culture mentality stresses both "truth of the senses" and "truth of faith" in a truth system that Sorokin calls "truth of reason." Greek culture around the 4th and 5th centuries BC and European culture around the 12th to14th centuries AD are seen by Sorokin as examples of this balanced cultural form. Idealistic culture similarly includes a both/and approach to moral values, incorporating both perspectives in its value system.

Table 5 illustrates the characteristics of the three culture mentalities as these relate to aesthetic values and social values. In the sensate culture, art and aesthetic values are based on increasing the joys and beauties of a rich sensate life, while social and practical values give joy of life to self and partly to others. In particular, they stress the value of monetary wealth and physical comfort. Prestige in society is in large measure based on these factors. In conflicts, physical might is more important than being right in the moral sense. The ideational culture type sees aesthetic values as being servants to the main inner values, which are essentially religious and non-sensate. For social values, only those which serve the ultimate inner spiritual reality are of value, while materialistic values, such as economic wealth, are seen as ultimately worthless. The principle of sacrifice is an integral part of the ideational social value system. As in the above cases, idealistic culture attempts to balance sensate and spiritual concerns.

Sorokin and his helpers collected and coded huge amounts of information on various aspects of Western macro culture, including indicators of sensate and ideational worldviews, in art, science, mathematics, architecture, discoveries and inventions, philosophy, ethics and jurisprudence. Using this data, he argued that there was a tendency, over long periods of time, for Western macro culture to swing from one end of the continuum to the other in their central meanings, and that these changes in central meanings are manifest in all aspects of an integrated culture. A crude summary of his findings are presented in Table 6.

The still evolving Western civilization, in Sorokin's view, had achieved overripe sensate status (with too much stress on materialism and an almost complete disregard for spiritual values) and was now in crisis, swinging back towards the ideational pole. Such a swing would inevitably manifest itself in the emergence of "new holistic paradigms" in many different areas, as illustrated above, as well as in the re-emergence of ideational, religious or spiritual worldviews. It will also, in Sorokin's view, lead to a period of turmoil, crisis and catharsis, from which the new ideational or idealistic culture will emerge.

3. Relevance of Sorokin's Ideas to the World Today:

Every model of reality--including Sorokin's--is a simplification of reality to some extent. In various ways, the global situation today is more complicated than Sorokin's model suggests, since the world is also more complex than when he wrote. There are, for example, multiple interactions between different cultures occurring in the world today, which are not in Sorokin's model. Despite this fact, it is nonetheless interesting that a number of new, holistic scientific paradigms and worldviews are emerging today in a number of different areas--just as Sorokin predicted 65 years ago would happen as part of a return to more spiritual values in Western cultures today. There is, however, within the scientific community itself, some difference of opinion over whether the new, holistic scientific paradigms deal only with the physical world, or whether they also parallel holistic spiritual values and experiences of reality. The latter view was the thesis of Fritjov Capra's book, The Tao of Physics, for example, but not all physicists agree with Capra.

Similarly, the Gaia Hypothesis is interpreted by some in a purely "functional" integration sense (K. Boulding, 1990) and by others within a spiritual framework, suggesting "intentionality" and an "intelligence" behind the way Gaia operates. (Ruether, 1992; Badiner, 1990) James Davies, who has written various books popularizing the New Physics, also asks: "Why are the laws of nature mathematical?" and why can nature everywhere be explained by mathematics, thereby allowing science to understand nature? To Davies, the fact that we can study and understand the universe at all, and that science is even possible at all, implies that the universe is not a random event, but rather that intentionality and purpose are behind its creation and design. (Davies, 1992) Other scientists also note the extremely low statistical probability of life--including self-conscious, self-aware, intelligent life (as represented by humans)--evolving on earth, which to some scientists implies an intentionality or purpose behind our physical universe, its creation and the design of its evolution. The fact that life itself seems to evolve towards ever more intelligent self awareness--whether in human form on earth or other possible forms elsewhere in the universe--implies a designer behind the design to some scientists. In summary, new holistic, scientific paradigms are emerging across a variety of fields, and increasing numbers of people are seeing connections between the spiritual and material aspects of these paradigms.

In looking at Sorokin's two opposite types of cultures--sensate/materialistically-based cultures, and ideational/spiritually-based cultures--and his thesis that Western history has alternated back and forth between these two extreme cultural types, with periods of balance between them during certain transitional times, several interesting questions and observations arise in regard to how these two opposite cultural types, and the transitions between them, relate to the contemporary world and to the world of the 21st century?

(1) First, it is amazing how Sorokin's two polar opposite cultural types--sensate and ideational cultures--which alternated in Western history, seem to perfectly describe what we commonly think of (at least in a generalized, archetypal way) as characteristics of Western cultures (sensate/materialistic) and Eastern cultures (ideational/spiritual).

(2) However, if we now think of Western cultures as predominantly materialistic, but note that Western culture has also had non-materialistic, spiritual periods in its history, then perhaps Eastern cultures, which we tend to think of as more spiritual, have also had periods of materialism and a predominance of sensate values at certain periods in its history as well? Sorokin's work focused primarily on Western cultures, so further research needs to be done by others today on this question. Nonetheless, it should be noted that the work that Sorokin did do on Eastern cultures tended to describe them predominantly as ideational/spiritually-based cultures. As Sorokin himself concluded: (Sorokin, 1957, p. 43)

....the Ascetic Ideational culture mentality comprises not an island but several of the largest continents in the world of culture. The systems of mentality of Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Taoism, Sufism, early Christianity, and of many ascetic and mystical sects, groups, and movements (i.e., the Cynics, Stoics, Gnostics, and the devotees of Orphism) have been predominantly Ideational, Ascetic Ideational at the highest level, Active Ideational on a lower, and Idealistic and Mixed on the lowest.

