The
torture of not knowing
Carolyn
Baker.
13
December, 2013
In
the age of catastrophic
climate change and two years following the horrifying meltdown of
reactors at Fukushima’s nuclear power plant, we realize that both
phenomena are profoundly impacting our species and the earth
community. What we don’t know with certainty is the exact extent of
the damage being done. In Alex Smith’s recent Radio
Ecoshock interview with Robert Way of the University of Ottowa,
Way explained that official figures greatly underestimate global
heating. In his groundbreaking new
paper, Way asserts that the EPA has low-balled methane emissions
in the U.S. by half, and Way’s findings were also published by the
Guardian in a November 13 article “Global
Warming Since 1997 More Than Twice As Fast As Previously Estimated.”
More
recently the Japanese government has sought to pass a state
secrets law that would place severe penalties on leakers of
government secrets and journalists who might attempt to dig deeper
than official government reports regarding the status of Fukushima.
As one who has been following updated reports on Fukushima for
months, I can attest to what appears to be a dramatic decrease of
coverage. Only two weeks ago Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO)
informed the world that it would be attempting to remove some 1500
damaged fuel rods from Reactor 4—a highly delicate and daunting
task which some observers speculated could result in the breakage of
rods and result in massive doses of radiation escaping. We have heard
little about how the procedure is unfolding, and overall, coverage of
the state of the Fukushima plant for nearly three years has been
sparse, with little attention being paid to it by mainstream media.
As
with the more specific aspects of catastrophic climate change, the
most significant details of the consequences of the Fukushima
disaster are not available to us unless we dig deeply for them, and
even then, it seems obvious that many pieces of the puzzle are just
simply missing. Thus we are confronted with two issues that are
probably the most life-threatening to our planet, but we sit with
more unknowns than knowns. Indeed the most torturous aspect of any
life-threatening situation is not knowing.
Recently,
my friend Mike Ruppert lost his dog Rags. During that time Mike was
frantic to find his beloved companion, and all of us who love both of
them were deeply pained by their separation. Where was Rags? Who
knew? Mike had scoured the region where he lives but to absolutely no
avail. Had Rags been devoured by coyotes, mountain lions, bears—had
he been hit by a car or perhaps stolen? For me, it’s one thing to
be separated from my forever canine friend, and quite another not to
know where or how he is. If he becomes ill and has to be put down, at
least I know. But oh the heartache of losing a pet and not knowing
where or how they are! Fortunately, Mike found his dog in a few days.
No
more not knowing, but the torture of not
knowing is inexplicable.
With
catastrophic climate change we do know two things: We know that it is
progressing with unimaginable speed, and we know that if it continues
to do so, there will be few habitable places on earth by mid-century.
Yet what else are we not being told? Does the silence matter? Will it
make a difference ultimately?
With
Fukushima, however, we know so much less. How much radiation has
already been released? How much is being released every day? How much
radiated water is actually being dumped into the Pacific Ocean every
day? What is the actual size of the radiation plumes that are moving
eastward in the Pacific toward the West Coast of North America?
Specifically how are these affecting sea life and human life? What is
the relationship between environmental illnesses or the incidence of
cancer and Fukushima?
And
the questions exacerbate and spin and swirl in our minds.
The
absolute bottom line with both catastrophic climate change and the
consequences of Fukushima: We simply don’t know most of the
information we should know about these two horrific realities.
Industrial
civilization has socialized us to know.
All of our educational systems dictate that information, particularly
accumulating as much as possible, is the brass ring. You either know
or you don’t know, and if you don’t know, you are dis-empowered
because, we are incessantly told, “knowledge is power.” So in
this culture, if you don’t know and can’t find out, then your
best course of action is to ignore, deny, or pretend there’s
nothing to know. Hence the dearth of reporting on either of the two
life-threatening issues I’m addressing here. Most human beings on
this planet cannot bear to know that the game may be over by
mid-century or that she or he will develop cancer as a result of
Fukushima radiation.
The
paradigm of the scientific revolution and ultimately industrial
civilization left no room for uncertainty. Twentieth-century
physicists such as Einstein, Bohr, Planck, Schrodinger, and
Heisenberg then pulled the rug out from under “certainty” with
concepts such as “uncertainty,”
“relativity,” and “wave mechanics.” These physicists plumbed
the depths of ambiguity in the atomic particle and revealed to us the
un-certainty with
which it behaves. Nevertheless, tenacious attachment to certainty
remained the mainstay of modern education.
