2023/09/11

윤정현 신부님 인터뷰 1



==
Transcript


0:09
5 기독교와 해경 께 노자
0:12
예 큰일을 말씀하신거 예 알
0:16
아 그렇죠 앉아 심사 예 아
0:23
0:25
제가 천공 한 건은
0:28
영성 신학의 요 예
0:31
영성신학 에서도
0:34
[음악]
0:35
4 긍정적인 용 용어를 사용하는 그런 신학과
0:43
부정 연 을 사용해서
0:46
쓰는 그
0:48
영성 청 표시 좀 달라요
0:52
그러니까 굉장 의 오늘 사용하는 하나님은 크고 아름답고 넓고 계속 긍정을
1:00
써요
1:01
이렇게 하나님 진리다 사람이나 이렇게 그럼
1:06
그럼 이제 예 하나의 정의를 하면 뭐 뭐 이다정 이라며 하나님 이미 그
1:13
개념이 갇혀 요 진리 안에 같죠
1:15
하나님은 살아 있는 사랑 사랑 많아 이자는 사랑을 넘어 계시지
1:20
진리 다음은 진리 안에 갇혀 버리는 카테고리 올
1:23
진리 넘어 있는데
1:25
예 하나님은 뭐 전지전능한 등 모든 쌀 고 뭐 능력인 넘치는 분이다
1:34
그 안에만 딱 같이 잖아요 근데 하나님은 그렇게 규정할 존재 나냐 더
1:38
크고 넓죠
1:41
예 그래서 이제 에
1:45
아파트 트지 신이라고 한다 는 그 부정의 신화
1:49
부정의 점도 그렇게 해서 아니라고 뭐 하는 용어를 써요
1:55
하나님의 진리 더 아니라 7만 아니라 질 넘어 계시지
2:00
하나님은 사랑이가 사랑만 앉아서 스플라인 사랑이 아니라 사랑을 넘어오게
2:06
시작해서 이렇게 부정이 언어를 써요 그래 이제 아빠 파티 테레즈 양으로
2:13
그래서 거기에는 이제 침묵에 은 으
2:17
그 다음에 호 여 속에서 하나님을 느끼는 그런 체험 중심의
2:25
근데 이제 긍정 원을 쓰는 데는 그 열정적 이에요
2:30
박수 주면서 이렇게 예 차장 하면서
2:35
그리고
2:37
제와 더해 게 그 그 후에 은총 이런 것들 굉장히 강조를 해요
2:44
에 신앙의 양태를
2:46
상대 달래고 있어 그 부정형 원을 쓴 내는
2:52
고요의 어 말이 필요없죠 규정을 정의를 아마 안되요
2:58
게토 덕평 에서도 포화도
3:01
p 3동 영감 0 비자나 포를 도라고 이미 필요하면 포구 아니라는 것이
3:07
영어라는 언어
3:08
뭐를 2 정일 해버리면 이름 지면
3:14
그 일을 많이 그 이름을 넘어져 있지 그런 개념이 거든요 그러니까
3:19
하나님도 정리할 수 없다 이제
3:21
부정 회원을 이렇게 했는데
3:24
그래 이제 그 영성 처음 에서도
3:28
부정해 언어 를 쓴 그 사막의 영성 침묵에 생활을 하고
3:35
고요 속에서 의 하나님을 느끼며 사랑 그 종교 체험을 제가 영어를 했어요
3:42
3:43
그래서 이제 소양의 그 종교 체험
3:47
그 양상이
3:50
영상이 이제 종교의 체험 그 이영희
3:55
다양하게 나타나는데 특히 이제 부정 신학을 않은 그 영상이 동양의
4:02
불교의 공채 엄 9 있어요
4:05
아예 그리고 이제 소양에 특히 이제 스페인의
4:11
스페인 의 수입자의 송료 안 되는거
4:15
아빌라의 데레사 그 그런 분들은 이제
4:19
종교 체험을 아주 나름대로 최소한 그 감정 표현 그리고 그 분류를 하면서
4:28
표현을 했네요
4:29
우리는 동양 사람 걸 잘 못해 그냥 측과 느낄 뿐이지 원으로 구술 잘못
4:36
근데 이제 스페인의 그 영성의 아빌라의 데레사 라던가 십자의 성료 아니라
4:44
드네요
4:45
아주 솜 지연 예 감정으로 표현을
4:50
[음악]
4:51
그래서 이제 영혼의 손 같은 노래
4:54
1 공방에서 또 709 안까지
4:57
그 취 난 의 유형을 하나님 만나는 깊이에 따라서 표현하는
5:03
예 우리는 궁 반 이라고 번역을 한데 맨션에 1단계 단계의 상당히 7단계
5:09
까지 넣어 예
5:11
그걸 110 반이 0 방석 7 군과 그렇게 아 표현한 우리나라 퍼갈땐
5:16
되있어요 안 되게
5:18
불교 학우들 이렇게 통할 뺄 수 있다고 볼게요 그죠 그러니까
5:23
뭐든지 체험을 아 메종 교체하면 비싸 얘 너 불 교체하면 기독교의 짜면
5:29
아 나는 다른 종 대 체 험 더 유형 입히세요
5:33
어 풀 그런 저민 불교 해줘야 돼 다른 봐야 예

윤정현 신부 “평화는 서로의 종교를 인정하는 것부터 시작” - 충북인뉴스

“평화는 서로의 종교를 인정하는 것부터 시작” < 사회 < 기사본문 - 충북인뉴스

“평화는 서로의 종교를 인정하는 것부터 시작”
기자명 박소영 기자   입력 2015.02.04
===
성공회 수동성당 윤정현 신부의 철학, 더 낮은 곳으로…

성공회 수동성당 윤정현 신부(61)는 청주에서 5년 가까운 임기를 마치고 더 낮은 곳으로 떠난다. 공식적으론 연구년을 신청했지만 올해 연구보다는 봉사로 바쁜 한 해를 보내게 됐다. 영국 대학에 논문제출도 있지만 무엇보다 인도, 가나, 네팔을 돌며 그가 풀어야 할 숙제가 있다.

먼저 2월 2일부터 10일간 그는 인도의 불가촉천민들의 공동체로 떠난다. 인도 옛 무굴제국의 수도였던 하이더라바드에 있는 공동체는 윤 신부가 지난 15년간 인연을 맺은 곳이다. 윤 신부의 노력으로 그 곳에는 고아원과 염소조합(goatbank), 학교가 세워졌다. 윤 신부는 “불가촉천민은 인간의 대우를 받지 못해요. 전체 인도 인구 13억명 가운데 15%인 2억 5000여명이 가난에 찌들어있죠. 만져서도 안 되는 사람들이죠”라고 설명했다.



영국 유학길에 만난 인도신부
윤 신부는 영국 버밍엄에서 석·박사 과정을 마쳤다. 서른이 넘어 목회를 시작했고, 마흔이 넘어 유학길에 올랐다. 그곳에서 불가촉천민 출신의 윌승싱검 신부를 만났다. “같이 공부하면서 인도의 상황에 대해 많이 듣게 됐어요. 만약 싱검 신부가 다시 불가촉천민에게 돌아가 활동한다면 지원하겠다고 약속했죠. 그런데 1999년 싱검 신부가 한국에 왔어요. 그 후 해마다 기금을 모아 인도에 전달하고 있어요.” 싱검 신부는 그 곳에서 100여개의 교회 공동체와 80명의 목회자를 배출했다고 한다.

정작 윤 신부가 버밍엄에서 공부한 내용은 ‘다석 유영모 선생’의 사상이었다. 그는 다석에 대한 연구로 석·박사논문을 냈다. 다석 유영모 선생(1890~1981년)은 동양적 사상으로 서양의 종교인 기독교를 재해석한 인물이다.

교육자, 철학자, 종교가이도 했던 그는 정인보, 이광수와 함께 1940년대 조선의 3대 천재로 불리기도 했다. 1921년 오산학교 교장을 지내다 이후 은퇴하여 농사를 짓고 제자들을 가르치며, ‘노자’를 번역했다. 기독교를 유, 불, 선으로 확장하여 이해했으며 그가 주장한 종교다원주의는 서양보다 70년이나 앞선 것이었다. 이러한 종교사상은 1998년 영국의 에든버러(Edinburgh)대학에서 강의됐다. 제자 중에서 가장 아끼던 이는 함석헌으로, 함석헌의 씨알 사상 또한 유영모 선생으로부터 물려받은 것이다.

윤 신부는 “다석의 사상이 지금 시대에 간절히 필요해요. 세계가 근본주의 배타주의로 매일 싸우고 있잖아요. 유영모 선생은 통종교 사상을 이야기했죠. 인류가 공존해서 사는 방법은 각자의 종교를 인정하는 것부터 시작해야 해요. 다르다 틀렸다라고 싸우지 말고, 종교에 매이지 않고 넘어서야죠. 그리고 무엇보다 ‘제 소리’를 낼 줄 알아야 해요. 알고보면 공자, 맹자, 노자, 장자, 부처, 예수도 각자 제 소리를 냈던 인물이에요”라고 설명했다.

하늘을 꿰뚫고 내는 소리, 하늘에서 울려주는 소리가 진짜 복음이라는 것. 서양의 선교사가 알려주는 성경이 아니라 동양의 철학으로 녹여낸 성경. 다석은 절대자 하나님의 존재를 ‘없이 계시는 하느님’으로 이해했다. 서양의 철학인 존재와 비존재의 개념으로 절대자를 본 게 아니라 동양의 사상인 태극과 무극, 이와 기의 사상으로 해석했다.

“하나님은 인간의 언어로 설명되는 분이 아니죠. 다석은 기도를 통해 깨달은 사람은 절대세계와 소통할 수 있다고 봤어요. 또한 한글을 하늘과 맞닿은 소리로 이해했죠. 한글은 땅과 하늘을 이어주는 묘한 법칙이 있어요. 땅의 소리가 아니라 하늘의 소리라고 본 거죠.”