(3) If we tend today (in our common images and stereotypes) to think of Western cultures as primarily sensate/materialistic, and Eastern cultures as primarily ideational/spiritual, then it needs to be noted that the actual world of today is more complex than this. Indeed, there are powerful forces of change sweeping the planet today. In many ways, Eastern cultures (represented especially by Asian countries) are undergoing rapid economic development, technological growth, and increasing materialism as a result. This has led many thoughtful people to be concerned that the whole world is perhaps becoming Westernized and materialistic. But an equally strong counter current is also occurring within Western cultures today, where the achievement of a certain level of material comfort often leads people to seek other values in life, especially spiritual values, in an effort to find meaning. Spiritual and religious movements of various kinds are thus having a comeback--especially in cultures and countries that have undergone the greatest degree of material development, i.e., North America, Europe, and Japan. This is no accident. Indeed, it can be argued that both Western and Eastern cultures, in their pure or extreme forms (to the extent that they did actually at times represent one of Sorokin's two opposite cultural types), have traditionally both been out of balance, and that today, for the first time our increasingly interdependent world is providing the conditions for both Eastern and Western cultures to become more in balance, in terms of honoring both spiritual and material values, inner peace as well as outer peace values, and group as well as individualistic concerns and perspectives, and that this is indeed the most promising development occurring in the world today, in regard to creating the foundations for a global culture of peace--for both East and West--in the 21st century.

(4) Nonetheless, it needs to be pointed out that periods of transition--when the underlying values on which a culture and civilization have been based are undergoing rapid change and being challenged--are very disruptive to people's lives and to the effective functioning of one's societal institutions. And indeed, we see that this is happening today. Crime and violence are on an increase everywhere. Fanatics of the left and right--including religious cults promoting violence in the name of God or spirit (a total contradiction in terms)--are multiplying. The transition period does not guarantee an easy ride. But change is inevitable, and it must be dealt with as constructively and consciously as possible, so that we can get through this transition period with as little real catastrophes and violence as possible.

(5) Then, assuming that such a new, balanced culture of peace can be created in the world in the 21st century (a big assumption, we grant you), how long could such a balanced inner-outer, spiritual-materialistic, female-male balanced culture be able to endure? Sorokin's work suggests--at least based on his analysis of the alternations in Western cultures historically--that such balanced Idealistic periods usually lasted about 200-300 years. In non-Western cultures, Sorokin saw Confuscianism and much of Ancient Egyptian culture (which lasted 3,000 years) as good examples of the balanced, Ideational form. As Eastern and Western cultures increasingly come together and interact with each other, now and in the future, perhaps such a balanced period could last for a long time--drawing on both Eastern and Western cultural values for its maintenance and sustenance. If that were to become possible, then the so-called "Golden Age" (prophesied in various religious and spiritual traditions) could indeed become a reality.

(6) A less desirable alternative to this balanced scenario would be if Western cultures move increasingly towards an ideational, spiritual value system, while Eastern cultures move increasingly towards a sensate, materialist value system, with East and West, in effect, changing places! This might be more likely if both Eastern and Western cultures could continue to develop in isolation from each other, but in our increasingly interdependent world, this seems unlikely. The more preferable, balanced scenario, however, would be for the East to increasingly develop economically--as it no doubt will do, with many economic observers having called the 21st century the "Pacific Century--while still maintaining and preserving its rich spiritual traditions and values, and for the West to increasingly further an interest in spiritual, inner peace questions, while still maintaining a decent materialistic lifestyle and concern with social justice issues in the outer world.

(7) We will no doubt have to wait and see what we all individually and collectively decide to create. The transition period of getting there may indeed be rocky. But a peaceful world, based on attention paid to both inner peace and outer peace, including social justice questions, is indeed one possibility for the 21st century.

B. MALE AND FEMALE ASPECTS OF DIVINITY IN DIFFERENT RELIGIONS AND CULTURES

1. In Different Cultures and Historical Periods, People Have Believed in Nature Spirits, Goddesses, Gods and Goddesses, and in One God (Often Interpreted as Male)

At different times in history, and in different cultures, divinity or the sacred or spiritual has been represented in different ways: sometimes as nature spirits (such as Shintoism in Japan, American Indian traditions, as well as other indigenous people's spiritual traditions, such as the Aborigines in Australia); sometimes as goddesses, often associated with fertility and the earth (seen in the ancient temples in Malta or the Old Europe documented by Marija Gimbutis); sometimes as a balance between male and female gods and goddesses, each representing different aspects or attributes of the one God, (as in Ancient Egypt and Hinduism); and sometimes as a monotheistic, all powerful God who is often portrayed as God the Father or male (in Western monotheistic religions, including Judaism, Christianity, and Islam).

