Tag Archives: bear

Fire & Ice: Natives, Alcohol and Spirituality, a Northern Health Paradigm (PDF)

Fire & Ice: Natives, Alcohol and Spirituality, a Northern Health Paradigm

Pamela Colorado, Ph.D.
Faculty of Social Welfare
University of Calgary
4401 University Drive
Lethbridge, Alberta

The Language Between the Cultures
Native and non-native interaction is powerfully and intricately interwoven with western science. Native alcoholism and the way it has been addressed provides insight to this complex phenomena and illuminates the possibility of global sobriety. From initial contact to contemporary times, the scientific view of the Indian has evolved through stages. Each stage has dramatically impacted the lives of both peoples.
Stage One, Scientific Racism
Scientific inquiry and literature on American Indians was born in the scientific racism of the nineteenth century. This doctrine replaced the word, “nation” with the word, “race” and assumed that moral qualities of people were positively correlated with physical characteristics; further, that all humanity could be divided into superior and inferior stocks (Berkhofer, 1978).
Typical of his time, Leslie Scott (1891) wrote an article entitled, “Indian” Diseases as Aids to Pacific Northwest Settlement” in which he States:

…Wherever went the white man’s appetites and wares went also his afflications which multiplied manifold in the savage habitat. Indians in the white man’s clothing, in his houses, in his liquor drinking, were like the cultures of malignant germs which the scientist multiplies in his laboratory…. throughout the entire West the Indians were victims, but perhaps nowhere else so badly as in the Pacific Northwest; and nowhere else were the results so good for the whites….

Thus, scientific arguments provided a rationale and a justification for the genocide and ruthless appropriation of Indian lands. Political rhetoric of the early 1800’s which was filled with optimism for the human race and the improvability of humankind gave way in 1850 to a strident “pessimism for inferior races and a belief in ineradicable racial weakness” (Horsman, 1975). In a popular work of the mid 1800’s phrenologist Combe argued that comparison of the heads of American Indians and Blacks demonstrated that Indian intellect was weaker but pride stronger therefore Blacks…

…were able to appreciate the superior moral and intellectual powers of the European race, and are content in some measure to live under their guidance.
The Indian on the contrary has refused to profit, to any great extent by the arts of literature of the Europeans and has always preferred death to servitude.

Bailey, who wrote as late as 1922, codified the scientific racist paradigm when he stated:

“From the statistics which relate to the two so-called primitive races, the African and the American Indian, it appears that the primitive could not under any present circumstances attain the average intelligence of cultured races. This appears to be so, not because there is any detailed information as to the potentiality of the primitive mind but because mental deficiency is so profuse that their average intelligence must be inferior to that of average European intelligence.”

Because Native alcoholism was understood to be a function of inferior biological stock, the treatment was death or near death. This view, turned on Native medicine and healers was examplified in a letter written in 1892 by Mrs. Willard, Christian Missionary who wrote:

It is here….I would speak of the Kling-get (Tlingit) fiend, the medicine man, and beg of those in authority to cause his extermination. His incantations should be held a crime and his uncut hair, his touch of power, should be shaved clean to his head; the whipping post and work under guard on public improvements would be better than a prison….(Dauenhauer, 1980)

These scientific “proofs” continued to assert innate Indian inferiority and establish complete confidence in ultimate Indian disappearance. In fact, scientific racism marched hand in hand with expansionists who at the close of the 19th century had exterminated more than twenty-five million Indian people!

Survivors of this “paradigm” became subject to the emerging cultural anthropological paradigm – at its worse a covert form of scientific racism and at its best, a harbinger of the golden age in Indian policy.

Cultural Anthropology, the Second View
In the birth of ethnography and cultural anthropology (beginning in the last part of the 19th century) the raciology and the evolutionism of scientific racism was repudiated. Boasian scholars such as Swanton, and later, Kroeber, espoused the idea of culture to explain the diversity of lifestyles of humankind. The cultural anthropological school separated biological heredity from the social transmission of culture, challenging previous work in the field.

