A Man of Many Parts
Essays in Honor of John Westerdale Bowker
on the Occasion of his Eightieth Birthday

Edited by

EUGENE E. LEMCIOA MAN OF MANY PARTS
Essays in Honor of John Westerdale Bowker on the Occasion of his Eightieth Birthday
Copyright © 2015 Wipf and Stock Publishers. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced inany manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions.
Wipf and Stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3, Eugene, OR 97401.
Pickwick Publications
An Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers
199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3
Eugene, OR 97401
www.wipfandstock.com
ISBN 13: 978-1-62564-071-0

Cataloguing-in-Publication data:
A man of many parts : essays in honor of John Westerdale Bowker on the occasion of hiseightieth birthday / edited by Eugene M. Lemcio.
xiv + 236 p. ; 23 cm. Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 13: 978-1-62564-071-0
1. Bowker, John Westerdale. 2. Bowker, John, 1935–. 3. Theologians—Great Britain. 4.
Church of England—Clergy—Biography. I. Lemcio, Eugene E. II. Title.
BX5199 B72 L46 2015

Manufactured in the U.S.A.

01/26/2015

Some biblical quotations in chapter 4 are taken from the New Revised Standard Version
Bible, copyright 1989, Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the
Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Some biblical quotations in chapter 4 are taken from A New English Translation of the
Septuagint, copyright 2007 by the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate
Studies. Used by permission of Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
“Theodicy,” “Midlands Snow,” “Prayer,” and “Examination Question” are reprinted by permission of the publishers, from “Where Poems Come From: Spirituality, Emotion and Poiesis,” in Making Nothing Happen by Gavin D’Costa, Eleanor Nesbitt, Mark Pryce, Ruth
Shelton and Nicola Slee (Farnham: Ashgate, 2014), pp. 127–70. Copyright © 2014.
“For my Tortoise, Joey” © Eleanor Nesbitt. From Gemini Four. Reprinted by Permission of
Only Connect Publishing.
Excerpts from John Bowker, Before the Ending of the Day: Life and Love, Death and Redemption: Poems and Translations (Toronto: The Key Publishing House, 2010), 34, 38. Copyright© 2010. Used with permission of The Key Publishing House.

Contents
Preface | vii
Abbreviations | xContributors | xiii

Part 1: Introduction
1

John Bowker: A Theological Overview | 3—Rowan Williams

Part 2: Biblical Studies
2

The Teaching of Syriac at Cambridge | 15

3John Bowker and “The Jewish Background to
the New Testament”: An Essay in Wirkungsgeschichte | 30

—J. F. Coakley—Christopher Rowland

4

Daniel & the Three (Principally in the Old Greek):“Historical” Signs of the Eschatological Son of Man & Saints of
the Most High God—a Paradigm for Gospels Christology andDiscipleship | 43
—Eugene E. Lemcio

5

A Pilgrimage of Grace: The Journey Motif in Luke-Acts | 62
—Martin Forward

Part 3: Theology
6

On Systems, Circles, and Centers: Christianity
as a Christocentric “System” | 79
—Richard Bauckham

7“In Persona Christi”: Who, or Where, Is Christ at the Altar? | 95

8

The Moral Imagination and a Sense of God | 113—Sarah Coakley—Jane ShawPart 4: Neuroscience and Theology
9Brain Battles: Theology and Neuroscience | 131—William J. Abraham

10 The Origin of the Sense of God: Causation,
Epistemology, and Ontology | 145—Quinton Deeley

Part 5: Comparative Religion
11 The Idea of Constraint: A Hindu Example | 169—Gavin Flood

12 Al-Ghazālī and the Progress of Islamic Thought | 181—David Thomas

13 God, Life, Love, and Religions among
Indigenous Peoples of the World | 196—Darryl Macer

Part 6: Culture
14 The Word Was Made Flesh: Life without Footnotes.
John Bowker as Religious Broadcaster for the BBC | 215—David Craig

15 “Such Was the World”: A Verse Offering | 222—Eleanor Nesbitt

Bibliography of John W. Bowker’s Publications | 233

God, Life, Love, and Religions among
Indigenous Peoples of the World—Darryl Macer

OUR PRECOLONIAL GOD

W

hen did God reveal himself to the created? Most would agree it
was before the ninetteenth-century in America, when followers of
the Mormon faith would claim that God presented Joseph Smith with aset of tablets. Many would claim it was before Moses received the tablets ofthe ten commandments from God at Mount Sinai. There have been many
earlier and later saints; but just how do the major religions regard the saints
and faiths of many Peoples around the world? Perhaps “ignorance” is themost common word we can use to describe the understanding of many
Peoples by most others. Yet, religious faith is common among all Peoples of
the world, although the details differ.
This paper is dedicated to a dear friend, mentor, and someone who
inspired me to consider life and broaden my faith as our life paths encountered each other when I came as a doctoral student in molecular biology to
Cambridge University: Canon John Bowker. This book to honor his eightieth birthday is a good opportunity for me, thirty years younger, to reflect on
how this friendship has been linked to my scholarship and life ever since.

