The word integrity is often associated with honesty or ethics but is defined more broadly as wholeness, completeness, and internal consistency. A building is said to have integrity if all of its components fit together harmoniously to form a strong and durable structure. Its foundation, walls, and roof must each be designed and built to support and protect the others – the components must have internal consistency. To sustain human life on earth, we ultimately must create a global society that has integrity – social, ecological, and economic integrity.

The integrity of a society must begin with people of integrity. People who are trustworthy are often said to have personal integrity. However, some people who are truthful and responsible in their dealings with others are also inconsiderate and disrespectful. Persons of integrity not only must be trustworthy but must also be kind; they must be empathetic, respectful, and compassionate. They must have the courage to be guided by an internally consistent set of social principles.

As suggested in the previous chapter, the truth of all of life’s principles is embodied in their internal consistency. Truths can never be in conflict. We can resolve apparent conflicts in core values by considering them within the context of larger principles, as in viewing honesty within the larger context of trust. It is never truly honest to be unfair or truly fair to be dishonest. We can resolve apparent conflicts among principles by considering them within the context of larger sets of principles, as in viewing trust within the larger context of personal integrity. For example, true respect can never condone our violation of trust, and we can never really trust someone we don’t respect.

In the new postindustrial way of life, we must respect the basic social, ecological, and economic truths in all aspects of our lives – wholly and consistently. Our social and economic relationships must be ecologically sound, our ecological and economic relationships must be socially responsible, and our social and ecological relationships must be economically viable. Only by applying the same principles to everything that we do can we ensure completeness and internal consistency among all aspects of our lives.

The ecology of society. To understand personal integrity, we need only reinterpret the ecological principles of holism, diversity, and interdependence within social contexts. We need to see our families, communities, and societies as more than collections of individuals; we are all members of interconnected wholes. Families have properties that are not present in any of their individual members. Whenever relationships within families change, the nature of the family is changed. In reality, families are defined by the fact that relationships within families are different from relationships between family members and so-called outsiders.

We also need to see communities as groups of people who feel some sense of connectedness and common commitment to the community as a whole. Communities whose members have no shared commitments or shared vision for the future are not really communities but simply collections of individuals. The same holds true of societies that lack a commitment to a common good or common future. To maintain positive relationships within families, communities, and society, we must see them and treat them holistically.

We must also understand that diversity adds strength and durability to human relationships by increasing their resistance, resilience, and regenerative capacity. A diverse group of individuals can share their strengths, come up with different ideas, and find different solutions to problems. In addition, if our friends all think alike and we change our way of thinking, we may well lose all of our friends. From a broader, long-run perspective, diversity among past societies has allowed humanity to survive the decline and fall of the great civilizations of the past. When one civilization has fallen, there has always been another different-thinking civilization to rise and further human progress. Social well-being and human progress are dependent on the principle of diversity.

Interdependence is also an essential aspect of social relationships. Our pursuit of happiness is dependent on finding “win-win” or mutually beneficial solutions to problems that arise among friends and within our families. Interdependence is also necessary to turn social organizations into something more than collections of independent individuals. Dependencies make an organization something less; interdependencies make it something more. A significant part of that something more is the basic human value of being connected, belonging, loving, and being loved. If our social relationships are to have integrity, they must be built on the principle of interdependence.

The ecology of economics. Holism, diversity, and interdependence are also essential in economics. Holism requires that we look at the economic organization as a whole rather than as a collection of functions, individuals, departments, and divisions. All of the departments and divisions must function in harmony if the organization is to function efficiently and effectively. If there is no reason for individuals, departments, and divisions to work together as a whole, there is no economic advantage in forming or continuing the organization. Sustainable economic organizations must be organized and managed by the principle of holism.

Diversity can strengthen economic organizations by allowing them to manage the risks inherent in all potentially profitable ventures. Diverse organizations don’t put all of their “economic eggs in one basket.” If one division of such an organization is unprofitable, profits from another, dissimilar division can help offset its losses. Diverse organizations employ people with diverse abilities and talents. If one person can’t solve a problem, someone else probably can. Individuals who have diverse skills and talents are less vulnerable to the uncertainties of job markets, as they have multiple employment opportunities. Sustainable economic organizations must be organized and managed by the principle of diversity.