이러한 다석의 사상은 오늘날 활발히 연구 중이다. 2008년에 세계 철학대회가 우리나라에서 개최됐는데 윤 신부는 다석에 관한 연구로 발제하기도 했다. 당시 유영모, 함석헌, 정약용, 최치원 등이 사상가로 소개됐다.
다석 유영모의 가르침

다석의 가르침을 연구한 윤 신부에게 공동체는 너무나 중요한 가치다. 다석은 늘 가난한 공동체를 강조했다. “신앙은 지행합일이 제일 중요해요. 말을 행동으로 옮겨야 제대로 신앙하는 사람이에요.”

그는 몇 해 전 가나에 유치원을 설립했다. 여성이 교육을 받아 가난의 대물림을 벗어나게 해주고 싶어서다. 가나에 2개의 유치원이 설립돼 운영 중인데 청주에 있는 ‘커피나무집’카페에서 매달 자선공연회를 열고 그 수익금을 전달해 왔다. 윤 신부는 네팔에도 한국문화원을 건립할 계획이다. 뿐만 아니라 고창에 여성쉼터를 크게 낼 계획이다. 이미 김포, 대전에서 여성쉼터를 운영했다.

“쉼터는 성매매 피해 여성을 구출하고 지원하는 기관이에요. 아내가 맡아서 운영해왔죠. 그 일을 통해 27명의 아이들의 생명을 구했어요. 고창에 집을 새로 지을 건데 친환경으로 전기 안 쓰는 공동체를 만들 겁니다. 자연으로 돌아가는 집이죠. 그곳에서 농사를 지으면서 다석 사상을 더 실천하고 연구하고 싶어요.”
다석은 농사 짓는 게 가장 하나님의 일에 가깝다고 말했다. 윤 신부는 별도의 국가지원은 받지 않을 계획이다. 왜냐면 정산 절차가 복잡해지고 운영의 제약이 따르기 때문이다. 순수 후원을 통해 시설을 운영할 예정이다.

윤 신부는 그 일을 위해 3년 간 휴직계를 쓸 생각도 있다. 그러면 정년이 된다. “27명의 아이들과 대안학교도 운영할 계획이에요. 아이들이 생명을 얻었고, 커나가기 때문에 그로 인해 마땅히 할 일들이 생겨난거죠. 그 자체가 감사해요.”
 

 박소영 기자 arggk@daum.net

황호택 릴레이 인터뷰 1, 2 윤정현 신부 2021



"그분은 제 소리를 냈던 사람입니다"
황호택 논설고문·서울시립대 초빙교수입력 2021-01-13 

===
<윤정현 신부 약력>

-1955년 출생
-1976년 중앙정보부에 체포돼 고문을 받고 국가보안법 위반으로 징역 1년6월 자격정지 1년 6월
-1982년 연세대 신학과 졸업
-1984년 성공회 사목신학연구원 졸업
-1986년 성공회 부제 서품 후 춘천교회 사목
-1987년 사제서품
-1990년 한국기독교교회협의회(KNCC) 선교훈련원 간사, 윤석양 이병의 보안사 민간인 사찰 파일 폭로 지원
-1993년 청원 묵방교회 관할사제

-1995년 서강대 대학원 입학
-1996년 영국유학
-2000년 정읍교회 관할사제
-2003년 영국 버밍험 대학에서 유영모에 관한 연구로 박사학위
-2004년 대전주교좌성당 주임사제
-2004년 성공회대 신학전문대학 겸임교수
-2008년 22차 세계철학대회에서 “Non-Existent Existing God” 이라는 제목으로 다석 유영모의 신관(神觀) 발표.
-2010년 청주수동교회 관할사제
-2015년 신부 정년(65)을 채우지 않고 고창 반암마을로 귀촌해 수도 및 연구 활동

===

황호택 릴레이 인터뷰 ① 윤정현 신부 <上>





윤정현 신부는 인터뷰에서 "다석은 동양철학과 기독교 사상을 회통했던 큰 스승"이라고 말했다. [사진=유수민 인턴기자]

​한국이 낳은 위대한 종교 철학자 다석(多夕) 류영모(1890~1981)는 19세기 말에 태어나 20세기 후반에 세상을 떠났다. 지금 지구는 다른 종교를 배척하는 근본주의 신앙으로 인한 전쟁과 살육이 그치지 않는다. 한국같은 다원주의 종교국가에서도 종교간 갈등이 심한 편이다. 세계의 한쪽에서는 탈(脫)종교 현상이 번지고, 다른 쪽에서는 근본주의 종교가 세계 평화를 깨트린다. 다석이 서구의 기독교 정신과 동양 전래의 유불선(儒佛仙) 사상을 회통(會通)해 풀어낸 다원주의 종교철학은 종교적 혼돈의 시대 21세기에 더욱 빛을 발한다. 다석에게서 직접 배운 제자, 다석을 연구한 학자들을 찾아 큰 스승의 가르침을 되새기는 인터뷰 시리즈를 연재한다. <편집자 주>

[코리안아쉬람 TV 토크쇼]고창의 윤정현 신부님을 만나다- 대담: 이명권 박사 PD: 정지훈


0:01 / 52:19


[코리안아쉬람 TV 토크쇼]고창의 윤정현 신부님을 만나다- 신선과 닮은 삶 속으로... 대담: 이명권 박사 PD: 정지훈


다석 유영모의 늙은이 풀이 | 윤정현 - 교보문고 2023

다석 유영모의 늙은이 풀이 | 윤정현 - 교보문고

다석 유영모의 늙은이 풀이

새롭게 명쾌하게 우리말 옛글 <노자> 풀이
윤정현 저자(글) · 이상랑 일러스트
기역 · 2023년 05월 25일

책 소개

1987년 성공회 사제서품을 받고 성직자로 여러 종교 사상의 맥락과 대화를 이어온 윤정현 종교사상가의 신작이다. 《도덕경》을 우리말로 풀어놓은 다석 유영모 선생의 풀이에 풀이를 더해 새롭고 명쾌하게 우리말로 다석과 노자의 생각을 풀어놓은 책이다. 청소년도 알아차릴 수 있게 펼쳐놓은 〈노자 도덕경 늙은이〉 풀이이다.

저자는 전북 고창 반암 숲에서 명상과 교육을 통해, 동서양 종교 사상의 스스럼없는 만남을 주선해오고 있다. 한국기독교교회협의회 선교훈련원 간사 등으로 일하면서 한국 사회 다양한 층위 문제와 직면하고 그 해결을 위해 국내 국회 활동을 이어오게 된다. 1995년 서강대 대학원에서 영성 신학, 신비주의 신학과 더불어 다석 유영모의 사상을 접하게 되었다. 그 사상적 만남은 2003년 8월 다석의 신론을 주제로 영국 버밍엄대학교 신학박사 학위를 받는 데로 이어진다. 이 박사학위를 통해 저자는 다석 유영모의 사상을 최초로 해외에 소개한다.

《다석 유영모의 늙은이 풀이》는 저자가 30년 가까이 붙들어온 다석과 그의 평생 노자 읽기에 대한 새로운, 명쾌한 풀이이다. 우리말로 노자 81장을 꼼꼼하게 풀어놓은 다석의 생각과 말, 글을 요새 한국인들의 생각과 말, 글에 어울리게 다시 풀어낸 것이다. 성경, 다석 어록과 주역을 가로지르며 동서양 철학사상이 맥락을 편안하게 이해하도록 이끌어주는 책이다.
미술사학자이자 화가 이상랑 선생의 간결한 라인드로잉을 통해, 노자, 다석, 윤정현 저자의 생각의 결을 새롭게 접할 수 있다.
====
작가정보
저자(글) 윤정현
종교인 

유교 신자 아버지와 불교 신자 어머니 사이에서 태어난 저자는 유년 시절 어머니로부터 신실한 삶과 자비심을 배웠습니다. 열 살부터는 어린 나이에도 새벽 4시에 일어나 교회 기도회에 나가기 시작해 고등학생 시절까지 이어갔습니다. 근본주의 신앙의 영향으로 ‘교회 밖에는 구원이 없다’고 굳게 믿어 19 82년 연세대학교를 졸업하고 성공회 사제가 되기 위해 사목신학연구원에 들어가 1984년 9월 마치고 이듬해 서울 베다교회 전도사로 사목생활을 시작, 1987년에 사제 서품을 받고 사목지를 춘천으로 옮겼습니다. 1990년 7월 한국기독교교회협의회 선교훈련원 간사로 일하기 시작했고, 윤석양 이병의 양심선언 사건에 관여하게 되었습니다. 국내 선교는 물론 세계선교에도 참여하면서 교회를 넘어 인류 동포애를 가지고 제3세계 가난과 인권 문제를 살폈습니다. 1995년에는 서강대학교 대학원에서 영성신학, 신비주의 신학을 연구하였고, 다석 유영모를 접하게 되었습니다. 19 9 6년 7월 영국 셀리옥의 아센션 칼리지에서 석사학위 과정을 이수하며 〈종교 간의 대화를 위한 장으로서의 신비주의 연구〉 논문을 제출했고, 다석의 신론을 주제로 2003년 7월 영국 버밍엄대학교에서 신학박사 학위를 받았습니다. 이 박사학위 논문은 다석 유영모 사상을 최초로 해외에 소개한 것입니다. 2008년 7월 제22차 세계철학대회에서 ‘없이 계신 하느님’이라는 제목으로 다석의 신론을 발표하였습니다. 정읍교회, 대전주교좌교회, 청주수동교회 관할사제로 사역하다가 2015년 귀촌하여 현재는 전북 고창 반암산골에서 자연과 더불어 살고 있습니다. 지은 책 으로 『없이 계시는 하느님』이 있습니다.