196

Macer—God, Life, Love, and Religions
What I am doing now is establishing a global university on Sovereign
land of Native American tribes in the United States, which may explain thelink in the title to Indigenous Peoples. As Provost of the University, andDirector of the Institute of Indigenous Peoples and Global Studies, I learnsomething new everyday still about the faiths, beliefs, and wisdom of different people. I will happily join in a premeal grace of the Apache chief facing
East, where the sun rises, just as joyfully as welcoming the rising sun for aprayer with my dear friend in Japan, a samurai of Shinto faith with whom I
had the privilege of sharing a common office wall for over a decade as professors at the University of Tsukuba. The fact that both faiths face East is not
hidden on me, as one who grew up in Aoteoroa, New Zealand and climbed
the roof of my house there to welcome the first sun in the world of any city
for the new millennium in the year 2000 . . . also facing East. Actually, as
I welcome many Muslims to American University of Sovereign Nations, I
am also happy that it happens that Mecca also is in the East. It is nice1 that
Peoples of different faiths could prayer together on sacred mountains andlands together, despite the fact that their revealed faiths came through thewisdom of different saints.
Back in my Cambridge days, I was the Chair of the Cambridge Christian Society for two years, and also one of the cofounders of the Cambridge
Christians in Science group, and still have a strong faith. Although there
were those at that time, and still today, who preached an exclusive form of
religious faith, one of the lessons I learned from John Bowker is a respect
and love of learning about other faith systems. I remember his writing that
90 percent of the world’s people follow a religion; and the same is true today.
I have conducted research in around 50 countries of the world to date, andright now am learning more about many indigenous Peoples. My original
passion for bioethics as an all-embracing discipline remains from my Cambridge days, and most of what I do I would call bioethics—encompassing
the love of life, and the ways people relate to each other, and to other lives
and nature.
Before this, I have spent a decade as UNESCO’s Regional Adviser forSocial and Human Sciences in Asia and the Pacific, conducting programs inover forty countries of the world—some small and others huge consortiums
such as India and China. So many systems are trying to find their way ina postcolonial world to prosper, and some even attempting to rediscoverthemselves and find their identity and past heritage. One of the programs
I developed was a dialogue between Asian and Arab philosophers to help
1. The word nice could be substituted by many more complex expressions; but, forthe point of people around the world, why not use a word like nice or beautiful?

197

198

Part 5: Comparative Religion
produce alternative materials for students to learn about philosophy fromdifferent traditions than the standard Anglo-American-European ones
that dominate. The obvious interfaith nature of these philosophical reflections has links to the Cambridge days also. I remember the attitude of thefundamentalists on both sides of a joint meeting I organized as a student
between the Christian and Muslim societies in Cambridge—an evangelistic
exercise from both sides; but most people just had a great time together.
The Asian-Arab philosophical dialogues were more a scholarly exercise byequally passionate people—not evangelizing the other but trying together
to understand the revealed wisdom of different traditions and how it could
help us all in our contemporary, postcolonial world.

BIOETHICS AS LOVE OF LIFE
The gift that we receive when we are born into this world is love. While it isa gift that few are deprived of—a deprivation that is in itself an insult to thehumanity that our flesh embodies—it is a norm for all forms of life for the
new life to be given a good start.2 The ultimate gift that we can share withothers is also love. If we ask people what images they have of love, answers
might include: lovers, family, warmth, God, happiness, difficulty, and manyothers. Many of these answers come from the local encounters around us;
and, in fact, the challenges for those who have tried to work on universal
love is that it is difficult to empathize with others in a distant land unless weare in contact with them. Only when “they” become “us” can we empathizewith others.
We can find various definitions of “bioethics.” The simplest would belove of life.3 Or less passionately, a consideration of the ethical issues raisedby questions involving life (“bio”). It includes questions we face each day,like, What food should I eat? How is the food grown? Where should I live;
and how much disturbance of nature should I make? What relationships
should I have with fellow organisms, including human beings? How do
I balance the quality of my life with development of love of my life, others’ lives, and the community? These are just a few; you can think of many
more. The history of bioethical reasoning is influenced by our genes, andthe forces that shaped and continue to shape these genes into the people,
society, and cultures that we have.4 We now have the power to change not
only our own genes but the genes of every organism, and the power to
2. Macer, Bioethics Is Love of Life.
3. Ibid., 1.
4. Macer, Shaping Genes, 340.