There are a number of books that have been written in recent years--many by feminists who are trying to recapture the spiritual and societal role of women historically--about the factors leading to the above transition from female goddess to male God. (Please consult the Bibliography for a few of these recommended sources, such as Anne Baring and Jules Cashford, Elise Boulding, Riane Eisler, Marija Gimbutas, David Leeming and Jake Page, Shirley Nicholson, and Merlin Stone. ) There is not space here to explore this subject in greater depth. The important point here is just to note that divinity has been portrayed and experienced differently, at different times in history and in different cultures. Underneath this diversity, however, was a common search for some kind of spiritual meaning in life--whatever the form that this took, which one could argue was at least partly a reflection of the dominant cultural values that existed at the time.

2. In Essence Spirit or God (in Mystical Traditions of All Religions) Transcends Polar Opposites or Dualities (Often Portrayed Symbolically as Male and Female)

It is not the purpose of this paper to argue that one symbol system for spirit or divinity is correct and others are wrong. All sought to honor spirit in some way. If God or spirit is beyond all dualities, however--which the mystical traditions of all religions seem to suggest--then clearly God or spirit or divinity is also beyond our human attempts to categorize it as either all male, or all female, at the exclusion of the other. As Lao Tsu said, "the Tao that can be named is not the Tao." Yet in our limited consciousness, and in our effort to create a personal relationship with what is essentially beyond form, infinite, and partaking of the great mystery, we tend to personify god or spirit--in different ways at different times and places historically.
One of the themes of this paper is that if we want to create peace in the world, then we need to find a way to include all the parts of the whole, or the world, in this process. It would thus seem in keeping with this theme that divinity or spirit should be seen to be the unity that transcends all opposites or dualities, however they are represented. In support of this idea, Figure 3 cites examples of spiritual symbols from a number of different religions in the world, which are all based on this idea of recognizing that the spiritual path involves balancing and transcending polar opposites, or dualities. Indeed, the mystical or esoteric path in all religions is based on this simple truth: unitive consciousness transcends duality.

Explanations for the Symbols in Figure 3:

Ancient Egyptian Ankh: Represents the unity of opposites, which are symbolized by the two halves of the Ankh: the top, circular part representing the female principle; the bottom straight part representing the male principle. The Ankh also symbolized eternal life and immortality (with the balancing and transcending of opposites--represented by the male and female principles--being the way to get there), as well as the union of Upper and Lower Egypt (the upper half representing the Delta region of Lower Egypt and the bottom half representing the rest of the Nile River that flowed through Upper Egypt, in the South, to the Delta in the North).

(Please Note: if the reader is aware of additional symbols, from different religious traditions, illustrating this idea of the unity of opposites, the writers would appreciate hearing from you about this. Thank you.)

Celtic Cross: The Celtic Cross is an interesting Christian cross in that it combines the traditional symbol of the cross (representing Christ on the cross, who died to the physical life and was resurrected into eternal life with the Father--more a representation of the male principle) with the circle around it (representing the female principle).* [*In this regard, it should be noted that the ancient temples in Malta to the goddess were all made in circular shapes representing the female figure.]

Vesica Pisces (Pre-Christian, Celtic Symbol): This pre-Christian, Celtic symbol also represents the unity (outer circle) of opposites--the two inner circles, which are also seen to be overlapping or interdependent. The area in the middle, where these two circles overlap, is also the shape of a fish, which later became one of the dominant symbols for Christianity. This symbol can be found on the ancient well at Glastonbury, England, which some call the mythical "Isle of Avalon" of King Arthur legends. This well has provided healing waters at a constant temperature for 5,000 years, according to tradition. This overlapping and interdependence of opposites also represents, in the Celtic tradition, the interdependence of spiritual and material life; it is not a choice of one or the other, but of both together.

Yin Yang: This is the famous Yin-Yang symbol from Taoism, which also represents the idea of the unity, balance, and interdependence of opposites--as the basis for a balanced and healthy life, including a spiritual life. What is most interesting here is that there is always a small amount of the opposite characteristic in each half of the symbol (Yin or Female in Yang or Male, and Yang or Male in Yin or Female). The meaning of this is clear. If you try to totally eliminate your opposite, and create a pure Yin, or pure Yang (half of the whole), it will have the opposite effect of what you intended, i.e., the state of total Yin, or Yang, will be so out of balance that it will cause the situation to begin to move in its opposite direction--towards what you were trying to eliminate. Thus the lesson is clear: if you want to maintain a current situation, always keep a little of its opposite present, so that the situation will be partially balanced and thus maintainable. This basic philosophical principle is also embedded in the I Ching, or Chinese Book of Changes.

Hinduism: Male-Female Embrace: Another version of the balance of male and female principles or opposites as a symbol of the path to attain spiritual union with God can be seen in the Hindu symbol of a male and female in an often voluptuous embrace. Westerners sometimes misinterpret the meaning of this symbol. What it really means is that the spiritual, mystical path requires the balancing and transcending of opposites, not the elimination of opposites.

Spirals (Coming Into Form, Going Out of Form): These ancient spirals--moving in two opposite circular directions--can be found on the ancient temples to the goddess in Malta, on ancient stone circles in England and Europe, and even in the Andes, as well as other places. These symbols have been interpreted to mean the spiral of coming into life and the spiral of going out of life as a continuous and interconnected process, thus indicating a belief in reincarnation by the people drawing these symbols.