접기
그때도, 지금도 그가 옳다
그때도, 지금도 그가 옳다
없이 계시는 하느님
없이 계시는 하느님


Australian Advices and Queries

Australian Advices and Queries.pdf

Australian Advices and Queries 

박정훈 - 소비자주의: 누구도 참지 않는 사회 20230911

박정훈 - 소비자주의: 누구도 참지 않는 사회 대전에서 사망한 초등교사가 4년 동안 학부모 민원에 시달린 것으로... | Facebook


소비자주의: 누구도 참지 않는 사회

대전에서 사망한 초등교사가 4년 동안 학부모 민원에 시달린 것으로 알려지면서, '악성 민원'을 넣은 학부모 중 한 명이 운영한다고 알려진 김밥집에 시민들의 분노가 집중되고 있다. "살인자"라는 포스트잇이 붙었고, 입구에는 피처럼 보이는 케첩이 뿌려져있다. 해당 김밥집의 프랜차이즈 본사인 '바르다김선생'측은 해당 지점의 영업을 중단했다고 밝혔다.
최근 불거진 교사들에 대한 갑질과 민원들이 '소비자주의'의 발현이라면, 그것에 대한 복수 역시 너무나 '소비자주의적'이라는 생각을 지울 수 없다. 서로가 서로에게 '소비자'가 되는 시대가 만들어 낸 참상이다.

사회비평가 박권일은 <토론의 즐거움>에 쓴 글에서 '소비자주의'에 대해 "'소비자가 왕'이라는 마인드이고, '구매자가 응당 지니는 메리트'라는 점에서 이는 '자격적합성의 정치'인 능력주의(meritocracy)의 친족이념"이라고 규정한다 .
 
올바른 태도나 가치관을 배우는 '교육'의 측면보다는 그저 '무사히 아이를 돌보는 서비스' 정도로 공교육이 여겨짐으로써, 소비자주의가 발동된다. 
교사의 훈육은 진상 부모들에겐 자식을 '정서적으로 고통을 준 것'으로서 서비스 제공자로서의 의무 위반이라고 여긴다. 
여기서 진상 부모들은 자식에 대한 '소유권'을 주장하며, 네가 뭔데 '내 소유'인 자식을 훼손하느냐는 이야기를 한다. 
또 한편으로는 우리가 낸 세금으로 네가 월급을 받는데, 왜 학부모의 말을 듣지 않느냐는 황당한 논리가 등장하기도 한다.

'입시 중심 교육' 시스템에서 공교육 교사는 '스승' 혹은 '교육 전문가'라는 지위를 서서히 잃어갔고, 이는 훈육을 위임하는 구조까지 위협했다. 교사가 전문성과 권위를 바탕으로 '더 나은 가르침'을 줄 거라는 믿음은 서서히 사라지고 있음에도, 우리 사회는 교사의 권한이 부모를 '대리'하는 수준으로 축소되는 상황을 효과적으로 막지 못했다. 그것이 결국 공교육에서의 소비자주의 발현으로 나타난 셈이다.
 
이러한 구조 속에선 교사는 스스로 생각하고 행동하면 안 된다. 평소에는 규정에 따라서만 움직이고 부모나 학생의 요청이 있을 때는, 배달 앱에서 덜 맵게 해달라거나 오이를 빼달라는 요청을 들어주듯이 뜻하는대로 해주면 그만이다 ('우리 가게 음식은 레시피대로 먹어야 맛있어요 해봤자 악플만 달리는 걸 본다). 하지만 그런 식으로 한 인간에 대한 교육이 제대로 될리 만무하지 않은가.

소비자주의는 갑과 을을 명확히 구분한다. 돈을 주는 자가, 무엇인가를 소유한 (혹은 사회적으로 소유한 것으로 간주되는) 자가 '갑'이다. 반면 돈을 받거나 소유하지 못한 자는 을이다. 소비자주의는 내가 쓴만큼, 내가 가지고 있는만큼 대접받길 원한다. 그리고 그 욕망이 당연하다고 정당화한다. 배달시킨 음식이 조금 늦게 와서, 돈이 아깝게 느껴지면 별점 1점과 악평을 날려도 괜찮다고 한다. 자주 쓰던 앱이 오류가 나면 콜센터에 전화를 해 막말을 해도 괜찮다고 한다. 노동과 노동자를 이해하기보다는 '내가 쓴 돈'이나 소유권을 먼저 생각해도 괜찮다고 한다.
수많은 언론과 커뮤니티에서 진상 갑질의 문제점을 지적하고 있지만, 이러한 현상은 쉽게 사라지지 않고 있다. 왜냐햐면 너나할 것 없이 소비자주의를 체화하고 있기 때문이다. 다들 '나는 아니다'라고 생각하지만, 실제로 그럴까.

이를테면 배달시킨 음식이 엉망으로 왔을 때, 짜증이 나지 않는 사람은 없을 것이다. 음식점이 바빠서 조리에서 약간의 실수가 있었든, 배달 기사가 초보라서 집을 잘 못 찾았든, 이런 것은 고려의 대상이 되지 않는다. 그보다는 내가 돈을 쓴 것과, 기다린 시간에 대한 아쉬움이 먼저 들 것이다.
예전 같았으면 전화를 해서 교환을 요구하거나 혹은 참았겠지만, 더 '강한 행동'을 가능하게 만드는 구조 속에서 소비자주의는 기승을 부리고 있다. 배달 앱에, 지도 앱에 악플을 달 수 있고, 동네 커뮤니티에 글을 쓸수도 있다. 그것이 소비자의 '정당한 권리'라고 믿는다. 내가 돈을 쓴 것에 상응하는 상품이 오지 않았거나, 자신이 소유한 상품(물건이나 아파트 혹은 '자식'이 될 수도 있다)에 문제가 생겼을 때의 '부당함'이 모든 감정을 압도한다. 서로의 노동에 대한 이해, 도덕과 규범은 뒷전이 되고 타인에게 함부로 할 수 있는 권리만 남는다. '내가 돈을 썼으니까'
자본을 초월하는 가치, 더 나은 사회를 만들어나가고자 하는 공동체의 윤리가 깨진 공간에서 소비자주의는 더욱 강해진다. 나를 보호해 줄 안전망이 없기 때문이다. 소비자 정체성만이 오로지 나를 '갑'으로 만들어주는 것이므로, 서로가 서로에게 소비자 노릇을 하게 된다. 공공의 영역이 자본에 침식당하면서 더 이상 소비자주의가 손을 뻗치지 못하는 곳은 없으니, 그렇게 '누구도 참지 않는 사회'가 온다.

그러나 '누구도 참지 않는 사회'에서 결과적으로 피해를 보는 것은 대부분 더 약한 사람들이다. 교장이 아닌 일선 교사가, 기업 간부가 아닌 콜센터 노동자가, 고위 공무원이 아닌 말단 공무원이, 돈과 권력으로 사건을 무마할 수 있는 이가 아닌 힘없고 가난한 사람이. 소비자 정체성을 통해 권력 관계를 뒤엎는 통쾌한 순간도 있지만, 그건 잠시일 뿐이다. 앞서 박권일 비평가가 '누구도 참지 않는 사회'가 일종의 능력주의라고 일컬었던것처럼, 누구도 참지 않는 사회의 승리자는 '더 많은 능력을 입증하는' 사람이다. 참지 않았을 때 더 많은 힘을 발휘할 수 있는 자가 이긴다. 그게 우리가 원하는 사회였던가.

대전의 한 김밥집에 쏟아지는 포스트잇과 케첩, 밀가루, 계란 등을 보며 '소비자주의'의 복수라는 생각이 들었다. 소비자로서 과도한 권한을 행사해서 한 사람을 죽음으로 몰아넣은 이가, 역설적으로 소비자들에게 당하는 모습. 하지만 악성 민원 학부모로 추정되는 그의 직업이 고위 공무원이었거나, 대기업 간부였거나, 검사였다면 애초에 이렇게 쉽게 신상이 공개됐을까? 알려졌더라고 하더라도 그가 일하는 직장을 이렇게 엉망으로 만들 수 있었을까? 이런 식의 '정의 구현'이 괜찮은지, 자꾸 되묻게 되는 이유다.






All reactions:474박정미, 하미미 and 472 others



Hong Eunha

국민끼리 싸울일이 아니고, 프레임을 정리하면 될 일입니다.
정치가 그래서 중요한거고,
교권을 좌우할수 있는 정책이 그래서 중요한거죠.
학생들이 달걀을 투척하든 말든.... 그것은 사전에 그 학부모가 그런짓을 못하도록 교육자가 단지 돈받고 강의팔이하는 학원강사와 다른 처우를 받을 수 있도록 환경을 설정해주면 될 일이었던겁니다.
이미 권력을 가진사람들이 처리하지 못한 일들을, 그 권력조차 가지지 못한사람들에게 탓을 돌리면 안되는 거라 생각하는겁니다.
사람은요, 자신이 직접 당해야 정신을 차립니다.
저 선생님이 가르쳤던 제자들의 충격은 한번 헤아려보신적이 있을까요?
내 일이 아니니 잘 모르시겠지요. 가늠도 안되시겠지요.
그러니 소비자라는 단어로 교체가 가능하신거겠지요.
정작 중요한건 저 상황에 관여된 사람이 저 가게를 이용하지 않은 사람도 있을수 있다는 것입니다.

만만해서 저러는게 아닙니다. 모 대기업의 근로자 사망을 똑바로 처리하지 못한것을 보고 한 고등학생은 그 회사의 제품을 이용하지 말자고 학교에 건의하였고, 그 건의는 받아들여져서 윤리경영을 하는 회사의 제품으로 바꾸게 되었습니다.
생각이 있으면 움직여야 합니다. 그래야 알게됩니다.
물론 저 방식이 잘했다는것은 아닙니다. 하지만 최소한 목소리를 내야 그 부당함이 그제서야 드러나는 경우가 적지 않습니다.