Macer—God, Life, Love, and Religions
remodel whole ecosystems of the planet, which has made many focus on
biotechnology applications. However, the key questions are more basic. We
have the technology to conceive an embryo in vitro, to mix genes from different persons and beings and to offer life support to those whose body has
temporarily failed. We have the power to remodel whole ecosystems of theplanet. New technology has nevertheless been a catalyst for our thinking
about bioethics, which have been stimuli for research into bioethics in thelast few decades.
A fundamental way of reasoning that people have when making decisions is to balance doing good against doing harm. We could group these
ideals under the idea of love, though the question of benefits for whom andharm to whom is central to deciding whether an action is one of love or not.
One of the underlying philosophical ideas of society is to pursue progress.
The most common justification for this is the pursuit of improved medicinesand health, which is doing good. A failure to attempt to do good is a form of
doing harm: the sin of omission. This is the principle of beneficence. This isa powerful impetus for further research into ways of improving health andagriculture and living standards.
Fritz Jahr5 has urged people to turn to “bioethics” and conduct a review of the ethical relations of humans towards animals and plants, following the traditions followed for millennia in Africa, the Americas, Asia, and
the Pacific—in fact, by indigenous persons across every continent. If one
has ever walked in a jungle, or swum in a coral reef, the words—“The strict
distinction between animal and human being [Mensch], dominant in our
European culture up to the end of the 18th century, cannot be supported
anymore.”—would have not only resonated, but also made us wonder whatsort of world tried to distinguish human beings from other animals in thefirst place.
Such thinkers had a biocentric or ecocentric worldview, influenced
not only by a revealed God through nature but also by the increased understanding of biological evolution. The love of life has always been expressedby some in society, in each religion. There are several basic theories of bioethics, and the simplest distinction that can be made is whether they focus
on action, consequences, or motives. Another separation that is used is deontological theories, which examine the concepts of rights and duties, andteleological ones, which are based on effects and consequences. If we use theimage of walking along the path of life, a teleologist tries to look where decisions lead, whereas a deontologist follows a planned direction. All around

5. Jahr, “Bio-Ethik,” 2–4.

199

200

Part 5: Comparative Religion
the world people make moral decisions using a range of ideas, which are notas diverse from each other as their different etiquettes may demand.6
What future do we want? The pursuit of a good life is a goal that all
persons can hope for. A good life should be understood in a holistic sense,
and is clearly more than just a contented life, free of want and fear. At theinternational level, this is what the United Nations was established to help
provide. This is also the duty of all governments to provide to their citizens, and those with the abilities to provide to those in need. Local wisdom
provides a number of answers to the question of what a good life is. The
extension of local wisdom to global love can be seen throughout history. In
the words of Erich Fromm, “If I truly love one person I love all persons, I
love the world, I love life. If I can say to somebody else, ‘I love you,’ I must
be able to say ‘I love in you everybody, I love through you the world, I lovein you also myself.’”7This reminds us of the words of Mo Tzu in the sixth century BCE from
China referring to Confucian family-centered love:
It should be replaced by the way of universal love and mutual
benefit . . . . It is to regard other people’s countries as one’s
own. Regard other people’s families as one’s own. Regard otherpeople’s person as one’s own. Consequently, when feudal lords
love one another, they will not fight in the fields. When headsof families love one another, they will not usurp one another.
When individuals love one another, they will not injure one
another. When ruler and minister love each other, they will bekind and loyal. When father and son love each other, they will
be affectionate and filial. When brothers love each other, they
will be peaceful and harmonious. When all people in the world
love one another, the strong will not overcome the weak, themany will not oppress the few, the rich will not insult the poor,
the honoured will not despise the humble, and the cunning will
not deceive the ignorant. Because of universal love, all the calamities, usurpations, hatred, and animosity in the world will be
prevented from arising.8