Sustainable economic organizations must also be managed by the principle of interdependence. Profits generated through extraction and exploitation simply cannot be sustained over time. Sustainable economic relationships must be “win-win” relationships. Both parties to transactions must receive more value than they give. In interdependent economic relationships, both parties to a trade value the things they trade away less than the things they receive in return. If individuals or organizations continually exploit and extract without giving back to nature and society, they will eventually run out of resources to extract and people to exploit. Sustainable economic relationships must be built upon the principle of interdependence.

The sociology of ecology. The principles of trust, kindness, and courage are essential in defining right relationships with our natural environment. We all share a common set of social values, but we appear to have very different ecological values. Some see the earth as nothing more than minerals, water, air, and energy – as resources to be extracted and exploited for human benefit. Others see the earth as sacred – as something to be worshipped rather than used for any human purpose beyond hunting and gathering.

However, truths cannot be in conflict with each other. If we accept this basic premise, we can reach some level of agreement on ecological values. The rightness of our relationships with nature cannot be in conflict with principles that define the rightness of our relationships with our fellow human beings.

If we are trustworthy in our relations with others, we must be honest, fair, and responsible to others in our use of the resources of nature. If we are honest with ourselves, we will realize that our pursuit of individual economic wealth is depleting the natural resources on which those of future generations must depend. We will also realize that we are polluting the environment and threatening the health of other people in the name of economic efficiency. If we are fair to other people, we won’t do things, or condone things, that diminish their quality of life. If we accept our responsibilities to those of future generations, we won’t use up the earth’s fossil energy unless and until we know there will be enough energy left for future generations to meet their needs as well. If we are people of integrity, we must be trustworthy in our relationships with nature.

If we are kind, we will be empathetic, compassionate, and respectful in our use of the things of nature. If we are empathetic, we will put ourselves in the place of those people who lack the economic and political power to protect themselves from exploitation and pollution. We will insist that they be treated as we would like to be treated if we were the ones who lacked the power to protect ourselves. If we are compassionate, we will be willing to do more than laws and regulations require to protect the environment and to conserve resources for the future. We will apply the precautionary principle by putting the burden of proof on the potential polluter rather than those who might suffer from their pollution. If we are respectful, we will respect the rights of those of future generations to an earth as productive and healthy as the world into which we were born. If we are people of integrity, we must be kind to other people in the ways we relate to nature.

Finally, we must find the courage to be trustworthy and kind in our ecological relationships. Many people still don’t understand, or are unwilling to admit, that their mistreatment of natural ecosystems represents mistreatment of other people. They demand scientific certainty of their damage, while rationalizing that people of future generations will be capable of finding a substitute for any resource we use up and will be able to clean up any ecological mess we create. Unfortunately, those who intellectualize and rationalize tend to be those in positions of greatest economic and political power. They have the power to exact a heavy price from those who question or oppose them. There are risks in speaking truth to power. In the face of such risks, we must find the courage to be trustworthy and kind to other people in our relationships with nature.

The sociology of economics. The principles of trust, kindness, and courage are equally important in economics. Sustainable economic relationships must be based on mutual trust, rather than contracts, rules, and regulations. Legal documents are useful only in dealing with those who are untrustworthy. Even then, contracts can be unfair when they are negotiated between parties with unequal bargaining power, as when one party knows and understands the legal requirements but the other doesn’t. In addition, rules and regulations are routinely violated by those who are dishonest or irresponsible. To them, fines and penalties are just a cost of doing business. Contracts and laws can only force the few to conform to the standards of conduct of the many. For sustainability, the many must be trustworthy. Economic relationships can be sustained only if they are based on the principle of trust.

Contrary to popular belief, sustainable economic relationships must also be relationships of kindness. Even if we are trusting in our dealings with others, sometimes trust isn’t enough. Sometimes people find themselves in financial difficulties, through no fault of their own, and simply cannot live up to their commitments. If we want to sustain these relationships, we must try to find ways to help them through the hard times and give them a chance to regain their financial footing. Sometimes we need to be willing to make risky loans, pay undeserved premiums or give unjustified discounts, and accept late or reduced payment of financial obligations. Economic relationships can be sustained only through occasional acts of kindness.