Using empirical methodology, Boasian scholars stressed the import of replacing evolutionary history of Natives with actual history. They were convinced that tribal change, including alcoholism, happened more as a result of diffusion among tribes from a unilinear sequence of modifications in cultural perceptions and practices presumed by evolutionists.

This shift in thought produced dramatically different research. Radin (1972) wrote:

“the relationship of conquered to conqueror is important to both. Up to the present, all attempts that have been made to understand them, or to come to any reasonable adjustments with them have met with signal failure, and this failure is in most instances due to the scientific accredited theories of the innate inferiority of primitive man…”

Drawing on this earlier thinking, Lemert (1954) studied Haida and other Northwest tribes. His research indicated that alcoholism was not a function of race; that greatest drunkeness occurred when tribes were intensely involved in fur trade. Lemert argued that anomie, interclan rivalry and cultural conservatism were the most appropriate way to view Northwest Native alcoholism.

Lemert’s findings were typical of those in the flowering of cultural anthropology in the 1950’s. From this time forward, any discussion of Native alcoholism would include “culture”. The word “primitive” was no longer used to refer to Alaska Natives; empiricism became the method and major theories of deviance and social control became the philosophical underpinnings of future research.

The Sociocultural Model – A Third View of Native Alcoholism
The activism of American Indians, the Civil Rights Movement and the growth of the human sciences brought national attention and funds to the problem of alcoholism among Native people. The field exploded, producing more studies in a single decade than in the preceding fifty years. (Bates, 1980) More than half the literature continued to be anthropological (Leland, 1970) but the sociocultural model was emerging. This model,

derives from the view…that human behavior is the complex resultant of any interplay of biological and historical factors including interactions among systems that can be distinguished as those of the culture, the society and the individual…” (Berkhofer, 1970)

The contribution of the sociocultural model include: freeing Natives from the “ethnographic present” of anthropological research. No longer were Native people frozen in time. The model led to awareness that the effects of ethanol include social, economic, historical and cultural factors as well as chemical, physical and biological factors. Using history as a methodological tool, socio-cultural theorists have shown how attitudes, values and ways of drinking have changed in various ways and at different rates in many cultures. (Heath, 1980) Finally, this multi-disciplinary approach of the sociocultural model showed a propensity to get within the society being studied, to see history and life from the view of the people being studied.

The application of this science looked different from previous models. Psychiatrists and physicians including Bergman (1971) and Pascarosa (1976) participated in traditional Indian ceremonies and reported that Native science or way of coming to knowledge was efficacious, rigorous and humane. Native alcoholism and health sciences united. Alcoholism was viewed as a medical problem properly treated with technology. Publicly funded community programs struggled to integrate Western and Native healing techniques.

A second significant event that occurred was the emergence of the first generation of college educated Native scientists. This small group used the sociocultural model to talk with non-Native people about Native issues. Their work looked to external forces – historical, economic and political, as causative agents of Indian problems. The work was concerned with continuity, tended to be highly descriptive and combined realistic and spiritual themes.

The New Empiricism, a Fourth Model
Early sociocultural research produced a wealth of descriptive and explanatory studies but few claims were made for scientific rigor (Heath, 1980) and the need for definitive studies pushed empiricism to the fore (Nobel, 1976). The nascent cross-cultural scientific exchange was effectively halted as the study of “Native People” moved toward the harder sciences.

As a result of the new more rigorous and robust scientific empiricism, fundamental issues were raised regarding previous work. First scientists recognized that Native social problems are a complex phenomenon about which little is known; second, data collection and interpretation problems presented manifold problems and finally, the appropriateness of theoretical models was called into question.