6. Macer, Bioethics for the People, 188.
7. Fromm, The Art of Loving, 63.
8. Macer, Bioethics Is Love of Life, 27.

Macer—God, Life, Love, and Religions

OUR COMMON MIND AND HUMAN DIGNITY
There have been debates in almost every corner of the globe over the definitions of “culture” and “identity,” and over the question, what is ethics? Thesesocial constructs all originate in our mind, a product of an individual’s ontology, genes, environment, and relationships. The underlying heritage of
ethics can be seen in all cultures, religions, and in ancient writings fromaround the world.9 We in fact cannot trace the origin of bioethics back totheir beginning, as the relationships between human beings within theirsociety, with nature and God, are formed at an earlier stage then our history
would tell us.
As countries have developed spaces to discuss their values, we havealso seen the role of social science as a driver towards understanding ofdifferent social relations and patterns between and within cultures, andincreased understanding of our views of nature. Creating a space is not somuch a challenge from the use of technology, but rather a challenge fromthe growing knowledge of human nature and life itself. Bioethics is the concept of love, balancing benefits and risks of choices and decisions, in our
ethical mind. This heritage can be seen in all cultures and religions, and inancient writings from around the world.
One of the most interesting questions before a thinking being iswhether we can comprehend the ideas and thoughts of other beings, andconversely whether they can also read our mind. In terms of evolution,
there could be survival benefit by the capacity to be able to fully understandthe thinking of others, both for direct competitive benefit and also for the
spirit of altruistic cooperation. Although the human mind appears to be
infinitely complex, and the diversity of human kind and culture has been
considered vast, in 1994 I made a hypothesis that the number of ideas thathuman beings have is finite,10 and in 2002 I called for a project to map theideas of the human mind11—the behaviorome project (or human mental
mapping project).12 There are many opportunities offered by greater understanding of the human mind, but also many challenges to greater individualand cross-cultural understanding of human beings.
The term “love” is usually omitted from international law, whereas theconcept of human dignity is often cited. Human dignity is arguably evenmore difficult to define than love. For example, article 11 of the Universal
9. Macer, Bioethics for the People,
10. Ibid., 168.
11. Macer, “Next Challenge,” 12.
12. Macer, “Finite or Infinite Mind?,” 203.

201

202

Part 5: Comparative Religion
Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights states, “Practices
which are contrary to human dignity, such as reproductive cloning of human beings, shall not be permitted.”13 Why cloning is always against humandignity is not clear. For example, if it was the only way a family could havea genetically related child, why is that against human dignity? Especiallywhen using donated sperm and eggs or a surrogate mother is permitted
in many countries, even for commercial contracts. Yet, at the time following the cloning of Dolly the sheep by nuclear transfer in February 1997, it
became a popular call for many government leaders to say it was against human dignity. Still, across the world we can find many common expressionsof dignity from many sources.14
Another expression of love of our own life that is dominant in medical
ethics is the sanctity of life. This sanctity of life is also often imposed uponothers on the behalf of the person who has their life threatened. The argument is also used by opponents of abortion, claiming the fetus also has asanctity of life. Indian philosophy also includes the idea of to do no harm,
ahimsa, as one guiding principle. Indian medical ethics today includes Hindu and Western influences, plus many folk traditions and other religious
groups. India includes followers of many religions, and the long tradition ofliving together, and has a holistic environmental ethic.15 In Jainism, patience
is regarded as a good; and pleasure is a source of sin, so that true freedom isindependence to outside things. Depending how removed we attempt to befrom the material world, we might accept our fate without taking medicine.
This reminds us of the Taoist idea to flow with nature.16 However, there is along tradition of use of curative and cosmetic remedies in Indian medicine,suggesting that, in India as elsewhere, people seek to cure sickness and enhance their body and emotions.
Part of the concept of dignity is linked to self-determination. Autonomy is applied to many life choices that are bioethical dilemmas. For example,
personal transport in an automobile is associated with high environmental
load. People are free to pursue sports that consume large amounts of energy, or to buy large cars or large homes that are beyond what is necessary for a comfortable life. Personal or cultural freedom in continuing to
eat whale meat in Norway, Iceland, or Japan is considered more important
than concerns that whales might have sanctity of life because of intrinsic
moral status. Whale baleen used to be widely used in woman’s corsets in
13. UNESCO, Universal Declaration on the Human Genome, 3.
14. Macer, Asian-Arab Philosophical Dialogues, 1–177.
15. Azariah, “Global Bioethics and Common Hope,” 66.
16. Hsin and Macer, “Contrasting Expectations,” 195–216.