Jewish Menorah: Apparently the Jewish Menorah is an outgrowth of one of these spirals which was cut in half. Further research follows re: its symbolic meaning.
In conclusion, if a symbol can represent a whole philosophy, as well as an approach, to the mystical path of enlightenment, then perhaps these symbols--from a number of different religious traditions--are a simple, visual way to do so. These symbols are also archetypal and thus communicate in deeper archetypal ways to our psyche or consciousness. One might also note that many, if not most religions, are based not only on the idea of the unity or interconnectedness of opposites; they are also based on the trinity principle in which two opposites come together and create something new.

C. JOSEPH CAMPBELL AND MYTHOLOGY: UNIVERSAL ASPECTS OF THE HERO'S JOURNEY IN THE MYTHS OF ALL CULTURES
AND EAST-WEST DIFFERENCES

This section will look at the role of mythology--especially as interpreted in the works of Joseph Campbell, and later Jean Houston--in showing a way to bridge one's outer life in the world with the inner life of the spirit. It will also look at universal aspects of the "hero's journey" (the journey to our inner selves) in the myths of all cultures; the stages of the hero's journey; and East-West cultural and historical differences in the hero's journey.

1. Mythology: A link between Our Outer Lives and the Search for Deeper Meaning and Purpose in Life--including the Inner Life of the Spirit

While some people living in our demythified Western world tend to think of only facts as true, and therefore myths as untrue or illusory, those who study myths note that they have a deeper type of truth to them, which attracts people in almost all cultures to them. Indeed, mythology can be seen as a link between our outer lives in the world and the search for deeper, archetypal levels of meaning and purpose in life, which then leads to the inner life of the spirit. Therefore myths do not speak to us in factual terms, but in archetypal, metaphorical language. Joseph Campbell himself said that "myth is the secret opening through which the inexhaustible energies of the cosmos pour into human manifestation." Thus myths provide maps for the inner spiritual journey. Myths can also help people realize how their everyday life can take on extraordinary or heroic dimensions via the way they choose to deal with these events, as often inspired by other heroic figures from mythology.

2. Joseph Campbell: Universal Aspects of the Hero's Journey in the Myths of All Cultures

Joseph Campbell's most famous study is probably The Hero With a Thousand Faces, originally published in 1947. In this he posits the idea of a "monomyth"--the one great story which underlies much mythology" from different cultures around the world. It is basically the story of any human being who sets out on a journey to discover whom he/she really is. While the outer forms can vary from one culture to another, the deeper aspects of the journey are universal and transcend different cultures. Besides The Hero With a Thousand Faces , Joseph Campbell also wrote a number of other books. His ideas gained a great following and popularity in the United States through the six part television series, "The Power of Myth," in which Bill Moyers interviewed Joseph Campbell for public television. In this series, as in other writing, Campbell encouraged people to "follow your bliss," meaning to listen to your own inner voices and follow your own dream, which will take you on your own hero's journey of self discovery and transformation.

3. Jean Houston's "Sacred Psychology" and the Role of Mythology in it

Jean Houston, who works with mythology in the tradition of Joseph Campbell, talks about "sacred psychology" where our "deepest fulfillment comes from experiencing union with the divine and bringing a sense of the sacred into our everyday lives"--especially in Western society which has become increasingly disconnected from the deeper "waters of life." Jean believes that we humans are multilevel beings, living in three realms, and that the middle realm (of mythology and archetypes) helps us connect our everyday outer lives with our inner spiritual selves. These three realms include:

(i) The "THIS IS ME" realm of our everyday self, the space-and-time bound personality that is heavily influenced by habit, social conditioning and cultural patterns.

(ii) The "WE ARE" realm housing "the myths and guiding archetypes that connect the personal self with its spiritual source. This realm also serves as a cultural template, providing the primal patterns that take form as works of art, architecture, literature and drama."

(iii) The "I AM" realm described by mystics throughout the ages as the realm of limitless Being, boundless love and pure potency. This is the realm that was revealed to Moses in the wilderness, for example.
Jean Houston believes that jumping from the time bound, socially conditioned life of the THIS IS ME realm directly into the "boundless unconditioned state of I AM ness" is too much for most people. They need the intermediate WE ARE realm of mythology and archetypal stories as a bridging place to prepare for the life of the spirit and to learn how to navigate through the various stages of the hero's journey. (Houston, 1994)

4. Stages of the Hero's Journey: Universal Path to Self Awareness and Mastery in All Cultures--Though the Outer Form May Vary

The hero's journey is basically a road map that shows any human being a pathway from the outer world of our everyday lives inward towards deeper spiritual dimensions. There are various versions of these stages. Campbell himself said: "A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man." (Campbell, 1949) In one version of the hero's journey, there are three key stages: separation (from one's everyday life); initiation (where one is tested); and return (to one's everyday life, to share with others what one has learned and experienced).

Another more detailed version of the hero's journey has five stages, borrowing on ideas of both Joseph Campbell first, and then Jean Houston, in each stage as follows:

(i) Nothing Holding You to Current Situation: you are open for the adventure of the hero's journey because there is nothing holding you to your current situation and you are, in effect, seeking some deeper meaning or purpose in your life. Another version of this stage is that you hear an inner call to adventure, which you can either accept or reject.

(ii) Find a Mentor or Teacher: Often a mentor or teacher must be found who can act as a guide on the journey. Another version of this stage is that once the call is accepted, you will find allies to help you on the journey. "These secret allies represent undeveloped potentials and skills that will be evoked" on the journey.