“…it is not clear that the disease we call alcoholism is the same in both white and Indian societies or even that there is one unified pathology we call alcoholism. Those indicators, both behavioral and physiological, which have been used to diagnose alcoholism in the White society have been found to be determined in part by sociocultural factors. The behavioral indicators have been most frequently used to diagnose the presence of alcoholism in Indian populations. Since the association between these behaviors and either a physiological predispositions to drink has not been demonstrated, there must be an effort on the part of clinically oriented researchers to observe and measure the causative agents of alcoholism more directly if, in fact, this is possible…” (Nobel, 1976)

Lacking a precise definition or clear understanding of the variety of Native cultures meant that the new empiricism was confounded in its earliest efforts. And the increasing reliance on sophisticated analysis produced a new set of problems:

“There is a growing concern about where quantitative techniques are carrying us…our data manipulation techniques are carrying us…our data manipulation techniques have become increasingly complete mathematically sophisticated and governed by strict assumption, but, paradoxically, our interpretive frameworks which make such data meaningful have grown looser, more open ended, fluid and contingent…there seems to be rather widespread skepticism surrounding the ability of conventional data collection techniques to produce data that do not distort, do violence to, otherwise falsely portray the phenomena such methods seek to reveal…” (Van Mannen, 1979).

Thus, in the early 1980’s alcohol research and the science that guided the research were again in search of a paradigm that would work. Van Mannen observed:

“…there is something of a quiet reconstruction going on in the social sciences…There has come of age that significant realization that the people we study (and often seek to assist) have a form of life, a culture that is their own and if we wish to understand…we must first be able to both appreciate and describe their culture…”

Toward a New Paradigm
The sterility that characterized the findings of much of the “New Empiricism”, triggered a movement back towards holistic and qualitative research in Native alcoholism. Theories of Paulo Freire, South American educator, and research by UNESCO prompted researchers to look at culture in a very different way. Freire observed:

Research is a cultural action, if it has a humanist character, it is eminently dialogical and dialectical. In culture based research, “MEN DO NOT ACT ON OTHER MEN AS OBJECTS”.

Freire concluded that research should not be

“our research on you, but rather a research project in which, together, in dialogue, we will come to know each other better and the reality in which we find ourselves so that we can more effectively transform that reality”.

For the first time scientists began to recognize that Native people have a voice, and by extension, a way of knowing or science. Methodologies and approaches have evolved from this recognition. Popular writer, Milam, typifies the movement towards synthesis. While arguing for medical dominance of the filed he nevertheless recognizes that the “ism” in alcoholism necessarily involves a human or family system not merely the alcoholic. Participatory research, systems theory and family therapy all focus on relationships, development and the strengths of an existing system.

In Canada application of Native science has sparked a fire in Indian alcohol treatment. Tache a small reserve in British Columbia has used its mobile treatment model to move from 100% alcoholism to 95% sobriety. According to Maggie Hogson, Director of Nechi Training Institute, the spark has now jumped over to Alberta and other parts of Canada. The key to this phenomenal success lies in a careful integration of western treatment methodology and Native traditional ways.

These methods complement, native science and offer the possibility of intercultural scientific exchange. Native Alcohol work, usually the unwelcome relative to “harder” science, may draw on its theoretical underpinnings of wholism to assume leadership in the new pardigmatic shift. The firs step is to ask Native People, what is Indian science?


“…This is what Raven did for us…The shelter is the tree…”

Indian science, often understood through the tree, is holistic. Through spiritual processes it synthesizes or gathers information from the mental, physical, social and cultural/historical realms. Like a tree the roots of Native science go deep into the history, body and blood of the land. The tree collects, stores and exchanges energy. It breathes with the winds, which tumble and churn through greenery exquisitely fashioned to purify, codify and imprint life in successive concentric rings – the generations. Why and how the tree does this is a mystery but the Indian observes the tree to emulate, complement and understand his/her relationship to this beautiful, life-enhancing process.

The Meaning of Science
To the Indian, the tree is the first spirit or person on Earth. Indeed, the tree which oxygenated Earth’s atmosphere, is the precursor to our human existence. Because of its antiquity it is a respected Elder but the greatest power of Native Science lies in the reasons behind the trees existence.

When discussing the origins of the tree Chief Donawaak, Tlinget Elder says:

“This is where stories begin, there is no story before this…When Raven spirit and Black Raven are working on this land, they put coves in it where you can come in when it’s blowing – a place where you can come ashore.

