5 Indigenous Ethics: Living in Harmony

Joseph Len Miller, is a member of the Mvskoke (Muscogee) nation. He introduces Native American ethical systems as founded on the concept of harmony.^[1] While different tribes have different specific beliefs, the main concept of harmony appears in many tribal ethics systems. According to Miller, the way to think about harmony is the idea of living together peacefully. Harmony is the standard for relationships.

What is Harmony?

Given each of us exists within a context, or in some surroundings, relationships are the foundation of ethics and relationships confer responsibilities specific to a type of relationship. For instance, as a daughter I have certain responsibilities to my parents and as a professor I have certain responsibilities to you as my student.

Ethics Come from Relationships

When we consider moral claims like “you ought not lie” or “you ought not cause harm to another” we justify such claims by the existence of particular relationships. This means that there are no universal moral rules, but, rather, ethical claims arise from the relationships we have. For instance, I ought not lie to my mother because she is my mother and part of my responsibility of being her daughter is to be honest, to trust her, and for her to trust me. Miller writes:

To live well one must live in harmony with one’s surroundings, and that means fulfilling the responsibilities of one’s relationships and treating others with a special kind of love. Living together peacefully requires living with a special kind of love. In Mvskoke this is known as vnokeckv…This refers to a “love that cares for and tends to the needs of the people…a compassionate love.”

This type of love requires us to understand the needs of the other and how we can appropriately reciprocate within that relationship. “Reciprocation is required to achieve harmony and knowing how to reciprocate requires love.” Without reciprocation, imbalances are created, which is the opposite of harmony.

Two Ways to Create Harmony

Miller explains that achieving harmony tends to either involve changing oneself or changing one’s surroundings. He explains this distinction with the issue of climate change. The problem of climate change can be addressed by either changing oneself and one’s behavior (e.g. driving less, recycling, buying used and/or sustainable products) or by changing one’s surrounding (e.g. changes in technology, renewable energy sources, sustainable farming). Either way can help address the issue of climate change. Miller refers to these two types of change as internal and external adaptation.

Either internal (i.e. changing oneself or one’s responses) or external (i.e. changing one’s surroundings) adaptations are capable of harmonizing and both can be helpful in living together peacefully, but it’s not always clear if there is an optimal path and if so which path to take. In the climate change scenario both options may be beneficial but maybe in this scenario one of the options may be too psychologically demanding or too financially demanding. So, which option should we pursue?

Choosing the Right Approach

Miller points to an additional distinction that may be helpful—the existence of a problem and our feeling of a problem. The importance of the distinction is that our adaptation strategy will be different if we are addressing an actual problem or if we feel there is a problem. When deciding which type of adaptation to pursue, there is a set of items we need to have knowledge of. First, one must know oneself. This involves knowing how you operate, how you tend to respond to situations, your culture, and history. Second, one must know one’s surroundings. This means you have an understanding the environment you’re in, including the land, ecosystems, history, customs, traditions, and people in your community. Third, one needs to have knowledge of one’s role in or relationship to one’s surroundings. This means you understand the interactions you engage in and you have a perspective about one’s place in the world. You understand the effects of your actions.

Miller explains, “One way to live together peacefully is to adapt yourself to your surroundings so that you’re not disturbed…If your reaction to something is creating disharmony, then your reaction – yourself—is the thing that should be changed.” Miller gives an example to show his point. If you get extremely angry every time you hear a specific song. If it’s your response that is creating disharmony then you should adapt internally by changing your reaction. This is a better option than trying to avoid the song the rest of your life. Miller continues:

Another way to live together peacefully is to adapt one’s surroundings to oneself…Addressing the cause will address your reaction. For example, imagine someone getting incredibly angry at the construction of a pipeline that’ll disproportionally affect Native American communities in negative ways (e.g. Keystone XL, Dakota Access Pipeline, Line 3, etc.). This anger seems warranted given that instances of racial injustice and environmental destruction are morally wrong. In these cases, the person shouldn’t change their reaction—they shouldn’t stop being incredibly angry. They should help to change their surroundings and stop instances of, and systems that encourage or allow, the construction of such pipelines.

If your surroundings are creating disharmony, there should be an external adaptation—a change in your surroundings. The aim is to bring peace to your surroundings. “It’s the promotion of harmony by making sure all of our relationships are reciprocal and guided by vnokeckv (i.e., love).”