Macer—God, Life, Love, and Religions
the West, and today many endangered animals are used to make cosmetic
products. We can see the evolution of law, however, in the 2014 decision of
the International Court of Justice to stop the hunting of whales in the international waters of the South Pacific in order to end an intensifying battle
between environmentalists of that region and whalers. Although the direct
legal arguments can be interpreted in different ways, the ethical-politicalrationale is extending the concept of moral agency beyond human species.
Similar arguments have been used for the Great Ape project, to call for laws
against experimentation on great apes—including chimpanzees, gorillas
and orangutans.17
There are precedents for limiting autonomy in behavior towards theenvironment. Personal taste in tropical timber products is one choice thathas begun to be limited by restrictions on tropical-forest logging. Anotherlimit is personal choice in use of ivory in statues and personal name stamps
in many countries due to the endangered status of elephants. Limiting personal choice of human beings when those choices harm other beings is being accepted. This will be seen more in environmental ethics.

PRECOLONIAL AND POSTCOLONIAL VALUE SYSTEMS
Colonization has been a major force to articulate bioethical value systems
that were previously implicit in the relationships of people and nature.
Along with colonization came waves of Christian missionaries; and theChristian faith was readily adopted in a “local” form. Anthropologists also
described a number of traditions, although some “sacred” knowledge ispreserved among chiefs and only informed to those they decide to entrust
such wisdom to. In my home, Oceania, as more persons left the shores of theislands to study, they started to document more of these diverse traditions,and in turn these values were discussed among many of the communities ina more articulated form.
“Bioethics” is both a word and a concept. Likewise, bioethics in the
Pacific is identified closely with a broad concept of love binding all of life
together, and the terms and values used to translate English words of bioethical principles in Pacific languages have deep historical roots. Although
there were a wide variety of concepts prior to European colonization of the
Pacific, the modern Pacific is predominantly Christian in faith, with a blendof indigenous culture and a theocentric approach to life ethics. Thus, although the actual word “bioethics” comes to us only from a German paper
17. Cavalieri and Singer, Great Ape Project, 11.

203

204

Part 5: Comparative Religionof 1927,18 amplified by Potter in English,19 the concept comes from human
heritage thousands of years old; and there has been rejection of attempts tointroduce the term “bioethics” when it is associated with universal ethicalprinciples.
The concept of love as a binding force resonates well with many approaches of indigenous cultures. This includes more than humans, however,with strong love of animals who live on the land and in water, and a love of
nature. In Maori, the word aroha is used to denote something broader thanlove, but including a oneness with nature and animals. Bioethics has origins in exploring human relationships with animals and with nature (ocean
and land), and spirituality.20 Love continues to be taught to children from ayoung age as a noble ethical character. In Tonga, ofa, which means all formsof love, and fe’ofo’ofani, caring love as a family, are some of the basic values
taught to children from a young age, which influence their behavior. These
concepts are expressed in the way that Pacific islanders care for the sick,often with practical expressions that family members will accompany thesick person to the hospital and a relative will always stay with the person day
and night in the hospital.21
Stories explaining the deeds of past generations and the symbolic nature of the landscape can be found in songs, laws, history instruction, andsocial systems. It is not possible to trace the origin of bioethics back to their
beginning, as the relationships between human beings within their society,within the biological community, and with nature and God are formed at
an earlier stage then history provides.22 Love is recognized as both the biological heritage given to humankind by genes, as well as a social heritage,
as society tries to pursue harmony between individuals and communities.
In some countries, deliberate mistranslations were made if a writtenconcept existed. For example, the Spanish missionaries in Mexico tried toeliminate the concept of reincarnation from Aztec and Mayan writings sothat people could believe in the Christian concept of one life, one deathand one judgment. Because Pacific values and beliefs are transmitted orally,
many have incorrectly assumed that bioethics were effectively nonexistent

18. Jahr, “Bio-Ethik,” 2–4.
19. Potter, Bioethics, 1–16.
20. Macer, Bioethics Is Love of Life, 3.
21. Mafi, “Polynesians often put family and community before their own health,”
13–16.
22. Macer, Bioethics Is Love of Life, 124.