My Great Grandfather who told this story to me said – the cove is where you’re going to be safe. If you pass that harbour you’re not going to go very far…you will tip over or drown. But if you come to the cove you will be safe. This is what Raven did for us. The shelter is the tree. You could get under the tree and stay there overnight. All this is what the Raven did…(Colorado, 1985)

From these words we see that Native science has a sacral basis and that its teachings are grounded in the natural world. The Navajo and the Natural World are one; he expresses that unity this way:

The foundation, you have to know your roots, where you are coming from. It is understood that we all come from God, God created us. But you have to understand in your own Indian way, where your roots are. You see a tree that is weak, about to give up. Sometimes you find people like that. Why is that tree just barely making it. Because the roots are not strong. If the roots are solid and strong, then you see the tree is strong and pretty. It can withstand cold, hot weather and winds. The human, has to have those roots because we are growing too. The Great Spirit put us here with nature. We have to understand the nature. That is why we understand how an animal behaves. That is why we have to talk to them. We don’t pray to them, we talk to them because they breathe the same air we do. We are put here with them. We are also a part of the plant life. We are always growing, we have to have strong roots. (Colorado, 1985)

Indeed all of life can be understood from the tree.

…just after the earths crust was formed Raven (the Creator) made the tree. Why did he make this tree? He made it to shelter us. Even before Raven broke light on the World, people took shelter from the tree. And after he broke light, look what your sitting on, what’s above you, it comes from the tree.

And that’s where the Tlingit gets his canoe, his house, his clothes – everything. The Raven put it there for him (the people).

And look, what’s growing under that tree? The grass. In the spring the Bear comes down to eat that grass and the wolf, the moose and the mountain goat. All these things, they come. And the berries, growing there – salal, salmonberry, huckleberry and beneath them, the plants, the medicine. All that, it comes from the tree… (Colorado, 1985)

So the roots and their functions form the basis of Native scientific methodology. Seeking truth and coming to knowledge necessitates studying the cycles, relationships and connections between things. Indeed a law of Native science requires that we look ahead seven generations when making decisions!

Principles of Native Science

Laws and standards govern Native science just as they do western science. In an Indian way, Bear who is the North, represents knowledge, healing and comfort. The Bear is also fierce, his claims are non-negotiable. Western Science understands Bear in terms of rigor, reliability, and validity.

In the spring Bear marks his territory on the tree. Stretching as far as possible, Bear uses his claws to score the tree. Other bears, passing by are challenged to meet this standard. If they cannot reach the mark they leave the territory. For the Native scientist the tree is not merely science but science interwoven inseparably with life. We meet the mark or die. Like the Bear passing through, no one watches us; the science relies on utmost integrity.

Native science assumes its character through power and peace. Vine Deloria (1986) noted Lakota scholar discusses its principles:

Here power and place are dominant concepts–power being the living energy that inhabits and/or composes the universe, and place being the relationship of things to each other…put into a simple equation: Power and place produce personality. This equation simply means that the universe is alive, but it also contains within it the very important suggestion that the universe is personal and, therefore, must be approached in a personal manner…The personal nature of the universe demands that each and every entity in it seek and sustain personal relationships. Here, the Indian theory of relativity is much more comprehensive than the corresponding theory articulated by Einstein and his fellow scientists. The broader Indian idea of relationship, in a universe very personal and particular, suggests that all relationships have a moral content. For that reason, Indian knowledge of the universe was never separated from other sacred knowledge about ultimate spiritual realities. The spiritual aspect of knowledge about the world taught the people that relationships must not be left incomplete. There are many stories about how the world came to be, and the common themes running through them are the completion of relationships and the determination of how this world should function.

Deloria notes that there is no single Native science, each tribe or Nation follows ways specific to a locale. However, the tree and the Bear are nearly universal. From South America to the Arctic, the tree and all that it implies has been guiding and shaping the thought of Native people since the dawn of humanity. Those who follow this natural science do so in search of balance, harmony or peace with all living relations. Iroquois call this SKANAGOAH.