(iii) Jumping off Place Into the Unknown: There is a particular point or place where you must leave all the things of your old, familiar life behind you, and jump off into the unknown. Another version of this stage is that you must get past the guardians at the threshold, who represent the limitations of conventional thinking, which one must outwit if one is to be allowed to enter the realms of the creative and mysterious depths, where one will be tested.

(iv) You Must Be Tested-Both Externally, in the World, and Internally: The hero's journey involves real testing, where you will be confronted with demons and dangers, which will require that you confront your own inner demons and fears and limitations, if you are to develop mastery in the situation; this part of the hero's journey is the real "initiation". If you survive it, you will grow and be changed in the process, and you will be able to return to your society a changed or transformed person--whether your hero's journey was an adventure (as Odysseus), a spiritual initiation (as Christ, Buddha, Moses, and others), or the development of authentic mastery in some artistic tradition.

(v) Return to Society, to Share the Wisdom and Mastery that You have Learned: If you survive the initiation and testing, and develop internal, as well as external mastery, then you will be able to return to your society able to share your wisdom and mastery with others. You will have received great boons, i.e., new powers and perceptual abilities which can help others.

5. Historical and East-West Differences in the Hero's Journey

While there are, according to Campbell and Houston, universal aspects of the hero's journey in the myths of all cultures (as noted above), Campbell and others also noted that there are important distinctions in the nature of the hero's journey--at different stages of history, as well as in Eastern and Western cultures. While we cannot go into these differences in any depth here, it should be noted that Campbell believed that there were four major mythological periods:

(i) The Way of the Animal Powers, i.e., the way of shamanistic hunter-gatherers in Paleolithic times, where "the individual has an inner experience which calls him or her to the role of shaman;"

(ii) The Way of the Seeded Earth, i.e., when settled agricultural communities emerged and there was a cycle of birth, death (or ritual sacrifice), and rebirth;

(iii) The Way of the Celestial Lights, with the emergence of the high civilizations, where priests and priestesses were ordained by institutions (rather than from an inner calling); writing and higher mathematics were invented; mythological systems were based on the movements of the planets, moon and sun; and large bureaucracies and monumental architecture emerged; and

(iv) The Way of Man, focusing on the modern world, where rationalism replaces the older role of mythology, and philosophy replaces theology, and art and culture are individually expressed, rather than products of society as a whole.
Campbell and others have also noted important differences in the hero's journey as it is lived in Eastern and Western cultures. In the East, where a group identity and culture are more dominant, one must follow the path set before by one's guru, spiritual teacher or master, in an unbroken lineage passed down from master to apprentice, while in the West, where individual identity and culture are more dominant, the hero must embark on the hero's journey at a place and time of his own choosing. In short, the hero cannot follow a path set by others, but must find his own path. Campbell believed that the best illustration of the hero's journey in Western culture was King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, where each of the knights, in their search for the Holy Grail (which search is basically that of the hero's journey) had to enter the forest (the unknown) at a point of their own choosing.

6. Need to Adapt the Hero's Journey to the Times and Culture (Star Wars: An Adaptation by George Lucas of the Hero's Journey for the Space Age)

Campbell also believed that the hero's journey--if it is to impact people's lives-- must be adapted to the times and the culture in which this mythological story appears. Ancient myths or stories must thus be reset in new contexts and environments if they are to relate to people's lives today. In this context, it is interesting that the Star Wars Trilogy was George Lucas' attempt to take the idea of the hero's journey and adapt it to a space age environment, which may be one of the reasons for the film's great popularity. If one looks at the five stages of the hero's journey (outlined under Section 4 above), one can see how closely the Star Wars story followed Campbell's five stages:

(i) Nothing Holding you to Current Situation: Here Luke Skywalker (who lived with his aunt and uncle who were farmers and were suddenly found murdered) had already been yearning to explore new horizons and now had nothing holding him to his old life anymore.

(ii) Find a Mentor or Teacher: Luke finds Obiwan Kinobe, who becomes his teacher in the ways of "the force".

(iii) Jumping Off Place Into the Unknown: There is a famous bar scene, filled with strange looking alien creatures, which symbolically represents Luke's jumping off place into the world of the unknown, which he does in the company of his mentor, Obiwan Kinobe.

(iv) You Must Be Tested--Both Externally in the World and Internally: Once in the unknown, Luke must receive further training in the ways of the force--by Obiwan Kinobe and later by Yoda; he must undergo many adventures; and then he must finally be tested, in the form of confronting Darth Vader--the symbol of evil itself. Only after he has passed this test, does the adventure come to an end.

(v) Return to Society, to Share the Wisdom and Mastery that You have Learned: Here victory over the dark side is celebrated and the trilogy ends.

7. Need to Create New Types of Hero Figures Today Besides Warriors

While Star Wars was a great success, it still glorified fighting and violence (against evil), and as such is still not the best archetypal model we can find for creating a peaceful, nonviolent world in the future. Indeed, society seems more violent than ever. In looking at the role of the warrior image in mythology, such as Star Wars, a few observations need to be made:

First, it is important to point out that the hero's journey--even for the warrior archetype-- need not be violent. With the destructive power of modern technology, clearly our future survival requires that we find alternative ways to resolve our conflicts short of violence. As Elise Boulding has noted, we can take the adventuresome energy of the warrior hero archetype and channel it (consciously) into nonviolent action in the world.