Macer—God, Life, Love, and Religions
before the expansion of modern bioethics in the 1970s.23 Ethics has a central
place in all indigenous knowledge systems and processes.
Each daily life event is seen through a lens of ethical values,
mores, and codes of conduct developed over years. Indigenous
ethical systems incorporate technical insights and wisdombased observations of natural, social, and spiritual phenomena
which, in turn, validate place and identity, as well as the survivalof Pacific nations in our increasingly globalized societies.24

Ethical values and principles have developed in the context of epistemological systems and are central to how knowledge is gained and organized, how knowledge is used, and who has access to it. In the developmentof ethical principles for medical research, the Pacific Health ResearchCouncil in New Zealand wrote:
Every Pacific society has a framework of knowledge that is systematically gathered and formulated within a paradigm of general truths and principles. Knowledge gathering and systems ofvalidating knowledge and legitimizing information are processes that are often determined and regulated (but not exclusively)by a select group within the traditional hierarchy of knowledge
with the aim of protecting the quality and wellbeing of people.25

The prime minister of Samoa, Tui Atua Tupua Tamasese Ta’isi Efi described the importance of the Samoan concepts of tapu (the sacred) andtofa sa’ili (the search for wisdom) in identifying ethical practices for application in research.26 He argued that it is possible to find a middle groundbetween ideas and practices grounded in religion, the spiritual, the sacred,and science. Against the background of an exploration of different facetsof the Samoan concept of tapu, which encompasses the sacredness of theorigins of all things as well as the affinity between people, the cosmos, andanimate and inanimate earthly phenomena, he envisages a Pacific bioethics
that reaches out for wisdom. Such activity and the search for knowledge
would be grounded in a sense of connectedness to all things, the awarenessof people’s responsibilities as protectors of the earth, attention to the sacredessence of all things, and a desire for increased understanding without everpresuming to know God.
23. Ibid., 15.
24. Fairbairn-Dunlop, “Pacific Ethics and Universal Norms,” 9–13.
25. Health Research Council, Guidelines, 10.
26. Tui Atua Tupua Tamasese Efi, “Bioethics and the Samoan Indigenous Reference,” 115–24.

205

206

Part 5: Comparative Religion
There are a variety of approaches to deciding whether a practice is
ethical or not. Are there indeed universal values which can be agreed uponacross the many cultures of the world, and is there a universal language ofmaking these values acceptable as well as applicable across the many communities? In the Western Abrahamic and post-Enlightenment worldviews,
there is a strong belief that universal values can be realized through objective criteria. Contrastingly, the Indic systems believe that while universal
values exist, they are not achievable because human beings apply their own
subjective experiences and emotions to their knowledge of values. Therefore, whereas the former ascribes a degree of objectivity as a prerequisite
for legitimacy, the latter considers subjectivity as a major influencing factor
specific to individuals, groups, cultures, and so on.27
This worldview will tolerate many individual choices as long as they do
not do harm, and will also tolerate belief in attempting to improve ourselves.
Indic cultural systems would be uncomfortable with a “universal” set of values arrived at through a consensus of human reason or legitimized throughdivine revelation. A pluralistic approach exists in most Eastern civilizations,
including in the Far East and China. It is understood that human society
lives by a diverse set of values and philosophies, and universalism deprivessome communities and people of their own value systems. Thus, Eastern
traditions believe that universalism is an infringement on a human being’s
basic right to enjoy one’s own value and belief system. People should be able
to exercise their choices if they do not harm others.
Confucianism has two interesting characteristics that set it apart from
Abrahamic and Indic traditions. First, it does not dwell on God or othermetaphysical theories. This leaves the individual free to believe in any “spiritual” truth he or she may wish to follow, and enhancement is a common belief. Confucianism is a set of ethics on relationships between the individualand government, the individual and society, individual and family and theindividual and friends. It describes how concepts such as compassion, honesty, justice, and work fit within these relationships. These sets of values anddirections form the essential nature of Chinese society regardless of the “religion” of the person. In fact, if religion is usually both about a metaphysicaltheory and human relations, then Confucianism can be said to be a religion
which does not concern itself with metaphysical aspects.
Second, Confucianism emphasizes harmony among humans and between humans and nature. Confucianism does not proffer divine origins
of harmony, but rather a set of values derived from reason and a spiritualawareness. Harmony influences the ethics of Confucians towards nature and
27. Rai et al. Universalism and Ethical Values for the Environment, 16.

Macer—God, Life, Love, and Religions
society. In the future, when differences between those who are enhanced
and those who are not become significant, there will be some challenges
to harmony for these reasons. Growing socioeconomic gaps however havebeen tolerated over time; so. we can question whether people will really
apply concepts of justice to the way people think.
Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics wrote that morality is the pursuit of a“final good” or “supreme good.” This may be accepted widely, but the question is what this “good” is.28 The final good was often interpreted as happiness, which leads us to one of the main teleological theories: utilitarianism.
Utilitarianism looks at the consequences of an action, and is based on thework of Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806–1873).
They could have been rediscovering what Mo Tzu had taught in China inthe sixth century BCE. The benefit of the community over individual is a
widespread ethic across Asian countries, as is the sacrifice of individuals
for the greater good. If a substantial majority of a community consider apractice to be ethical does it make it ethical? The principle of utility assertsthat we ought always to produce the maximal balance of happiness/pleasureover pain, or good over harm, or positive value over disvalue. Harmony is
an important principle in Asian bioethics.