교사는 어떤학생들에게는 아버지같고 어머니같은 존재들입니다.
집에서의 시간보다 훨씬 많은 시간을 함께 해주는사람들인데,
그런사람이 정서적으로 죽임을 당하게 되었고, 그게 실제 죽음으로 이어졌고, 그걸 옆에서 겪은 학생들이 최소 수십명, 재학생 졸업생까지 하면 수백명 이상입니다.
저는 저 현상이 단지 소비자운운할 그런 정황은 아니라고 생각합니다.
그리고 소시민이 할 수 있는 행동을 하는것.... 그게 방향은 잘못되었을지라도 그걸 소비자의 복수라고 폄하할일은 아닌 것 같습니다. 적어도 사람에게 직접적인 상해가 가지 않는다면 말이죠.
참아라, 참아라, 참아라, ....글쎄요.
어떤이의 지나가는 개념이었다고도 하지만 선진국의 시민의식중 하나가 불의에 공분할수 있는가......라고 하죠.

영국은 민주사회를 이루기위해 200년이 걸렸다 합니다.
한국은 고작 100년이 안되었습니다.
수많은 선진국들에서는 여러 운동이 있었습니다. 한국도 동학농민운동도 있었습니다.
어떤 방식이든... 그것이 누구에게든... 그것이 잘못되어 보일지라도 저는 가해자들이 본인들에게는 정당한 방식으로 복수당하는(?말씀하신 논리에 의하면) 게 옳다고만 보지는 않는 편입니다.
참고로 전 대전출신이고 대전에서 오래살아왔습니다.
연예인들이 공연한번 힘들어할 정도로 감정동요 잘 없고, 자기표현 잘 안하기로 이름난 지역입니다. 그런 사람들이 저렇게까지 하는데에는 다 이유가 있겠죠.
피해자를 두번 상처준다... 라는 말은 올리신 글 같은걸로 인해 나오는 말 같습니다.
어차피 다 사필귀정이 될테니 저는 여기서 줄일게요.



김민준

저는 하고 싶은 말이 이것밖에 없네요. 그래서 저기다 테러 한 당신들이 악성민원인들보다 얼마나 더 나은 사람이냐고.

17

박용현

소비자주의와 관련된 칼럼 하나 남겨봅니다.
https://n.news.naver.com/article/028/0002620436?sid=110




N.NEWS.NAVER.COM
[박권일의 다이내믹 도넛] 사회를 뒤덮은 소비자 프레임[박권일의 다이내믹 도넛] 사회를 뒤덮은 소비자 프레임

===
[박권일의 다이내믹 도넛] 사회를 뒤덮은 소비자 프레임
입력2022.12.22. 오후 6:43

크리스토퍼 마틴은 1990년대 이후의 대형 파업이나 시위 보도에서 가장 자주 등장한 프레임이 ‘소비자 지향’이라고 설명한다. 절대다수의 언론이 노사관계나 생산 현장의 문제를 ‘소비자의 관점’에서 다룸으로써 공통의 내러티브를 생산하고 있다는 것이다.
서울의 한 대학교 축제 현장. 연합뉴스




박권일 | 사회비평가·<한국의 능력주의> 저자

지난가을, 코비드19로 중단됐던 대학 축제들이 열리면서 캠퍼스가 활기로 가득 찼다. 그 무렵 강연을 갔다가 서로 다른 대학 관계자들에게서 비슷한 이야기를 들었다. 축제 공연장에 대형 장벽이 세워졌는데, 이게 학생회비 납부자와 미납자를 구분해서 미납한 학생들이 공연을 못 보게 하는 용도라는 것이다. 장벽을 세운 주체는 학교본부가 아니라 총학생회였다.

검색해보니 실제 여러 대학에서 일어난 일이고 기사화된 적도 있었다. 이 에피소드를 강연 자리에서 언급하며 의견을 물어봤다. 많은 분이 충격에 사로잡혔는데
특히 진보적 성향의 중장년층에서 반응이 세게 나왔다. 그들은 “진짜 대학은 끝났구나” “절망스럽다” 한탄했다. 반면, 적지 않은 청년 세대는 “돈을 안 낸 사람이 낸 사람과 똑같이 공연을 보면 그거야말로 불공정이고 무임승차”라고 했다.

이건 ‘순수했던 대학이 상업화되었다’는 한탄이나 불공정 담론으로 끝내버릴 이야기는 아니다. 1980년대든 1990년대든 대학이 ‘순수한 학문의 공간’이거나 ‘진보와 해방의 자치구’였던 적은 없다. 대학은 예나 지금이나 국가와 자본이 통제하던 공간이다. 다만 소수의 학생이 맹렬히 저항했고 스스로의 힘으로 대학 안에 조금 자율적인 공간을 겨우 만들어낼 수 있었을 뿐이다. 과거의 대학교는 순수했다기보다 이질적 가치들이 충돌하며 공존하는 공간이었다. 적어도 학생운동의 자장 안에서는 수익성이나 소비자 권리보다 공공성과 연대의 가치가 중시됐다.

예전에 대학 축제는 ‘대동제’라 불리기도 했는데 이는 글자 그대로 모두가 하나로 어우러지는 행사였다. 다른 학교 학생들만이 아니라 지역 주민들까지 참여하고 즐길 수 있는 장이었다. 한편 지금은 축제를 포함해 캠퍼스 전체가 상업화됐을 뿐 아니라, 학생들 역시 학교 구성원이기보다 (학교 명성이나 시설 등의) 구매자로서 권리를 누릴 수 있으면 만족하는 것처럼 보인다.

그럼 과거의 대학이 더 나은 것일까? 적어도 지금보다 예전 대학생들이 공공 영역으로서 대학의 의미를 더 깊이 인식하고 있음은 분명하다. 하지만 그런 과거를 본보기로 삼기는 어렵다. 과거 대학생 운동은 자본의 논리가 일방적으로 관철되지 못하게 하는 방어선이긴 했으나, 그 내부는 권위주의, 엘리트주의, 군사주의, 가부장주의에 찌들어 있었다. 1984년 ‘서울대 민간인 감금 폭행 사건’처럼, 숭고한 가치를 앞세운 확증편향은 종종 타인을 향한 끔찍한 폭력으로 발현됐다.

적어도 개인들 사이의 폭력에 요즘의 우리는 꽤 엄격해졌다. 이는 뚜렷한 사회 진보다. 반면 자본주의의 구조적 폭력에는 더 순종적이게 됐다. 대학만이 아니라 사회 전체가 그렇게 변했다. 유권자는 노동자나 시민보다 정치 소비자 혹은 팬덤으로 분석되며 스스로도 그렇게 생각하는 경향이 강해졌다. 노동자 파업 보도를 봐도 온통 소비자의 불편을 얘기할 뿐 좀처럼 노동자의 삶과 생산 현장의 문제를 조명하지 않는다.

미국의 커뮤니케이션학자인 크리스토퍼 마틴은 1990년대 이후의 대형 파업이나 시위 보도에서 가장 자주 등장한 프레임이 ‘소비자 지향’이라고 설명한다. 절대다수의 언론이 노사관계나 생산 현장의 문제를 ‘소비자의 관점’에서 다룸으로써 공통의 내러티브를 생산하고 있다는 것이다. 마틴은 언론의 이러한 프레임이 노동자, 시민, 마을 주민이자 연방의 구성원으로서 개인 정체성을 소비자로 환원함으로써, 상품이 실제로 생산되는 작업장이나 공적 시민의 관심사는 배제될 수밖에 없었다고 지적한다.

미국도 예전부터 그랬던 건 아니다. 1940년대 문헌을 보면 미국 노동자의 근황이 신문 머리기사로 오르는 일이 흔했다. 그러나 미국 언론이 점점 노동계급 독자들을 자신의 비즈니스 모델에 쓸모가 없는 집단으로 인식하게 되면서 노동 역시 “더는 뉴스 가치가 없어지게”(no longer newsworthy) 됐다. 마틴에 따르면, 미국 노동계급 상당수는 오늘날 트럼프의 열광적 지지자가 되거나 극우 대안 미디어의 독자가 됐다.

한국 언론도 미국 언론과 그리 멀리 떨어져 있지 않은 것 같다. 한국의 주류 매체들은 소비자와 투자자에게 공손히 귀를 기울이지만, 노동자와 시민은 지워버리거나 사회 불만 세력으로 묘사한다. 언론에 비친 대한민국이 민주공화국이라기보다 종종 거대한 공동구매 장터처럼 보이는 이유다.

Kenneth Boulding: a Friends’ economist Robert H. Scott, III 2022

pdf

Kenneth Boulding: a Friends’ economist
Robert H. Scott, III
 
Abstract: 

This paper examines Kenneth Boulding’s (1910-1993) religious beliefs and argues he was one of the most prolific religious economists in the 20th century. He was an enigmatic economist whose career spanned over six decades. He helped to establish the field of general systems and furthered peace studies and conflict and defense. His early work earned him the John Bates Clark medal in 1949. But behind Boulding’s theoretical economics was a deep religious ideology. Strongly affected by World War I while growing up in Liverpool, England, Boulding became a lifelong pacifist. Raised Methodist, Boulding discovered Quakerism in high school. While Boulding published widely in the field of economics, he also published almost 100 articles in Quaker journals. Boulding’s body of work in economics and Quakerism led to interesting crosspollination. His work on peace and conflict and defense were a direct result of his pacifism. Boulding’s work shows deep concern for human betterment and prosperity that is steeped in his religious principles. 

Keywords: Kenneth Boulding, human betterment, pacifism, Quakers, Religious Society of Friends 
 
Religion […] has been an important part of my personal life, and it would be surprising if this did not spill over into my professional interests (Boulding 1968, p. vii). 
 