Second, it is clear that we also need to find new types of hero figures, besides the warrior archetype today. Various books have been written exploring alternative types of archetypes, and this type of research needs to continue. Women, who identify less as a whole with the warrior archetype than men, are looking for such alternative archetypal images, which could provide models with which they could identify as women. In addition, alternative, non-warrior archetypes also need to be found for men.

Third and lastly, we need to remember that when we go to do battle in the world--the warrior archetype--that the real battle is really within oneself. Indeed, the external battle in the world is really a reflection or mirror of the inner battle within--to master one's own fears, limitations, insecurities and demons. Once we can consciously recognize this, then 'perhaps' we will realize that we can focus our primary energies there, on developing internal mastery and balance, which can then be expressed in nonviolent ways in the world, and then we will not have to act out the warrior need to do battle in the external world in what has too often been a violent way. Or if we must do battle in the world, we can do it against poverty, injustice, ignorance, prejudice, intolerance, etc. Certainly there are plenty of admirable battles that need to be addressed and they do not require violence as a means to engage in such efforts.

8. Conclusion

In conclusion, this section has explored the possible role of mythology as a bridge between our outer lives in the world--what is comparable to the exoteric aspect of religion, with the development of an inner life of the spirit--what is comparable to the esoteric aspects of religion. If mythology and archetypal figures can help us to embark on the hero's journey to discover and encounter the deeper aspects of our being, then perhaps nonviolent, archetypal models can also be found for our actions in the world that are appropriate to our technologically sophisticated and interdependent world for our actions in the world.

PART III: INNER AND OUTER ASPECTS OF PEACE, THE CULTURES OF PEACE, AND NONVIOLENCE (PARALLELING ESOTERIC AND EXOTERIC ASPECTS OF RELIGION)

A. EVOLUTION OF THE PEACE CONCEPT: INNER AND OUTER PEACE IN WESTERN PEACE RESEARCH

1. Evolution of the Peace Concept: Six Stages

If, for the sake of brevity, we oversimplify peace thinking, then it is possible to identify at least six broad categories of peace thinking which, in large measure, also correspond to the evolution of peace thinking in Western peace research. This is not to say that all scholars once thought one way and now think another, nor is it to say that the majority of peace researchers now adopt holistic paradigms. Rather it is to argue that overall there has been a trend in peace research away from the traditional idea that peace is simply the absence of war towards a more holistic view, as seen in Figure 4:

(a) Peace as Absence of War

Figure 4 summarizes six perspectives on peace in terms of the levels of analysis and theoretical focus that each includes. The first perspective, peace as the absence of war, is applied to violent conflict between and within states--war and civil war. This view of peace is still widely held among general populations and politicians. In certain situations, it can be argued, this is still a legitimate objective, at least until the killing stops and it is possible to ask for more out of life than avoiding death in war. Furthermore, all six definitions of peace discussed here require absence of war as a necessary precondition for peace.

(b) Peace as Balance of Forces in the International System

Quincy Wright (1941) modified this absence of war idea to suggest that peace was a dynamic balance involving political, social, cultural and technological factors, and that war occurred when this balance broke down. Wright argued that this balance of forces occurred in the international system--defined in terms of the overall pattern of relationships between states and International Governmental Organizations (IGOs)--as well as between and within states. Wright also discussed the role of domestic public opinion within a state--which involves the community level of analysis. His model assumed that any significant change in one of the factors involved in the peace balance would require corresponding changes in other factors to restore the balance. For example, Robert Oppenheimer, the much misunderstood "father of the atomic bomb," adopted Wright's view when he insisted on continuing to develop the bomb so that a global political institution, the United Nations, would have to be created to help control the new global military technology.

Galtung (1969) further modified Wright's view, using the categories "negative peace" and "positive peace" that Wright had first put forward some 28 years earlier. Galtung developed a third position and argued that negative peace was the absence of war and that positive peace was the absence of "structural violence", a concept defined in terms of the numbers of avoidable deaths caused simply by the way social, economic and other structures were organized. Thus if people starve to death when there is food to feed them somewhere in the world, or die from sickness when there is medicine to cure them, then structural violence exists since alternative structures could, in theory, prevent such deaths. Peace under this rubric involves both positive peace and negative peace being present. Galtung's model (in addition to the community, within states, between states, and international levels of analysis) includes the global level of analysis, such as the global economy which is influenced by non-state actors, such as MNCs.

(d) Feminist Peace Theories

During the 1970's and 80's, a fourth perspective was ushered in by feminist peace researchers, who extended both negative peace and positive peace to include violence and structural violence down to the individual level. (Brock-Utne, 1989) The new definition of peace then included not only the abolition of macro level organized violence, such as war, but also doing away with micro level unorganized violence, such as rape in war or in the home. In addition, the concept of structural violence was similarly expanded to include personal, micro- and macro-level structures that harm or discriminate against particular individuals or groups. This feminist peace model came to include all types of violence, broadly defined, against people, from the individual to the global level, arguing that this is a necessary condition for a peaceful planet.

(e) Holistic Gaia-Peace Theory

The 1990's has seen the emergence of two types of holistic peace thinking. (Dreher, 1991; Macy,1991; Smoker, 1991) Here, as with the feminist model, peace between people applies across all levels of analysis--from the family and individual level to the global level. In addition, Gaia-peace theory places a very high value on the relationship of humans to bioenvironmental systems --the environmental level of analysis. Peace with the environment is seen as central for this type of holistic peace theory, where human beings are seen as one of many species inhabiting the earth, and the fate of the planet is seen as the most important goal. This type of holistic peace thinking does not have a spiritual dimension, peace being defined in terms of all forms of physical violence against people and the environment.