From
my perspective the root of modern humanity’s fundamental inner
turmoil is the tension of these opposites: certainty and
uncertainty. And while the study
of relativity may be fun and fascinating, the mind demands answers,
especially when confronted with the possibility of its own demise.
When experts on nuclear radiation articulate grave concerns about the
amount of radiation to which we are being exposed, we either turn a
deaf ear or demand “proof.” How then is it possible to live with
the uncertainty of our fate?
Our
ancient ancestors had much more experience with navigating
uncertainty than we have. From their perspective, the greater wisdom
is not to flee uncertainty or deny it, but rather immerse ourselves
in it. Verbalizing a piece of this wisdom, in her book Comfortable
With Uncertainty,
Buddhist teacher, Pema Chodron writes that “Sticking with
uncertainty is how we learn to relax in the midst of chaos, how we
learn to be cool when the ground beneath us suddenly disappears.”
In other words, willingly enter the uncertainty and abide there,
allowing the tension, fear, sorrow, and extreme vulnerabililty. “We
practice dropping whatever story we are telling ourselves,” Pema
Chodron says, “and lean into the emotions and the fears…We make
the choice, moment by moment, to be fully here.”
Why
do we do this? Because the uncertainty, the fear, the vulnerability,
the grief, and yes, the seeming unfairness of it all have something
to teach us about being human—about being part of, not separate
from, this extraordinary planet. And they have something to teach us
about connecting with our own and other species. The ultimate lesson
is one of compassion: for ourselves, for other species and other
humans. Compassion means that I see your darkness, and you see mine,
and as a result, we can be more present with each other. “Compassion
becomes real,” according to Chodron, “when we recognize our
shared humanity.”
Openness
to uncertainty may also allow us to explore other ways of knowing
that are neither rational nor linear, yet reveal what is so. My
friend Mike is a tracker and has learned to honor myriad methods of
knowing. At his wits end, he called a friend who called another
friend living in India who has extraordinary psychic abilities, and
that friend described the area in which Mike’s dog was wandering.
Mike drove there, and voila! Dear old Rags.
Opening
to uncertainty guarantees that sooner or later, the heart will open,
and when it does, we get to love and be loved—in spite of our
bewildering fallibility. The playing field is leveled, no one gets to
be special or exempt from the suffering inherent in the human
condition. We discover that we need each other despite our inordinate
obsession with independence. So much of what mattered before in our
prison of certainty matters so little now. Or as Pema Chodron
summarizes: “Never underestimate the power of compassionately
recognizing what’s going on.”
In
times of extreme uncertainty such as we are currently experiencing—in
times of wandering through the maze of conflicting facts and
theories, one of our most trusted allies may be poetry—reading it,
writing it, and reciting it to others by heart. Yes, “by heart”
which is another way of saying “from the heart.” Prose is linear
and more aligned with certainty whereas poetry values our uncertainty
and the twists and turns of our frail human condition.
The
poet Jane Hirshfield captures our predicament in “Against
Certainty”:
There
is something out in the dark that wants to correct us.
Each time I
think “this,” it answers “that.”
Answers hard, in the
heart-grammar’s strictness.
If
I then say “that,” it too is taken away.
Between
certainty and the real, an ancient enmity.
When the cat waits in
the path-hedge,
no cell of her body is not waiting.
This is how
she is able so completely to disappear.
I
would like to enter the silence portion as she does.
To
live amid the great vanishing as a cat must live,
one shadow fully
at ease inside another.
Hirshfield
gives us a priceless phrase, “the great vanishing,” which
succinctly captures the fundamental essence of the time in which we
live. Clean air, pure water, unadulterated food, and 200 species per
day—all vanishing. And we along with them. Perhaps like the cat, we
are all in the process of learning how to “completely disappear.”
Like the cat we are waiting, but hopefully not simply to disappear.
Our disappearance must serve a purpose, and in order for that to
happen, we are waiting and
working, waiting and
loving, waiting and making
amends, waiting and
making the demise of other species less agonizing.
In
the torture of not knowing, we are “challenged to stay in touch
with the heart-throbbing quality of being alive,” says Pema Chodron
because “things are as bad and as good as they seem.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.