 
Introduction 

This paper studies how Kenneth Ewert Boulding (1910-1993) was one of the most prolific religious economists in the 20th century. This paper explores how Boulding’s pacifist Quaker principles [1] led to work on population, peace studies, ecological economics, and conflict and defense. His concern for human betterment made him accept that economics is normative with moral 
 
The Journal of Philosophical Economics XV (1) 2022
implications. During a time when economics was becoming more positivist, Boulding advocated for a normative, humanist, and transdisciplinary approach. Boulding’s economics stands in stark contrast to the mainstream economics that promotes itself as a value-free dehumanized science. Boulding’s vision of economics is reminiscent of the political philosophers of Adam Smith, Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo (also a converted Quaker).  
Boulding wrote the following about his childhood, ‘I had a very happy and supportive childhood living in downtown Liverpool in what might easily have been called a slum’ (Boulding 1992, p. 70). At that time coal was used in much of the industry in Liverpool, England and Boulding remembers that on winter days he could not see across the street from all the pollution. He was an only child, and his parents were both from working class families. His father was a selfemployed plumber and his mother a homemaker (and amateur poet). Boulding never shied away from his family’s heritage. He embraced their working-class roots and was always sympathetic to the struggles of that class. His childhood home at 4 Seymour Street was in the middle of Liverpool that in the early twentieth century was working-class cosmopolitan (Scott 2015).  
The quality of education for children of working-class parents in Liverpool was poor. But Boulding was fortunate because he showcased his intelligence early and was able to get scholarships to excellent schools in Liverpool. This preparation led to an Oxford University scholarship to study Chemistry, which was an impressive achievement for a Liverpudlian Methodist from a workingclass family. After his first year he decided to abandon chemistry for economics. He wrote a letter to the warden of New College about his desire to change his studies and maintain his scholarship: And ‘with great generosity the College allowed me to do this’ (Boulding 1989, p. 369). England’s economic depression was in full force while he was growing up in the inner-city of Liverpool, so Boulding saw the effects a weak economy has on real families. He argued that Chemistry was not likely to save the world, and ‘at that time the great problems of the human race seemed to be economic’ (Boulding 1989, p. 369). 
Boulding published nearly 100 articles in Quaker journals [2] starting in 1938. 
Much of this work revolves around the economics of issues relevant to Friends (i.e., the Religious Society of Friends): peace, population growth, distribution, taxation, ethics, and politics. Boulding’s religion played an important role in his 
 
public conversion from a mostly mainstream economist into a transdisciplinary social science philosopher. This transition is complete by the time of Boulding’s American Economic Association presidential address ‘Is Economics a Moral Science’ (1969), which may be summarized by his statement, ‘The concept of a value-free science is absurd’ (Boulding 1969, p. 4). 
The following paper proceeds first with an exploration into Boulding’s early intellectual development. Then, we explore his early professional life from Edinburgh to America and his emergence as a leading Keynesian economist. Next, we see how Boulding’s work diverges from the mainstream into concerns about broader social issues such as ethics, evolution, ecology, peace, conflict, and defense. This divergence seemed sudden and strange for people who only knew one side of Boulding’s work; but in truth, Boulding’s later work was an extension of his values and beliefs. Finally, Boulding’s work from retirement until his death in 1993 is discussed in the context of the body of his life’s work. 
 
Pacifist 
I have lived most of my life on the uneasy margin between science and religion (Boulding 1974, p. 4). 
Boulding’s parents were devout Methodists. Early in Boulding’s life he came to the decision to embrace his Christianity. He was greatly influenced by World War I. According to him, it was the experience of seeing his Uncle Bert, psychologically traumatized by trench warfare, that most impressed upon him the vulgarity of war. He wrote that he was very fond of Uncle Bert and that when he returned from the war he had ‘an expression in his eyes I can still see’ (Boulding 1989, p. 367). Boulding writes, ‘I even recall being horrified at a toy I got, with wounded soldiers in little stretchers’ (p. 367). There were many other injuries and deaths of close friends and relatives. So deeply affected was Boulding that it was around this time he developed a life-long stutter. So common is stuttering (or stammering as it was called at the time) among English boys that it became known as the mark of the English gentleman. It is a hereditary trait, yet no known person in Boulding’s family had a stutter (Kerman 1974, pp. 211-212). Boulding’s stutter became a trait endearing him to people. 
Boulding’s pacifism was resolute. In high school, he read John Williams Graham’s ‘Conscription and Conscience’ (1922) – a study of conscientious objectors from World War I and their struggle to live their faith during wartime. 
Boulding was impressed by arguments in the book and came to respect the Quakers for their commitment to pacifism. This knowledge led him to talk with his friend, Robin Wall (a Quaker), about Friends and their spiritual practices (Kerman 1973, p. 117). Wall took Boulding to some Quaker meetings and Boulding felt an immediate spiritual connection with the Quaker method of worship – especially the silence at the beginning of meetings. Boulding started regularly attending the Liverpool Friends Meeting and continued while at Oxford. But Boulding remained an active Methodist during much of this time until he finally became a convinced Friend in 1931 (Kerman 1974, p. 138). Being a Quaker comprised his primary social circle during the rest of his life – and had a profound effect on his professional life. About half of Boulding’s Quaker publications are on the topic of pacifism (and by his own estimates in 1989, over 17% of all his publications are on peace, war and conflict (Boulding 1989, p. 382)). Boulding discusses not only the immorality of war, but also the economic inefficiencies associated with war (see Boulding 1941; 1944; 1954).  
Boulding’s first Quaker article was published in American Friend in September 1938 and was titled ‘Making Education Religious.’ It discusses that wholly educated people must not only have book knowledge but also a sense of their place in the world. That same year he published ‘An Experiment in Friendship’ that discussed the immorality of anti-Semitism in Germany. Also, in 1938 he wrote ‘In Defense of the Supernatural’ published in Friends Intelligencer. Here we find that Boulding is a devout Christian who does not hide his love of God and belief in God (see also, Boulding 1987). Boulding’s friend Anatol Rapoport, an atheist, wrote about a conversation with Boulding that revealed ‘he believed literally in Jesus’s resurrection and miracles’ (Rapoport, 2013, p. 485). In Boulding’s William Penn lecture in 1942 ‘The Practice of the Love of God’ he exclaims the value in the practice of religion (Boulding, 2004). He writes, ‘And to be ‘religious’ only, in the narrow sense, to be shut up in a little world of the purely personal, is to be a Pharrisee’ (pp. 19-20). He goes on to write, ‘We can only truly express our love for God, then, in expressing our love for God’s family, for all creation’ (p. 20). Against the secularism of the modern age, Boulding stated, ‘Dare to love God! Dare to practice that love everywhere…’ (p. 3).  
 
Early professional life  

Boulding graduated from Oxford in 1931 and then won a Webb-Medley Scholarship in Economics that let him study for another year, which he did as a graduate student. The next year he received a Commonwealth Fellowship (essentially a Rhodes Scholarship in reverse) and studied economics at the University of Chicago and Harvard. After two years he had come to love America but had to return to England to teach, as required by his fellowship. He spent three years at the University of Edinburgh, which he found intellectually dead compared to the vibrant atmosphere in Chicago.  
Serving as a Quaker delegate at the Friends World Conference in Philadelphia, PA in 1937 Boulding received a call from a friend about a job at Colgate University in Hamilton, New York. He interviewed immediately, and after some negotiating took the job. His two years at Colgate were largely spent writing a textbook ‘Economic Analysis’ (1941). It was an immediate success that furthered his reputation and acceptance among economists, and he argued later it was a primary reason he won the John Bates Clark Medal in 1949 since it was ‘as pure as the driven snow’ (Mott 1992, p. 356). 
While at a Quarterly Quaker meeting in New York in 1941 he met 21-year-old Elise Bjorn-Hansen and within three months they married. Elise became a devout Quaker and later a first-rate Sociologist. Soon after the wedding they moved to Princeton, New Jersey so Kenneth could work at the League of Nations Economics and Financial Division to study European agriculture. Boulding was part of a team whose work helped lead to the establishment of the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration. His time at the League was short lived after he and Elise published a Quaker pamphlet titled ‘A Call to Disarm.’ His supervisor said if he published the work that he would be fired. Boulding published it and resigned – though he recounted the situation as being fired. They created a stir among the Princeton elite early on because they had a Black family over to their house for dinner. 
From Princeton they moved to Nashville, Tennessee so Boulding could teach at Fisk University, which is a Historically Black College founded in 1866. He got the job because a friend and Quaker, Thomas Jones was the President of Fisk. Boulding enjoyed his time in Nashville. He and Elise lived on campus. They were involved in the local Quaker meeting, and Elise even started a newsletter South Central Friends Yearly Meeting (Morrison 2005). While at Fisk Boulding wrote his second book The Economics of Peace (1945b). This book came from his work at the League of Nations. It primarily focuses on the reconstruction and development of countries and regions after war. Boulding was more focused on the period following World War II (in 1942) than focusing on the war itself. The Economics of Peace was a Keynesian treatment of post-war macroeconomics explaining how to handle the boom-and-bust economic cycle caused by war. Due to many factors, the book was not published until 1945 and did not garner popular attention. Besides his Keynesian economics, the book contained strong moralizing about how economics should have greater compassion and understanding of humans and their struggles. Boulding believed staunchly, perhaps naively, that the fastest way to achieve peace was for each of us to treat one another with empathy, respect, and love. But he also explains that institutions matter too:  
It is no exaggeration to say that responsible government is the key to the whole political problem, in internal as well as in external affairs. We have seen how the development of a responsible foreign policy is the way to the creation of a world order. It is equally true that in domestic politics the achievement of responsible government is the basic problem and is still far from full attainment. Democracy, significant as it is for human welfare, is not an end in itself. It is important mainly as a means to responsible government (Boulding 1945b, p. 251). 
Boulding further argues that the problem is more complicated: 
In the last resort, the problem of responsible government is more than a political problem; it is a moral problem, affecting the thought and conduct of every individual – even the reader of this page. It is true that environments and institutions modify the character of individuals, yet change in institutions only comes about as a result of changes in the individuals whose character the institutions reflect. It is as true today as in Plato’s day that the nature of the state is determined by the nature of the individuals that compose it. Responsible government, whether on a world scale or even on a national scale, can never develop unless there are responsible citizens (Boulding 1945b, p. 253). 
The passage that may best summarize the economics in The Economics of Peace follows: 
Drawing an entirely false analogy from personal and business life, the conservatives argue that just as a private individual must balance his budget, so must a government. Oddly enough, this rule is relaxed in time of war – it is apparently quite proper to finance the destruction of life and property with a budget deficit, but not proper to finance slum clearance, good nutrition, and prosperity! (Boulding 1945b, p. 197). 
Iowa State College offered Boulding a better position with more time to write. The chair of the economics department was Theodore Schultz (winner of the 1979 Nobel Prize in economics and American Economic Association president in 1960), who once stated, ‘Most people in the world are poor. If we knew the economy of being poor, we would know much of the economics that really matter’ (Schultz 1981, p. 3). Schultz had the idea of bringing in a general economist and giving that person a year to study labor issues in order to specialize in labor economics. Boulding appreciated the idea of spending a year to learn an area of economics he knew little about. He spent that year traveling around the country, going to labor conferences, meeting with labor economists and activists and visiting various unions. He recounts visiting roughly 85 head offices of different labor unions during that year and all the unions in Iowa (Boulding 1989, p. 374). He credits this experience with opening his mind to the understanding that economics alone cannot provide answers to social science questions. Boulding stated that this experience ruined him as a pure economist (1989). From then on, he argued that all social sciences are studying the social system – though from difference perspectives. 
World War II was the only time Boulding remembered his pacifism quavering – seeing the atrocities of Nazism. He questioned deeply whether to support the war efforts and was conflicted. However, during this tumultuous time he had a religious ‘vision’ after taking a bath. He wrote the following poem immediately after the experience (Kerman 1974, p. 119): Hatred and sorrow murder me. But out of the blackness, bright I see Our Blessed Lord upon his cross. His mouth moves wanly, wry with loss Of blood and being, pity-drained. 