Finally, we must find the courage to be trustworthy and kind in our economic relationships with others. We live in an economically competitive world. Everyone is expected to take advantage of every opportunity to get ahead financially, even if it means taking advantage of someone else. Those who trust people they don’t know and who are committed to “doing good” are considered naïve and idealistic. However, many are not naïve; they know others will occasionally take advantage of their trust, and some will treat their kindness as weakness. They are not idealistic; they know the risks of challenging the conventional economic wisdoms, and they are willing to take those risks. To sustain economic relationships, people must find the courage to be trustworthy and kind.

The economics of ecology. The principles of value, efficiency, and sovereignty are just as important in managing our ecological relationships as in managing economic organizations. Ecological value is also affected by scarcity. Natural resources often become ecologically scarce long before they are economically scarce, and thus they take on ecological value long before they have any economic value. Individual species become more ecologically valuable as they become fewer in number or increasingly endangered. The scarcity and ecological value of species cannot be measured in dollars and cents, but their relative scarcity is nonetheless important. If we are to sustain a healthy, productive natural environment, we must respect the principle of scarcity in assessing ecological value.

The principle of efficiency also is important in managing our ecological relationships. The tradeoffs of value gained in relation to value sacrificed are as important in ecology as in economics. All species compete for space and resources as they attempt to modify their natural environment to accommodate their individual needs. However, we humans do it through conscious, purposeful decisions, rather than solely by instinct. Each time we modify our environment we are sacrificing the potential long-run benefits from the species we harvest or displace to gain some short-run advantage for ourselves. As in economics, at some point the ecological cost of what we sacrifice will exceed the ecological benefit we receive in return. In our relationships with nature, we must respect the principle of efficiency.

Finally, sovereignty is just as important in ecological decisions as in economic decisions. Natural ecosystems are dynamic – always changing and evolving. Nature is also incredibly complex with countless interconnections and feedback loops. As a consequence, trends and cycles in natural systems can be explosive or disintegrating. Beyond some point, natural cycles and trends can exceed the bounds of human influence or control. Thus, if we wait too long to correct our ecological errors, we lose our ability to influence future outcomes. We end up like the consumers whose debts are so large they can’t make the monthly interest payments, let alone reduce the principal of their debts. As we pollute our environment, deplete our natural resources, and alter our climate, we are incrementally losing our ecological sovereignty – our freedom to choose. We must protect our ecological sovereignty if we are to have the capacity to do the things that must be done now to keep the earth inhabitable for humans in the future. To sustain healthy, productive natural ecosystems we must respect and protect the principle of sovereignty.

The economics of sociology. The principles of value, efficiency, and sovereignty are also essential in maintaining positive relationships within families, communities, and societies. The value of our interpersonal relationships is not monetary but is nonetheless affected by scarcity. We may not like to admit it, but the value of additional friendships is inversely related to the number of friends we already have. If we don’t have a friend in the world, finding one friend may be our highest priority. If we have a dozen friends, each may still be valuable to us, but one more or less won’t make nearly as much difference as if we had only a couple. The same holds for families, communities, and cities. Other things being equal, the greater the number of people, the weaker will be their connectedness and the less valuable will be their individual social relationships. To sustain positive interpersonal relationships we must respect the principle of scarcity.

Efficiency is also important in maintaining interpersonal relationships. Relationships require time and energy. The time and energy we spend on one relationship are not available to be spent on another, and the time we spend on relationships in total is not available to be spent on anything else we might do instead. So every relationship has a cost, and its cost can be expressed in terms of the value of what we could have done instead – its opportunity cost. We get the most out of our interpersonal relationships when we allocate our time and energy among friends, family, neighbors, and society so as to get the greatest benefits in relation to whatever else we must forgo to maintain those relationships. Trust and kindness need not be sacrificed for the sake of social efficiency, as the truth of principles cannot be in conflict. However, we must respect the principle of efficiency in sustaining positive interpersonal relationships.

Finally, sovereignty is as important in sustaining interpersonal relationships as in economic relationships. Interdependent relationships among people must be relationships of choice. If one person is dependent on the other, the relationship is inherently exploitative. Even if the dominant person doesn’t exercise his or her opportunity to exploit, the dependent person always feels vulnerable and insecure. When people within a society are not free to express their political preferences, they inevitably feel oppressed and exploited, even if they are ruled by the most benign aristocrats. Friends remain true friends only if each feels free to end the friendship if necessary. Neighbors remain good neighbors only if they feel free to be good neighbors with others. And people feel a sense of belonging only within societies where they feel free to choose their own destiny. To sustain positive interpersonal relationships we must respect the principle of sovereignty.