DESCRIBING OUR VIEWS
A repository of worldviews29 is being set up that will evolve as different setsof ethical values from the first principles widely held within the religion or
culture of that region, people, or civilization are included. Once a repository
is more fully developed, we may find that there may be similarities in all,there may only be similarities in some, or there may not be any similarities
in the different perspectives, or that the small number of similarities does
not warrant a unitary ethical system for the whole world.
There are implications for mind mapping our future relationships withnature and cultural identity as we explore. How should a culture that tries
to maintain its cultural uniqueness by claiming everyone thinks the same,
face up to the reality that in every culture the full range of idea diversity isfound. This diversity is found in almost all groups, excluding those particularly finite groups that are formed to promote particular political aims,
such as those who fight for or against abortion or euthanasia. Religions
which have observed already that humankind is universal will have fewer
challenges than religions which claim a special religious status for their
28. Macer, Bioethics Is Love of Life, 52.
29. http://www.eubios.info/repository_of_ethical_world_views_of_nature/.

207

208

Part 5: Comparative Religion“chosen” people. The question of how universal the human-idea map is, isof importance for the development of global society, when we’re faced withdilemmas like should we have common guidelines to regulate the use of
new biotechnology or assisted reproductive technology using cloning, forexample. It is time to start thinking scientifically about it, whether or notscience is finite or infinite. That is another question.
To compare mental maps allows comparisons of idea diversity between persons and species. This will allow the development of descriptive
bioethics into a common framework for comparative ethics. This will aid
in policy making to make policy that respects the diversity of people in a
culture, and globally. This would help develop bioethics for the people by
the people. The development of biotechnology and use of humans in clinical
trials in many countries raises fundamental questions about whether the
standards used should be universal or local. The development of guidelines
should be culturally sensitive in the way ethical, social, and legal aspects
are considered. Having a map of human ideas will enable us to reflect morediversity of ideas into policy frameworks. We will have to pay attention toensure it is used well, and not used to dictate majority views to minorities.
We can see that the mental-mapping project will develop international
bioethics, social and human sciences of the twentieth-first century onto a
more concrete and transdisciplinary basis. We need to develop a common
language for studies of life and ideas, and it is hoped that these projects willallow this. There will be challenges for many aspects of our understandingof human beings—though we should be clear: there will always be morequestions than answers for humans to attempt to understand ourselves andnature. This is clearly an issue of information ethics in collection, storage,
and use. Already military uses have been debated at conferences on thisproject, as have many psychological consequences of the mental maps when
they are available for human individuals, cultures, and in general. How
should we proceed in these studies, also given that the mind of youth andaged persons also vary in the era of mundialization and globalization? There
are many questions for us to discuss, and more contributions for the repository will be useful as we develop these processes.

ETHICS EDUCATION THROUGH GLOBAL AND LOCALDIALOGUE AND DEBATE
What future do we want? The pursuit of a good life is a goal that all persons can hope for. We can consider the four imperatives of love for ethics,
as self-love, loving others, loving life, and loving good. Love is not only aMacer—God, Life, Love, and Religions
universally recognized goal of ethical action, but is also the foundation of
normative principles of ethics. Global responsibilities for promotion of agood life for all (not only humankind) are necessary for our sustainable
future.
A person’s identity and ethic develops based on their own and otherpeople’s opinions, and grows as we face various dilemmas through our life.
To have a balanced opinion from the community, it is important to hearfrom persons in a range of positions with different occupations. Interactive
ethics education allows the classroom to be a place for moral explorationand clarification of values.
The common social goal to respect the moral choices of others hasdeveloped hand in hand with the emergence of increased media attention inpluralistic democracies to display the divergent views on many topics. These
dialogues can show us that local wisdom from our corner of the world issimilar to local wisdom from others on the other side of the globe, so thatthey now also join to “us” to construct a larger “us.” These lessons also assist
us in the development of a globally accessible multicultural and multidisciplinary curriculum that offers cases from many local wisdoms that can beshared.
We need to promote greater dialogue between different regions of theworld, separate to the export of ideas from Europe that occurred during
the colonial days, and more recently from North America as English has
become the common language for globalization. What can we teach in acurriculum that covers many localities and local wisdoms? Consensus ispossible after recognition of the individual yet connected history of relationships between different persons and communities, to try to preservesocial harmony. This consensus building is seen even in countries that havestructured paternalism affecting the relationships between persons. Public
discussion of the ethics of science and technology in many societies is aided
by the media.