Between the thieves alone he reigned: 
(Was this one I, and that one you?) 
“If I forgive, will ye not too?” My vial of wrath breaks suddenly, And fear and hate drain from me dry. 
There is a glory in this place: 
My Lord! I see thee face to face. 

Boulding’s pacifism during World War II cost him friends and some people’s respect, but he remained committed to his ideals. For the rest of his life his pacifism only grew stronger. Threats of nuclear war and modern warfare gave Boulding confidence that his convictions were correct – war was never a solution.  
While at Iowa, Boulding was not yet a United States citizen, but for some reason was still eligible for the draft. According to transcripts, Boulding got classification as a Conscientious Objector (CO). At this time, COs were assigned to a Civilian Public Service (CPS) camp. Boulding believed his work was more important than the ‘lands and forest projects’ the CPS would have him do. He understood that refusing to go meant jail or deportation. He agreed to take the physical exam, which required him to travel by bus from Ames, Iowa to Minneapolis. Staying up all night he had anxious energy from the thoughts about whether he would be put in jail or not. Part of the physical exam was a psychiatric evaluation. The psychiatrist asked Boulding about his reasons for not wanting to fight. Boulding explained, as best he could, the Quaker belief in the ‘Inward Light’ (see Boulding 1947). This doctrine confers on people the right to live their lives as they see right and proper – with mediation from God. Of course, one must wait for guidance from the Inward Light. In the transition to the Liberal Quakerism of the twentieth century Quakerism moved from a cataphatic (outward) worshipping of God by wearing simple clothes and so forth to an inward worshipping. This approach meant one would meditate on issues and wait to receive guidance – or be led to a particular decision. Boulding tried explaining this to the psychiatrist, who became befuddled and took him to the chief psychiatrist. After being introduced the chief psychiatrist leaned on the table and roared at Boulding, ‘Do you ever hear the voice of God’? Boulding had a hard time answering this question, but he said ‘Well, not in a physical way.’ Boulding again went into the explanation of the Inward Light leading his decision making and the chief eventually could not take anymore and said, ‘Get out of here’ and put a big X on his paper and issued him a 4-F, which meant he did not have to serve in the Second World War or go to jail (Scott 2015). 
Around this same time, Boulding wrote a popular Quaker book ‘There is a Spirit (The Nayler Sonnets)’ (1945a) for which he thereafter was often referred to as a Quaker poet. This book contains 26 sonnets, each a meditation on the final words of a dying Quaker leader James Nayler in 1660. While there is little in this book on economics (except about greed), it emphasizes his commitment to Quakerism at a time just prior to his economic thought transition, which was his intellectual metamorphosis. Boulding published three more volumes of poetry that covered a broad swath of his views on life, economics, and family (1975; 1990; 1994). 
Boulding was also a talented artist. His archives at the University of ColoradoBoulder contain many wonderful drawings and paintings throughout his life.  
 