The Goal of Indian Science
Skanagoah, literally interpreted as “great peace”, is the term used to describe the still, electrifying awareness one experiences in the deep woods. This feeling or state of balance is at the heart of the universe and is the spirit of Native science. For the western educated audience, the notion of a tree with spirit is a difficult concept to grasp. The English language classifies reality into animate and inanimate objects, with most things falling into the inanimate classification. Native languages do not make the same distinction. As Deloria says, the universe is alive. Therefore, to see a Native speaking with a tree does not carry the message of mental instability, on the contrary, this is a scientist engaged in research!

Put another way, western thought may accede that all natural things are imbued with energy. Much like the electromotive force in a capacitor, the force of the energy is transmitted without there being a direct flow of energy. If you had a piece of wire, electricity would travel from one end to the other uninterrupted. But if you put a capacitor in the line, the force is transmitted from one side to the other without there being a direct flow of electricity form one side to the other. This is how energy is transferred from tree to tree to tree to person without there being a direct flow of energy. The spiritual energy of a tree isn’t transmitted directly but rather its life force is felt. Like a capacitor, the thickness of the dielectric, the physical distance between the person and the tree, is not important; the exchange still occurs.

This exchange suggest that human beings play a vital part in Skanagoah. Western thought teaches the value of the specialist, especially to the masses who are mostly generalists. In an Indian way, we may think of the Bear as a specialist, indeed, if I compete with the Bear in his own environment and on his terms, there is no way I can match his proficiency. But the generalist, in this case, human beings determine the continuance of Bear’s habitat. We are related, we are all one, life and death, good and bad, we are all one. The Indian acknowledges this and so discovers the most liberating aspect of Native science; LIFE RENEWS and all things which support life are renewable.

The struggle through Native alcoholism has repeatedly brought two peoples together. Let us hope that the fire of sobriety sparked in northern communities, spreads south and our sciences lead the way.

The Bear Has Made His Mark…
Can you Reach It?

18 November 1987 Personal Correspondence on Women, Myth, and Goddesses (PDF)


Ts-itstsinako, Thought Woman

is sitting in her room

and whatever she thinks about


She thought of her sisters,

Nau’ts’ityi and I’tots’ityi

and together they created the Universe

this world

and the four worlds below.

Thought Woman, the spider,

named things and

as she named them

they appeared

She is sitting in her room

thinking of a story now

I am telling you the story

she is thinking.



I will tell you something about stories (she said)

They aren’t just entertainment.

Don’t be fooled.

They are all we have, you see,

all we have to fight off

illness and death.

You don’t have anything

if you don’t have the stories.

Their evil is mighty

But it can’t stand up to our stories.

So they try to destroy the stories

let the stories be confused or forgotten.

They would like that

They would be happy

Because we would be defenseless then

She rubbed her belly

I keep them here (she said)

Here, put your hand on it

See, it is moving.

There is life here

for the people.

And in the belly of this story

the rituals and the ceremony are still growing.

[Leslie Marmon Silko: Ceremony]


Nov. 18, ’87

Dear Pam

In the poem [Ceremony], I changed (He said) to (She said). It makes more sense that way. Silko’s book was quoted by Paula Gunn Allen, and I was checking the source for the purpose of finding some illustrations for my story on Linear/Non-Linear Dynamics.

The “Belly” is Ghii Lii, but I do not know if you would like to use that or not. I am trying to make up some “intellectual model” for those academic snobs who are not enlightened enough to appreciate the sacredness of the Womb, particularly described as “Belly” — of perhaps the Mother who is old enough to tell stories —.

Like we talked about, Stories (Myths) are in the hands of Males nowadays. I think that is why Silko wrote (He said). But, that brings the question of how Women lost the status as the Myth Makers.

I forgot who wrote it in what book, but it is a standard theory in Sociology that Women lost their status when “external relations” (trade, war) invaded tribal communities. It was an almost universal reaction of tribal communities all over the world that the “external relations” were handled by “Warriors” who were, by and large, males. Paula also  says the same as to the “degradation” of women’s status in Native communities which came in contact with “outsiders”.