(f) Holistic Inner Peace-Outer Peace Theory

This sixth view of peace sees inner, esoteric (spiritual) aspects of peace as essential. Spiritually based peace theory stresses the interactive relationships, the mutual co-arising, between all things and the centrality of inner peace. In addition to the relationships of human beings with each other and the world--including the environment-- a spiritual dimension is added to Gaia-peace theory. This dimension is expressed in different ways by peace researchers, depending on their cultural context. As in the Tao of Physics, where new paradigms in physics resonate with worldviews found in Eastern mysticism, this new paradigm in peace research resonates with much thinking in world spiritual and religions traditions. Peace has truly become indivisible.

(g) Summary: Evolution From Negative to Positive Peace

Two important issues in the evolution of the Western peace concept concern the various interpretations of "positive peace" (which, following Galtung, was expressed in terms of absence of structural violence) and "nonviolence" (the verbal construction of which suggests an "absence of violence" framework, i.e. nonviolence--somewhat parallel to the peace as absence of war perspective). In this section of the paper, we would like to consider the evolution from negative to positive views of peace, including the evolution of the "positive peace" concept itself.

Schmidt, in his critical Marxist analysis, "Politics and Peace Research," (1968) argued that value positive concepts of peace were doomed to failure within peace research, because it would not be possible for peace researchers to achieve a consensus on what constituted a positive view of peace. He put forward the view that peace researchers could only agree on what they were against--for example war, starvation, and poverty. Schmidt's article was arguably the main stimulus to Galtung's 1969 rejoinder, in which he redefined Quincy Wright's concept "positive peace" to mean the absence of "structural violence"--harmful social, political and economic structures that are responsible for avoidable human deaths through preventable starvation or treatable illness. Galtung's positive peace concept --the absence of structural violence, like his negative peace concept --the absence of war, did not include an inner or spiritual dimension. Peace of both sorts took place in the outer world and positive peace was a function of human social structures.

Feminist theory, the fourth perspective defined above, broadened the positive peace concept to include micro structures, such as the family, as well as Galtung's macro structures, but for the most part it still emphasized elimination of the undesirable--such as war and wife beating. At the same time, however, there was an increasing emphasis on value positive thinking (stressing desirable alternatives, such as visualizing alternative futures as a part of the process of moving towards those futures--the work on imaging positive futures by Elise Boulding in the peace research community being an excellent example).

An earlier paper (Smoker, 1981) discussed the extent to which peace research--as reflected in the pages of a defining journal, such as the Journal of Peace Research--had focused almost entirely on negative concerns, such as how to avoid or control war, aggression, physical violence and structural violence. Since that article--which was part of a special issue of the Journal of Peace Research on peace--the situation has not changed significantly. Within the last six months, the Editors of the Journal of Peace Research have revisited the idea of peace in the positive sense--as opposed to positive peace in the Galtung sense--and are considering including a section on the topic (not a whole issue) at some future time. However, a decision has not yet been made. There is little doubt that positive images of peace have been the exception, rather than the rule, in Western peace research.

This has not been true in Futures Studies, where a focus on alternative futures has contributed towards the development of both negative and positive conceptualizations. There is a sizable group of people within the Western futures community--but by no means all futurists--whose visioning of positive alternative futures is based, in part at least, on a spiritual, holistic, perspective. The works of Barbara Marx Hubbard, Marilyn Ferguson, and Jean Houston--an outstanding group of women futurists--are particularly notable examples.

The emergence of holistic peace paradigms in peace research--whether spiritual and/or environmental--has included an increasing emphasis on positive conceptions of peace. In part this is because of our realization that, whatever our nationality, culture or religious tradition, we are all interconnected and interdependent. Viewed from space, planet Earth is a blue-green sphere, we cannot see national boundaries, but we can see the land and the water, ice caps, deserts and forests. The Earth is clearly a whole complex system, a living being perhaps, but we as individuals and groups are but a part of the planet as the planet itself is a part of the solar system, galaxy and universe. The new thinking, it can be argued, represents a return to wholeness, not in the sense of uniformity, but in the sense of complexity dynamically balanced in interaction, the whole as integrated synergy, syntigration. This mindset enables an appreciation of the interdependence of species in the global ecosystem, of particular cultural meanings in the context of the total global cultural system, and of particular faiths in the rich diversity of global religions. The whole is more than the sum of the parts, and the greater the variety of the parts, the richer the expression of the global whole.

Whereas "peace as absence of war" typifies the conceptual framework for most popular "peace thinking," there are other aspects to peace. The answer to the question " if you think about peace, how would you define it?" might, in the majority of cases, very well be "absence of war" or "absence of violence". But the answer to the question "when you are at peace, what does it feel like?" will almost certainly describe some form of inner peace experience involving "being at one with," or being "peaceful" or "calm". This is because the actual experiences of peace that most, if not all, of us have as human beings--in Western or Eastern culture--are related to inner peace. Inner peace also involves an inner knowing or intuitive dimension--beyond the feeling dimension--where one suddenly understands patterns and relationships between things which were not understood before. This is the classic "aha" type experience which is the basis for creativity, and tapping this source would do much to enrich peace researchers visions of a positive future world at peace.