CONCLUSIONS
Scholarship is so engrained in the fabric of the human mind that some haveconsidered it the image of God; as Descartes said, “I think therefore I am.”A mature society can discuss the benefits and risks of all choices and havepublic debate on these. The same is true in our individual moral education.
Participation of the public in the societal decision-making process regarding
new technology is essential. Community engagement is not only a question

209

210

Part 5: Comparative Religionof knowing what is going on: but for a new technology to be accepted by the
public, it is crucial to perceive the choice and influence.
Beyond that, scholarship is the capacity to show love, and in that there
is some common understanding of love that should be central in a dialogue
between cultures—of East and West, North and South, powerful and weak,
and technophiles and technophobes. Human beings are one part of nature,
closely interwoven with all species. Can we enhance all species to love more
to enhance life? It is a challenge that many cosmetic choices are not beyond
the economic choices that societies let individuals pursue; and if they do notdirectly harm others, perhaps we will see even greater evolution of our mind
than we would like to! However, a lesson of indigenous culture is that mostare evolutionary and prepared to survive through times when norms arethrown upside down and trampled on. That capacity for survival is something that gives us hope. That hope is also embedded with the humility that
all of us and all societies have made moral mistakes; that should make us
pursue greater wisdom for a better future.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Azariah, Jayapaul. “Global Bioethics and Common Hope.” In Bioethics for the People by
the People, edited by Darryl R. J. Macer, 98–124. Christchurch, NZ: Eubios Ethics
Institute, 1994.
Cavalieri, Paola, and Peter Singer, eds. The Great Ape Project: Equality beyond Humanity.
London: Fourth Estate, 1993.
Fairbairn-Dunlop, Peggy. “Pacific Ethics and Universal Norms.” In Asia-Pacific
Perspectives on Ethics of Science and Technology, edited by Darryl R. J. Macer, 9–13.
Bangkok: UNESCO, 2010.
Fromm, Erich. The Art of Loving. New York: Bantam, 1963.
Health Research Council of New Zealand. Guidelines on Pacific Health Research.
Auckland, NZ: Health Research Council of New Zealand, 2005.
Hsin, H-S.D., and Darryl R. J. Macer. “Contrasting Expectations of Biotechnology for
Medical Care in Taiwan between Seniors and Medical Students.” LHGR 20 (2004)
195–216.
Jahr, Fritz. “Bio-Ethik. Eine Umschau über die ethischen Beziehungen des Menschenzu Tier und Pflanze.” KHN 24/1 (1927) 2–4.
Macer, Darryl R. J., ed. Bioethics for the People by the People. Christchurch, NZ: Eubios
Ethics Institute, 1994.
———. Bioethics Is Love of Life. Christchurch, NZ: Eubios Ethics Institute, 1998.
———. “Finite or Infinite Mind?: A Proposal for an Integrative Mental Mapping
Project.” EJAIB 12 (2002b) 203–6, http://www.eubios.info/mentmap.htm/.
———. “The Next Challenge Is to Map the Human Mind.” Nature 420 (2002a) 12.
———. Shaping Genes: Ethics, Law and Science of Using New Genetic Technology in
Medicine and Agriculture. Christchurch, NZ: Eubios Ethics Institute, 1990.

Macer—God, Life, Love, and Religions———, ed. Asian-Arab Philosophical Dialogues on Culture of Peace and Human Dignity.
Bangkok: UNESCO, 2011.
Mafi, G. “Polynesians Often Put Family and Community before Their Own Health.”
NZFP 25/1 (1998) 13–16.
Potter, Van Rensselaer. Bioethics: Bridge to the Future. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall, 1971.
Rai, Jasdev Singh et al. Universalism and Ethical Values for the Environment. Working
Group Report 1. Bangkok, UNESCO, 2010.
Tui Atua Tupua Tamasese Efi. “Bioethics and the Samoan Indigenous Reference.” ISSJ
60.195 (2009) 115–24.
UNESCO. Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights. Paris:
UNESCO, 1997, http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13177&URL_
DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html/.
UNESCO. Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. Paris: UNESCO, 2005,
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001461/146180E.pdf/.

211