[There were some exceptions. In the Japanese Myth I sent a copy to you last week, the Goddess Amenouzume was a “diplomat”. Besides, ancient Japan was ruled by an Empress, and even pregnant women went to wars along with men. They were like Amazons, who supposedly lived in Northern Europe, possibly Czechoslovakia. In my father’s country in northern Japan, peasant women used to be the ones who sold and bought things, until 1945 or so. Peasant men in the country were, in general, “reclusive” and did not like to deal with strangers. They talked only when they were drunk, but then they could not count money. “Samurai” Warriors were the complete opposite, which supports the theory in Sociology.]

But, trades and wars were “external”. How did that become “internal”? Why is Myth Making lost?

I am not against the “happy myths” that women make about “A little cozy house with a white picket fence and Sunday strolls to a park with children”. It is a worthwhile Myth and I hope the Myth becomes a reality for every woman. After all, the Socialist Ideal that Rosa Luxemburg fought for, with all her intellect and passion, was for the happiness of all people in that sense. And, in that sense, European Socialist movements had at least a partial success, in terms of a compromise called “Welfare Capitalism”. That is, Rosa’s Myth becomes true, to a degree. It is rather the megalomaniac Utopia of men-socialists, such as that of Stalin, Hitler, and Big Money Men, that brought disasters.

You read Silko’s poem, with a minor substitution of “Myths” for “Stories”. The “Theory” is absolutely correct. When women make up a Myth of the New World, the New World comes. That will be, for sure, the reality sooner or later.

Women, with their “manipulative minds”, can make men do most anything. Men would not know what was happening to them. It was Women — said to have been some 200 of them — who made Jesus do what he did. It was ladies who made Galileo do science, by their show of support in terms of “popularity” and perhaps coy flatteries. Galileo was known to be a lover of wine and women.

The only exception was Newton. Young Newton adored a daughter of a pharmacist in his town. But she did not even look at him. And we all know the dreadful result of that. If Human Race annihilates itself by Nuclear War, I shall blame women for their part in frustrating men, driving them crazy, and making them desperately suicidal. To be sure, however, before men can blame women, women of the world must be given a universal and absolute “Natural Right” to each own “a little cozy house”. You may not have noticed it, but with some 800 Billion Dollars we have been spending on armaments every year, we can do that. (No less than 40 million houses a year. And think about the employment they would create, plus the secondary effects on the economy.) The problem is, of course, the “egg and chicken”. We are in a Vicious Circle — a bad type of Non-Linear Dynamics —.

The only way to get out of the Vicious Circle is Myth Making. I do not go into mathematics here. But the same can be explained in cases like the “high jump”. Athletic coaches would tell you that the first thing one has to do is to make an Image of one jumping high. If you cannot see yourself jumping high, you cannot jump high. That is the most important “pedagogical” secret.

If you can imagine that you are doing it, then you can do it. Whatever the “it” is. If we can see what Indian Reserves look like, then that is what it shall be. We do not have Peace, simply because we do not know what Peace looks like. In dealing with Vicious Circle situations, Imagination, i.e. Myth Making is the most important thing. If we have a “Story”, we can jump. That is why I am “holding a gun to your head” — though I would prefer a better metaphor —.

OK I tell you a story. The story is about a strange man and an author. This strange man used to stand on a bridge over a river in Tokyo. There was a sand bar in the river. This strange man, on a certain weekday, every week, would go there and look at the sand bar. The author also had a habit of taking a walk and passing by the bridge on the same evenings. Eventually, the writer came to know the man and they started to talk. The man was thinking of building a beautiful town on the sand bar. I do not remember the details, but I guess it was something like Utopia. Maybe it was a Woman Town, consisting of “cozy little houses” with flower gardens and parks.

The writer did not believe a single thing this strange man was talking about. It was a crazy dream, nothing more than an “escape from reality”. But nevertheless those two kept meeting and discussed all details of the Town Plan.

Then, like any story of this kind, it came to an end. One evening, the writer came to the bridge, but the strange man was not there. The next week, the writer waited a little longer, but the dreamer did not show up. The next next week, the writer went a little earlier and waited. No show. A month passed. A season passed. A year passed. In the dusk of Tokyo, the writer kept looking at the sand bar in the River Sumida. The Utopia was no longer there. And there the story ended.