Friends economist  

The idea that there is something called ‘science’ which detects truth faultlessly and cannot have anything to do with valuations is an absurd byproduct of the now largely discarded logical positivism (Boulding 1986, p. 9). 
In 1949 Boulding accepted a position at the University of Michigan, which offered an excellent environment for him to evolve into the economist most people recognize today. He and Elise found an active Quaker community and engaging colleagues and raised their five children in Ann Arbor. His work at Michigan was different than his earlier work. It is important to note that the economics profession up to this time only knew one side of Boulding’s personality. His Quaker writings were only known to other Quakers. From his Quaker writings it is clear that Boulding was focused on social and human betterment all along (e.g., Boulding 1938a; 1938b). Morality was critical to his thinking and served as a strong foundation for his later economic writing. He tried to keep his two personalities (pure economist and Quaker moralist) separate, but once at Michigan the two conflated into one another causing a transformation that continued the rest of his life. Free from the confining static models of economics led to his broad outlook on morality, history, society, and spirituality.  
Boulding’s article ‘What About Christian Economics’ (1951) provides insight into his thinking about the relationship between his economics and Christian values. In this paper he writes,  
The inability of capitalism to command loyalty and devotion probably arises from the fact that exchange, especially monetary exchange, is one of the least emotional of human relationships, and a society built around the institution of exchange therefore is likely to be sadly deficient in emotional vitamins’ (p. 361). Nevertheless our very proper fear of socialism must not lead us to abstain from the prophetic criticism of all societies. In a very real sense Christ stands above all human societies, and sits in judgment on them. It is perilously close to form of blasphemy to attempt to identify the Kingdom of God with any form of society, for this is clearly a problem which man has not yet solved (Boulding 1951, p. 361). 
The idea that economics is a moral science was not new – e.g., Adam Smith’s The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) – but Boulding’s open acknowledgement was an important part of his evolution into a social philosopher. Economics, however, was moving away from this thinking and aligning itself with the hard ‘positive’ sciences rather than normative propositions. ‘Market morality’ was supplanting the human morality that Boulding advocated. Making all economic questions answerable to the market eliminates any requirement of economists to think about the social or human implications of their theories. A concept such as profit maximization separates companies from the impact their decisions have on people, the environment, or the global economy – since profit is the only objective. 
Some people argue that companies that fail to consider their employees and environmental effects will be less successful, so it is in their interest to be socially responsible; but many examples suggest this is more myth than reality (see Boulding 1951). 
Perhaps because of this Boulding became involved with the General Committee of the Department of the Church and Economic Life of the National Council of Churches. His experiences led to the book The Organizational Revolution: A Study in the Ethics of Economic Organization (1953). This book was Boulding’s attempt to understand how, why and to what ends over the past century the number, size, and power of various organizations has grown. He is particularly interested in both the growth of economic organizations, which arguably includes most of them, and the ethics of organization. On the second issue, Boulding writes,  
No matter how complex a society, it remains true that most of the moral problems which face an individual deal with person-to-person relationships. The personal virtues of honesty, truthfulness, kindliness, sincerity, sobriety, self-control and so on are still the sign of a morally mature spirit and are still the virtues which hold the world together, no matter how complicated it may become. The individual is ultimately the only bearer of moral responsibility; even when an individual acts in the name of others, or in the name of an organization, it is still the individual who acts, and who ultimately must bear responsibility for the consequences of his acts (Boulding 1953, p. 9).    
Religion and ethics were closely associated for Boulding. Once beyond orthodox economics, he freely blended his religious views and economics. Nowhere is this better presented than in two papers. First, the ‘Religious Perspectives in Economics’ presented at a symposium on Religious Perspectives of College Teaching in 1950; and, second, ‘Religious Foundations of Economic Progress’ published in the Harvard Business Review in 1952 (both articles reprinted in: Boulding 1968). In these articles, Boulding argues that throughout much of history there are many examples where religion influences the economy, and vice versa. This is visible from the pyramids to the Vatican.  Religion, in its early stage, can act as a ‘revolutionary force’ that often occurs at the same time as rapid ‘economic development’ (Boulding 1968, p. 178). As a religion matures, progress slows and a more conservative stance takes hold. Contrary to Karl Marx’s historical materialism that asserted religions stand on foundations of economics, Boulding presents the work of Max Weber and his The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism as a study of the Protestant Reformation and how it helped foment the development of capitalism (in a similar vein as William Petty). It, therefore, reversed Marx’s causation setting religion as the foundation upon which the economy is guided.  
Indeed, one can say with some confidence that when the tide of religion runs strongly in the minds of men it draws them away from worldly power, wealth and security, and offers them in return a power, a wealth and a security which are not of this world, not dependent on the favor of other men, but are secured by a secret inward covenant between the soul and its heavenly Lord (Boulding 1968, p. 184). 
Perceptively, Boulding states in various ways, ‘[t]he nature of the dominant religion, therefore, is determined in an appreciable degree by the economic opportunities that are open’ (1968 p. 184). Boulding writes that in areas where population is large and land scarce the withdrawn mystic life is held in the highest regard (minimalism). Contrast that with a more open American landscape where economic freedom is praised, and hard work and wealth accumulation is honored and the mystic is vilified you end up with materialism and mass consumption as the dominant cultural fabric.  
While it may be impossible to conclude definitively whether economic behavior leads to religious emergence or vice versa, Boulding explains that ‘religions breed civilizations, and civilizations breed and spread religions in a continuous pattern’ (Boulding 1968, p. 185). Finding any causality in these social movements is difficult. It may be easier to spot invasions occurring within society (e.g., deregulation and the rise of financialization) and mutations (e.g., technology and the rise of government spying). These invasions and mutations are constantly changing the social structure. Without these adjustments society would settle into a recognizable equilibrium. Instead, we have an evolving ecosystem that both acts upon and is affected by these changes. Accordingly, ‘we cannot, therefore, understand economic processes in time without reference to the whole universe of social phenomena, of which religion is a vital and significant part’ (p. 186). 
Of particular concern to Boulding was that,  
[T]he student of economics in our universities can easily get through his course and can be turned out as a full-fledged teacher of the subject, without any awareness of this interconnectedness penetrating his consciousness [….] The economist, by reason of the peculiar history of economic thought, is especially in danger of being indifferent to religion (1968, pp. 186-187).  
Boulding argues that part of the reason for this is because Adam Smith, whose 
Wealth of Nations serves as the foundation for the study of economics. He notes that Smith was friends with David Hume who personified the 18th century age of enlightenment intellectuals and ‘[b]oth regarded religious enthusiasm as a serious break of good taste’ (1968, p. 188). Yet, Boulding found that, 
It is indeed curious that no economist since Adam Smith seems to have dealt at any length with the economics of religion – perhaps it was felt that Adam Smith had said the last word on the subject! (Boulding notes possible exceptions such as Simon Patten and Richard Ely, but none of them had the effect of Smith.) (1968, p. 188). 
There exists a thin line between religion and economics; and, therefore, temperance must be exhibited to separate the normative from the positive. 
Boulding, reflecting on his own experiences, wrote:   
Many people are attracted into the social sciences, and especially perhaps to economics, because they feel a concern for the ills of society or wish to learn how to reform them. This is a proper motivation, yet it needs to be disciplined by a strong sense of scientific integrity and by a willingness to acquire real skill in the abstract disciplines before venturing to make applications….goodwill is in no sense a substitute for scientific competence – nor, of course, is scientific competence a substitute for goodwill (1968,  p. 190-191). 
Boulding further noted that institutions of higher learning are so focused on scientific inquiry that there is little opportunity to lose one’s way with fruits of religious fanciful thinking. In fact, for Boulding, 
It is the opposite danger which threatens [the economist] – that of becoming so engrossed in the refinements of scientific abstraction – and in the substantial rewards, which in these days often accompany proficiency in such abstractions – that he forgets the ills of society and becomes deaf to the cry of the hungry and blind to the misery of the oppressed. […] Those who have knowledge have a peculiar responsibility to be sensitive to the ills of the world, for if they are not then it will be the ignorant who will be the movers of events, and the value of knowledge will be lost (1968, p. 191).  
Boulding states that for teachers of economics, the division between religion and economics is a little broader. When teaching economic history, for example, ‘the contact between religious and economic life becomes clear and significant’ (1968, p. 192). So, no economic history course can adequately purge (nor ignore) the effects of religion.   
The other aspect of economics that lends itself to considerations of religious influence is public policy. Here the ends and means can be affected by religious influence. When studying unemployment, pollution, or public finance it is difficult to look at these issues in an objective way without seeing the effects on people:  
For the sake of his own spiritual and intellectual health the economist must face the challenge of prophetic indignation: on the other hand the prophet also must be prepared to submit his moral insights to the rigorous discipline of intellectual analysis when it comes to translating these insights into policies (1968, p. 197). 
The economy is a social construct, so when studying exchange, value and production we are ultimately studying decisions made by people or institutions of people. Boulding argues that where scientific abstraction is perhaps most dangerous is found in the study of labor markets. The pure ‘rational economic man’ sees workers as commodities producing output (an automaton). Boulding, however, sees the value in each worker and each worker’s output (like Marx). This is where an economics teacher’s acquaintance with religion is important (and maybe more than an acquaintance). Boulding writes, ‘To seek God is to find man’ (1968, p. 194). For Boulding, Christians see each person as special and important since each is made in God’s image (he applies this logic to all religions, not just Christianity). Treating people as chattel upon which capitalists through their yokes and whip into productive fervor is as much immoral as it is dishonest, since no person is reducible to his/her economic output. If this were possible, it would likely resemble a diastrophic Orwellian nightmare in which people are more robot than human.  
These examples also highlight why Boulding believes so strongly in a transdisiplinary approach to social problems. An integral approach considers the psychological, social, historical, physical, political, religious, and educational effects of ‘economic’ decisions on people. It is a daunting task to consider this general systems macrocosm. After all, it is much easier to apply ceteris paribus and look at one or two factors ignoring everything else. But this oversimplification masks the real value in studying economics, which is to study social issues and systems. Only in the larger, broader view are we able to see if our observations are valid and if they have the potential of a lasting positive wide-reaching impact. Nowhere is this more challenging than for the religious economist who balances the scientific and the mythical ethic in terms of value and morality. About this Boulding wrote: 
Communication between the intellectual and the religious subcultures is perilous in the extreme. It depends almost entirely on the doubtful abilities of a few individuals who participate in both. Society owes an enormous debt to those marginal men who live uneasily in two different universes of discourse. Society is apt to repay this debt by making them thoroughly uncomfortable and still more marginal (Boulding 1956, p. 146).     
In the article ‘Economic Life’ (1953), Boulding finds that ‘On the great question of socialism versus capitalism, for instance, the Quaker trumpet seems to speak with an uncertain sound. Despite – or perhaps even because of – this apparent weakness in clarity of the theoretical position, the practical impact of the Society of Friends on the economic life of the world has been enormous, and quite out of proportion to the small number of friends’ (pp. 43-44). Boulding further states that Quakers played an important role in the industrial revolution. ‘It is perhaps sufficient to mention that the basic technical changes in such industries as iron and steel, lead and zinc mining, porcelain, and even railroads were to a large extent the work of Friends’ (Boulding 1953, p. 45). Friends also cultivated economic institutions – merchandising, banking, and insurance (e.g., Barclay and Lloyd). Quakers were deeply entrenched in the capitalist market-based system. ‘The two great features of the economic life of the Society of Friends were first, the practices of the ‘minor virtues’ of personal probity, thrift, simplicity of life, and hard work; and second, the willingness to innovate, to try out new ways of doing things, not only in manufacture and trade, but in human relations as well’ (p. 47).  
 
Peace testimony 

During the 1954-1955 academic year, Boulding studied at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University. Two important events occurred while at Stanford that had a lasting impact on Boulding (and Elise) personally, professionally, and spiritually. First, soon after arriving at Stanford Boulding, Ludwig von Bertalanffy, Clyde Kluckohn, and Anatol Rapoport were sitting around the lunch table and it was discovered they were all studying general systems, but from different angles. So, they decided to start an association. The Society for General Systems Research was born (now called the International Society for the Systems Sciences). Boulding became the Society’s first president (1957-1958). General systems theory does not have a clear definition; but essentially it is an interdisciplinary approach to studying environments, societies, and institutions. For example, general systems thinkers study a forest and its complex ecosystem working in concert compared to studying one aspect of the forest and ignoring the rest. Only in its totality is the value of the forest fully appreciated. In addition, time plays a role in general systems thinking, because forests (and all ecosystems and institutions) change over time; and studying those changes is important for understanding what happened in the past and present as well as what might happen in the future.  
The second event (closely related to the first) was a focus on research associated with conflict and peace. It was surprising to many of the interdisciplinary scholars at the Center that no one was studying war and peace in a rigorous way (other than historical accounts), yet these were critical issues. So, after Boulding got back to Michigan, he and several others, including Elise Boulding, started the Journal of Conflict Resolution (which remains an influential journal in the field). The journal had the unintended effect of creating by way of inertia the Center for Research on Conflict Resolution at the University of Michigan. Elise, while getting her Ph.D. in Sociology at Michigan, was actively involved in starting and helping to run the Center at the University of Michigan.  
So strong were Boulding’s feelings that in the mid-1960s he was at a meeting with Russian scientists discussing the implications of nuclear weapons on humanity. At the meeting he cried openly at the conference table, which was a turning point in the meeting. One of the Russian delegates said, ‘here [is] a man [we] can trust.’ Then the Russian delegates cried with Boulding. In the middle of the Cold War Boulding was able to use his convictions to reach people by showing his compassion for humanity (Rapport 1996, p. 69).  
Boulding spent the 1959-1960 academic year at the University College of the 
West Indies in Jamaica where he wrote a classic book, Conflict and Defense: A General Theory (1962). This work was the result of his pacifism and desire to understand the nature and consequences of conflict. In the preface he wrote, ‘The origin of this book in my mind can be traced back to a passionate conviction of my youth that war was the major moral and intellectual problem of our age’ (Boulding 1962, p. vii). In particular, Boulding saw that conflict is everywhere, but it can be either helpful or harmful. What Boulding developed was a twotiered structure that identified harmful grants as those resulting from fear, where one party coerces another party to do something out of threat (unhealthy conflict). Essentially one person gains while another loses. Helpful grants are given without the expectation of reciprocation (e.g., love), where one party gives something unconditionally and another party gains. This interaction of love and fear (or benevolence and malevolence) was what emerged from Conflict and Defense, but Boulding had yet to fully form his thinking on this structure until several years later when developing his grants economics – more below (see Boulding 1969).  
In 1965 Boulding presented his influential paper The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth (1966) that was remarkably prescient. This paper laid the foundations for much of the development of modern ecological economics. He argues that the traditional pursuit of economic growth leads to environmental and social misery. He states that what is needed is a movement toward renewable energy and a steady-state economy. The previous thinking about economics – that the environment is illimitable and economic growth can continue forever is an outmoded idea he calls the ‘cowboy economy.’ In the face of pollution, finite resources, and population growth we need to think of the earth as a ‘spaceship’ that must be sustained. While he never states that this thinking had any religious influences – the ideas to live within our means, reduce wasteful consumption, be good stewards of the earth, and promote human betterment are all present. 
 