The foundational principles of integrity. A structure of ecological, social, and economic integrity must be built upon a strong conceptual foundation. The ethical principles of faith, hope, and love must provide the conceptual foundation for a sustainable economy and society. Faith, hope, and love are the most deeply felt and widely shared of all human values. These things are old; these things are true. These things have been the quiet driving force of progress throughout human history. What is demanded of us in these times of gathering clouds and raging storms is a return to these most basic of all truths: the truths of faith, hope, and love.

Without faith, there is no purpose for living; without love, there is no goodness in life; and without hope, there is no possibility of realizing life’s goodness. If there is no purpose for life, it doesn’t matter whether the natural ecosystems are healthy and productive, whether human societies are strong and durable, or whether economies are ecologically and socially sustainable. If there is no goodness in life, the integrity of natural ecosystems, human societies, and economies simply doesn’t matter.

Furthermore, if the purpose of life is evil, rather than good, it would be better if there were no life in the future. Finally, if there is no hope, it makes no sense to continue in our pursuit of happiness – it is hopeless. Even if there is a purpose for nature and society, and even if that purpose is inherently good, if there is no possibility of our contributing to that goodness, there is simply no reason for us to keep trying. Our pursuit of happiness must be guided by the foundational principles of faith, hope, and love.

Many people associate faith with religion, but a person of faith need not be religious. Some people define faith as belief without reason. But we always have reasons for our beliefs, although our reasons cannot always be validated by either science or logic. We believe our life is worth living, although we have no proof. We believe that we can find the goodness in life, even though there is no way of proving that goodness is even possible. Most important, we believe, without proof, that our life has purpose and meaning. Our beliefs ultimately may or may not turn out to be well founded. However, if we needed scientific proof to support our every belief, life simply wouldn’t be worth living.

Scientists don’t like to admit it, but all science is rooted in faith. The essential axioms, maxims, or principles that underlie all scientific disciplines are not proven but are simply accepted on faith. For example, basic mathematical propositions, such as a + b is equal to b + a, are not proven and can’t be proven; they are just accepted as fact. Such rules are called first principles, the principles from which all other principles are derived.

To live by faith is not to deny science but instead to understand its intrinsic limitations. Some of the most important aspects of life’s principles simply cannot be revealed by the methods of science or logic. A life of faith must be guided by informed intuition – gut feelings informed by observation and analysis. Living by faith requires intelligent insight – premonitions tempered with reason. People of faith follow their intentional instincts – intent guided by innate senses.

In our new way of life, we need to respect, cultivate, and learn to use our powers of intuition, insight, and instinct. We must be willing to trust our “gut feelings” that there is something fundamentally wrong with today’s economy and society. We must be willing to believe without proof that changes in our individual way of life can help create a better world. In faith, there is truth.

The principle of love has been defined in many ways. In principle, however, to love is to believe in the inherent goodness of a person, physical object, or idea. The many types of love, including romantic love, brotherly love, and Godly love, are all rooted in the same basic principle of love. They all reflect a belief in the inherent goodness of the object of one’s affection.

We typically think of love between two people, and such love is special because it can be returned in kind. But people can also love a pet, a dress, a car, or anything they believe is intrinsically good. Pets can also return our love, in their own unique ways. Inanimate objects can’t return love, but we can still love them. What man hasn’t spent too much time and money fixing up an old car, and what woman hasn’t spent too much on a new dress, because they just loved it. We can also love abstract ideas, concepts, or theories, if we believe them to be inherently true and thus good. Love requires only that we have come to believe someone or something is innately good.

We can’t really love another person until we know that person well enough to distinguish him or her from all other people. We can’t love everyone, at least not as individuals, because we can know only so many people well enough to love them. Beyond some number, the other people we know are just friends and acquaintances. We apparently have a basic need to be able to depend on at least a few other people who know us well enough to believe in our innate goodness, without doubting, questioning, or evaluating. We also need to know at least a few other people well enough to believe in their basic goodness. Our needs for food and water may be more immediate than the need for love but are no more essential. Studies have shown that infant primates will die if deprived of contact with their mothers, even if their needs for food and warmth are met. We humans, likewise, cannot live very well for very long without love.