Holistic peace paradigms that include spiritual and/or environmental concerns resonate with our positive peace experiences and, as a result, are better able to add value positive images to their intellectual frameworks. Positive peace can therefore be seen as an evolving concept, a concept that does not yet exist in the initial "peace as absence of war" definition, but a concept that subsequently takes on different meanings as the peace concept expands.

2. Cultures of Peace: Inner and Outer Dimensions

The term a "culture of peace" has recently become an important focus for UNESCO--both in academic terms, as witnessed by the 1993 Barcelona conference on "Contributions of the World's Religions to a Culture of Peace," and in practical terms, as evidenced by the launching of UNESCO field projects in the South around this concept. An important theoretical question concerns the possible meanings of the term "culture of peace", particularly since the previous section of this paper illustrated the broad range of interpretations given to the word peace, and the ramifications this has for peace action. The difficulties of understanding what might be meant by "culture of peace" are further magnified by the fact that "culture," like "peace," can and has been defined in many ways. Therefore this section of the paper is best seen as a contribution to a preliminary discussion of the culture of peace concept, a discussion that is likel

Table 1: Three Types of Culture Mentality (Sorokin): Active Sensate, Ascetic Ideational, and Idealistic (Combining Both)
	Active Sensate	Ascetic Ideational	Idealistic
Reality	Sensate, material, empirical	Non-sensate, eternal transcendental	Both equally represented
Main needs and ends	Manifold and richly sensate	Spiritual	Both equally represented
Extent of satisfaction	Maximum	Maximum	Great, but balanced
Method of satisfaction	Modify external environment	Self modification	Both ways

Table 2: Three Types of Culture Mentality (Sorokin): Weltanschauung, Power and Object of Control, and Activity
	Active Sensate	Ascetic Ideational	Idealistic
Weltanschauung(or World View)	Becoming: Transient values, full blooded sense of life, joy and grief; dynamism and endless readjustment ; progress, evolution	Being: Lasting value; indifference to transient values; imperturbability; statism	Both equally represented
Power and Object of Control	Control of the Sensate Reality	Self Control, repression of the sensual person and of "self"	Both equally represented
Activity	Extrovert	Introvert	Both equally represented

Table 3: Three Types of Culture Mentality (Sorokin): Self and Knowledge
	Active Sensate	Ascetic Ideational	Idealistic
Self	Highly integrated, sensate, dissolved in immediate physical reality; materializes self and all spiritual phenomenon; cares for integrity of body and its sensual interest (sensual liberty, sensual egotism)	Highly integrated, spiritual, dissolved in the ultimate reality; aware of the sensual world as illusion; anti-materialistic	Both equally represented
Knowledge	Develops science of natural phenomena and technical inventions; concentrates on these; leads to arts of technology, medicine, hygiene, sanitation and modification of peoples' physical environment	Develops insights into and cognition of the spiritual, psychical, and immaterial phenomena and experiences; concentrates on these exclusively; leads to arts of education and modification of inner life	Both equally represented

Table 4: Three Types of Culture Mentality (Sorokin): Truth, and Moral Values and Systems
	Active Sensate	Ascetic Ideational	Idealistic
Truth: its categories, criteria, and methods of arriving at	Based on observation of, measurement of, experimentation with, exterior phenomena through exterior organs of senses, inductive logic	Based on inner experience, "mystic way," concentrated mediation, intuition, revelation, or prophecy	Both equally represented (scholasticism)
Moral values and systems	Relativistic and sensate; hedonistic, utilitarian; seeking maximum sensate happiness for largest number of human beings; morals of rightly understood egotism	Absolute, transcendental, categoric, imperative, everlasting, and unchangeable	Both equally emphasized

Table 5: Three Types of Culture Mentality (Sorokin)
	Active Sensate	Ascetic Ideational	Idealistic
Aesthetic Values and Systems	Sensate, secular, created to increase joys and beauties of a rich, sensate life	Ideational, subservient to the main inner values, religious, non-sensate	Both equally emphasized
Social and Practical Values	Everything that gives joy of life to self and partly to others: particularly wealth, comfort, etc.; prestige is based on the above; wealth, money, physical might become "rights" and basis of all value: principle of sound egotism	Those which are lasting and lead to the ultimate reality: only such persons are leaders, only such things and events are positive, all others are valueless or of negative values, particularly wealth, earthly comfort, etc.; principle of sacrifice	Both equally emphasized; live and let live

Table 6: Fluctuation of Truth Systems in Graeco-Roman and Western Civilization (Sorokin)
Period	Classification
Up to the 5th Century B.C.	Ideational
5th and 4th Centuries B.C.	Idealistic
3rd to the 1st Century B.C.	Sensate
1st to end of 4th Century A.D.	Transition & Crisis
5th to 12th Centuries A.D.	Ideational
12th to 14th Centuries A.D.	Idealistic
End of 14th Century to 15th Century A.D.	Transition & Crisis
16th through 20th Century A.D.	Sensate (Active, then passive, now cynical, entering transition)

SPIRITUALITY, RELIGION, CULTURE, AND PEACE: EXPLORING THE FOUNDATIONS FOR INNER-OUTER PEACE IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY

Linda Groff California State University

Paul Smoker Antioch College

Introduction