A moral science 

In Fall 1966 Boulding moved from the University of Michigan to the University of Colorado. He was brought in to work at the Institute of Behavioral Science (IBS). The director of IBS at the time was Gilbert White a geographer who was a fellow Quaker and eventual good friend of Boulding and his family.  
Boulding was elected president of the American Economic Association (AEA) in 
1968. His presidential address at the national meeting in December 1968 was ‘Economics as a Moral Science’ (Boulding 1969). Here Boulding puts forth his tripartite model of society. His most important point in the presentation is to argue that economics is not a value-free discipline that analyzes the economy from an unfeeling position of neutrality. Instead, economics is normative, and this is not a bad thing. He states correctly that Adam Smith was a professor of moral philosophy, and that economics was for a long time after a moral science. He writes, ‘In the battle between mechanism and moralism generally mechanism has won hands down, and I shall not be surprised if the very title of my address does not arouse musty fears of sermonizing in the minds of many of my listeners’ (Boulding 1969, p. 1). He makes clear that ‘the largest part of human preferences are learned,’ that society and culture define these preferences (p. 2). No science, to Boulding, is without some ethical standards and understand. Boulding further states that economic models must consider benevolence and malevolence to be accurate reflections of the world. Economics is too narrowly focused on pure exchange and easily disregard the role of an ‘economic ethic.’ Yet, it is possible to measure benevolence and malevolence toward each other like other preferences. He relates this back to his peace studies by stating that ‘it apparently costs the United States about four dollars to do one dollar’s worth of damage in Vietnam, in which case our rate of benevolence towards North Vietnam is at least minus four’ (p. 3).  
Boulding states as a threat to the economic ethic is the ‘heroic ethic,’ which includes military, religious, and sporting. He writes, ‘the enormous role which religion has played in the history of mankind, for good or ill, is based on the appeal which it has to the sense of identify and the sense of the heroic even in ordinary people. ‘Here I stand and I can do no other’ said Luther; ‘To give and not to count the cost, to labor and ask for no reward’ is the prayer of St. Francis’ (p. 9).  
No one in his sense would want his daughter to marry an economic man, one who counted every cost and asked for every reward, was never afflicted with mad generosity or uncalculating love, and who never acted out of a sense of inner identity and indeed had no inner identity even if he was occasionally affected by carefully calculated considerations of benevolence or malevolence (p. 10). 
Boulding helped (along with Martin Pfaff, Anita Pfaff, and Janos Horvath) start the Association for the Study of the Grants Economy in 1968 (recently renamed the Association for the Study of Generosity in Economics). Grants economics was the culmination of Boulding’s thinking about general systems, religion, economics, and peace. Essentially, he argues there are three parts of the social system. First, exchange, which economics is primarily concerned with. Second is the threat system, which is outlined in Boulding’s work on conflict and defense (see Boulding 1962). The last part is the integrative system (or love, as Boulding referred to it early on). The integrative system is the grants economy, and Boulding argues that it makes up a substantial part of the economy. Of course, the three systems blend into one another in certain areas. Take for instance religion, where financial donations are ‘grants,’ but perhaps out of fear of damnation (threat system). ‘The reaction of the economics profession to the idea that grants economics should be a regular sub-discipline within the larger field was one of not always polite skepticism’ (Boulding 1981, p. vii). 
Boulding stated that the most important book during his time at the University of Colorado was Ecodynamics (1978), his ‘manifesto of the universe’ (Boulding 1992b, p. 81). In this book Boulding explains his perspectives on evolution and how matter, beings, society and so forth have been subjected to evolutionary forces. The power of evolution is the emphasis on adaptability. Boulding did not see this as contradictory to his religious beliefs. Instead, he deftly weaves religion into the evolutionary process. He states, ‘[f]rom the beginning, therefore, religion has played a part in the great phyla of human and societal evolution’ (Boulding 1978, p. 307). However, Boulding is also quick to point out that religion, as a divisive force, has not successfully eliminated war and at times is the cause of more war and tension than it resolves. However, he also argues ‘[r]eligion has had an important role to play in the integrative system, as the very name suggests. ‘Religion’ and ‘ligament’ come from the same Latin word meaning something that binds together’ (p. 308). Furthermore, ‘Religion like the nuclear family seems to be a very fundamental part of human society and no society has been found without some sort of religious practices and beliefs…. There are deep historical connections that link religion with sex; both are part of the deep emotional layer of the human make-up’ (p. 337).  
 
Market morality 

Boulding retired from the University of Colorado-Boulder in 1980. He remained prolific during his retirement years. He taught at several different universities and traveled extensively. He wrote several interesting pieces in Quaker publications on the intersection of economics and religion more broadly. This section discusses three writings from this period.   
Boulding wrote a comment article in an edited volume titled Morality of the Market (1985b) in which he states ‘The case for Christian origins of capitalism is seldom made, but I think it is almost as strong. Capitalism could not come out of a spiritual culture, or even a gentlemanly culture, like Confucianism. It could only come out of a culture for which the material world is not only real and important but is the way in which the transcendent world is made manifest’  (p. 253). ‘As my wife [Elise Boulding] once said very profoundly, “the difference between Buddhism and Christianity is that Buddha was a prince and Jesus was a carpenter.” Science could only have come out of a culture founded by a carpenter or a like artisan’ (p. 253).  
Christian culture which preceded capitalism, and yet which capitalism itself could not generate. Banks may be enormously useful and productive, but very few people love them. Governments are destructive and morally outrageous, yet they command remarkable amounts of human loyalty and affection. If, as I have argued, it is the integrative system, involving such things as loyalty, legitimacy, love, identity, and so on, which really dominates the other two major systems (which I have called the exchange system and the threat system), then the future of capitalism, and with it perhaps the future of democracy, looks rather bleak (p. 252). 
In his Quaker pamphlet ‘Mending the World: Quaker Insights on the Social Order’ (1986b) he presents how Quaker thinking has evolved. Quakers were always concerned with ‘mending the world.’ Quakers emerged from the devastation of the English Civil War (1642-1649). ‘Once the big rip that separates from God is mended, life is different. Things which perhaps were not seen in need of mending before are now seen as needing it, and there is a change both in personal behavior and in what is urged upon others’ (Boulding, 1986b, p. 6). Boulding asserts that Quakers are people not only of promoting peace (as in the Peace Testimonies), but actively moving the world toward peace – particularly with political activism. Boulding observes that the great challenges have not changed – poverty, nuclear war, income inequality, and the rise of debt (pp. 24-25). Ultimately, ‘learning, indeed, is the key to mending the world. We have to learn to sew before we can mend. We have to learn how to live at peace or we will destroy ourselves. This is not easy, but it can be done’ (p. 27). 
Boulding’s article ‘Religion and the Pathologies of Economic Life’ (1986c) again discusses the interactions between religion and the economy. But he more explicitly notes important differences. ‘Religion stresses human needs. Economic life stresses wants. Religion stresses forgiveness, mercy, and grace. Economic life stresses the payment of debts, interest, legal justice, and the careful keeping of accounts. Religious life at its most intense stresses poverty, chastity, and obedience. Economic life stresses pleasure and is even pretty tolerant of lust. Religion is poetry; economics is prose. It is not surprising that there is tension between the two’ (1986c, p. 12). Boulding argues that the free-market is like an ecosystem, but it is susceptible to pathologies (e.g., Great Depression) – financial markets are particularly notable in financial markets where speculation results in sometimes vigorous price swings. Another pathology is one he calls the ‘Matthew Principle’ (from the book of Matthew in the bible) ‘For whosoever hath, to him shall be given,… but whoever hath not, from his shall be taken away, even that he hath’ (p. 19). This acknowledgement of the fairness of equality is difficult for economics to rectify since it sees disproportionate distributions as a ‘natural’ outcome of market forces.  
Religious criticisms of economic life and institutions has not been insignificant. […] It is less generally recognized that there is an economic criticism of religion, as we find it in Adam Smith’s masterly twenty pages on the sociology of religion in Book V of The Wealth of Nations, in which he argues for free competition in religion and the separation of church and state, as over against his friend, David Hume, who thought that religion could best be handled by stated monopoly. […] The separation of church and state and the remarkable freedom of religion in the United States has not only contributed to the vitality of the American economy, but has also contributed to the extraordinary vitality of American religion (p. 21). 
Boulding ends this piece with the insight that ‘[b]oth religion and economic life are inescapable parts of the heritage of the human race and their mutual critique might help to cure the ever-present potential pathologies of both’ (p. 22). 
 
March 19, 1993 
Boulding maintained his enthusiasm for teaching and writing up to his diagnosis of prostate cancer in October 1992 and passing on March 19, 1993. And soon afterword Elise wrote:  
My fear that he wouldn’t be able to use this time for spiritual growth has vanished. Later in February 1993, while in hospital after breaking his hip, he said to [me] with a smile, ‘Death is a wonderful invention – everyone should try it’’ (Boulding and Boulding 1994, p. vi). 
Boulding’s last diary entry was on October 16, 1992: 
Russell [Boulding’s oldest child] has just gone home. He was here for more than a week. He was just enormously helpful. I can't say how helpful he was in getting me adjusted to my present state of life. We did go to an excellent new doctor and had a very frank conversation about how long I had to live. I gathered from him that he thinks this probably is my final illness and could easily last about six months. At any rate, I have got forward to look for it ending, and I must confess I have had an extraordinarily good life. I will be 83 in three months and I have absolutely nothing to complain about. If there is a future life, well, that's fine; if there isn't, I won't know about it, and that's fine too (Boulding 1992a). 
 
Conclusion 

Boulding had a tremendous academic career. Starting life in a working-class family in Liverpool, England Boulding realized early academic success and leveraged this into an ethic that produced a unique body of research. He was unapologetically Christian at a time when such thinking was considered antediluvian. His religious convictions were unwavering and resulted in writings that reached far beyond economics. Boulding always considered himself an economist, but more than anything he wanted to understand society and how to make it better. As presented above, his thinking was greatly influenced by his Quaker beliefs. Starting in the 1930s he began writing about economics as the study of human betterment. This approach gave Boulding’s writings a timelessness that makes them appear fresh many decades later. Boulding challenges economists and other social scientists to realize we are ultimately studying people (society, institutions, and nations) and trying to make their lives better, more peaceful, and fulfilling.