Only people of faith have the capacity for true love. If our “love” requires proof, it is not love but a factual conclusion. Mature love doesn’t even require strong evidence to support it and resists strong evidence against it. Most mothers love their children, by nature. They cannot be convinced that their children are guilty of anything really bad, regardless of evidence to the contrary. Most of us instinctively defend members of our own family. We can criticize them, even though we feel others should not, because we know they are inherently good. People who are “in love,” emotionally and physically, are somehow blinded to any “bad” traits of their lovers. Perhaps this is nature’s way of establishing the emotional commitments necessary to perpetuate the species. However, it takes mature love, knowing as well as feeling, to sustain an intimate relationship.

The most essential love is our love of life – our belief in the inherent goodness of all life. Our commitment to “doing good” arises from this belief in the inherent goodness of life in general. Without a love of life, there can be no sense of goodness in the purpose of our own life, and thus no good reason for living. Love provides the foundation for respect, compassion, caring, and kindness. As a matter of faith, we choose to love and thus to live.

To hope is to believe that no matter how bad the current situation may seem, a good life is still possible. People often find themselves in bad situations, even in a world that is inherently good. Even though most of us do not lead lives of economic or social deprivation, we still must confront the normal challenges of life. Personal disappointment, unemployment, divorce, death: these things have no respect for social or economic class. No matter how difficult or trying our lives may seem at times, we simply cannot afford to lose hope. To hope is to believe in the possibility of goodness, regardless of our current situation.

Hope is a matter of possibility, not probability. Hope certainly is not the same as optimism or the expectation of quick and easy success. We can have hope even when the odds are against us and the chances for success appear small. As long as something good is possible, even if it’s not probable, there is reason for hope. Vaclav Havel, philosopher, writer, and former president of the Czech Republic, wrote of hope, “It’s not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out.” As long as we know at the very core of our being that what we are doing is right and good, we know it makes sense; we know there is hope.

Among faith, hope, and love, hope is perhaps least appreciated but not the least important. A person without hope has lost faith in the goodness of life and can see no reason to continue living. We tend to look on those who have committed suicide as irrational or emotionally disturbed. However, suicide is a logical decision for the person who has lost all hope. Far more common than those who have lost hope are those who are losing hope. It’s easy to lose hope in today’s society. Many people are feeling the economic and social pressures of a growing gap between the rich and the poor, both among and within the rich and poor countries of the world. Even those who are not aware of the demographics are suffering the consequences of a dwindling commitment to social equality and justice, both domestically and globally.

However, there is hope in the awakening of Americans to the fact that something is fundamentally wrong and in the growing calls for dramatic and fundamental change. There is hope in the great global movement that has arisen in response to continuing economic extraction from nature and the economic exploitation of humanity. This movement is unlike any other social movement in human history. It doesn’t have a single leader or defining group of people; it is truly a movement of We the People, nationally and globally.

This new social movement is driven not by narrow ideology but by the deep, philosophical question of sustainability. “How can we meet the needs of people today – of all people, with equity and justice – while ensuring that people of the future will have opportunities to meet their needs as well?” Paul Hawken, in his book Blessed Unrest, provides evidence of more than one million nonprofit organizations globally that are addressing issues of the environment, indigenous peoples’ rights, and social justice – three important dimensions of sustainability. The hope is that their numbers will continue to grow as they realize that change will not come from the economically and politically powerful but from common, ordinary people – the people of the Middle. Their odds of success may seem small, but the movement makes sense. In this, there is hope.

Perhaps most important, we need not wait until sometime in the future to reap the personal benefits of hope. The greatest personal benefits come from having hope, rather than from eventually getting the thing hoped for. Hope can bring happiness to the unhappy today, in even the most trying of situations. Even people suffering from poverty and oppression can find a sense of peace and contentment in their core being, as long as they have faith in the inherent goodness of life and believe that goodness is possible for them. As long as we continue to believe in the possibility of goodness, our life will be good; we will have an opportunity to achieve our full measure of happiness.

No matter how great the challenges that confront us today, as long as we know that what we are doing to meet those challenges makes sense – that our relationships with each other and with the earth are right and good – there is hope for the future of America and for humanity. In the words of Vaclav Havel, “Life is too precious to permit its devaluation by living pointlessly, emptily, without meaning, without love and, finally, without hope.” In faith and love we find the motivation to restore ecological, social, and economic integrity. In faith and love, there is always hope.