I must have been 10 years old or so when I read it. But the sad feeling is still with me. My mother did not even know that I was reading stuffs like that. My teachers, schoolmates, brothers, would not have known what the feeling was like, even if I told the story to them. Only my sister knew that I was reading, but I did not tell her about the story. And that I learned math, physics, Marxism, Christianity, etc., including digging into Bear Shit, has to do with the story too.

I am looking for the imagination lost.

You see I am the writer still looking for the man with the strange imagination. I am not holding a gun at you. I am hanging on to the imagination.

What you are talking about may be a dreaming nonsense. But it is important to me. I expect you to be a Myth Maker. You have to tell me your “Stories”.

If you cannot find words, I supply you tons of words. As long as there is a vision, in a sense of even being a feeling, there will be words for it. If not, we make up words. If you can’t get the picture right, someone will dram it for you. One thing about Myths is that they are communal properties. Don’t try to monopolize the burden like Jesus Christ — even his case was not an egoistic enterprise  as the Bible distorted it to be —. You are not even a Christian.

Back to the “Woman talk”. The difficulty of Ghii Lii is from its Femininity. C. Kerenyi open the chapter on Kore by saying “How can a man know what a woman’s life is?”

[Essays On A Science of Mythology. C.G. Jung, and C. Kerenyi. Princeton U Press 1949. BL313 J83.]

Kore, a Greek goddess, Holy Virgin, The Mother Earth, The Female Spirit of the Universe, is dated some 5,000 B.C. Her name is spelled variously, like “Car”, “Carna”, “Ker”, “Kali” and apparently worshipped all over Indo-European World, including Egypt. The Myth is the oldest, from the time before any Male Gods appeared. But the Kore Myth was destroyed. We only have fragments, and with many distortions. Probably you do not think of this, but to me it was obvious from the beginning that Ghii Lii has to do with the Female Spirit. It was “Water” that led me to it. That led me to Paula’s books, etc.

Now I have a hell of a problem. How can a man know what a woman’s life is?

It is one thing to talk of a “different culture” in terms of, say, male anthropologists interrogating male informers. As long as “Culture” is defined by Males, there is a hope in understanding. But what I am facing is something else. I try “Geometry/Field” — because that is the only thing I know —. Hopefully there is some Female Principle in Geometry/Field, enough to get to Ghii Lii. But that is tough going.

At any rate, let us see what we can get out of this mess. Like I said, Levi-Strauss could not do it. So if we fail, there is nothing to be ashamed of (in and intellectual sense). But, for the sake of the life of people under oppression, I hope someone will find a way. I remind you that many people pampered you (a pun intended), because you hold a key. In a sense, we are “mouse woman” to you as the “bad tempered, flighty, headstrong girl” in the “Bear Shit” story narrated by Bill Reid. If and when she become the noble Bear Mother is an open question at the moment.



P.S. In summer 1988, I am offering Physics 2020 “Physics And Society”. I will be talking of the Role of Scientists in the Nuclear Arms Race/Destruction of the World. Would you kindly consider talking about Native Science in the course? The summer course will likely be offered in July (in the second session). However, if we do not get enough enrollment, it will be withdrawn.

American Indian Science (PDF)

American Indian Science

Pamela Colorado, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor

University of Calgary

Faculty of Social Welfare

Paper presented to 46th Congress of the Americanists

Amsterdam, Holland. July 4 – 8, 1988



Until the present time, we have had to stretch Western science so far that knowledge about Indian culture seems unreal. Research has been perceived and presented as monocultural, thus not accepted by the Indian community. All peoples including Native Americans have science or a way of coming to knowledge; each tribe has its specific methods, but for the purposes of introducing the concept of Native science, we will deal in generalization about “Native” metaphysics.

Reflecting on the implications of “sciences”, it is clear that a bicultural research model recognizing both Indian science and Western science needs to emerge. Newly evolved Western research methods such as ethnographic research, content/issue analysis, and the framework of Participatory Research can be drawn upon to complement or meet Indian science and culture.

Traditional Indian science must be articulated in contemporary terms to permit scholarly exchange growth and to empower Indian people in the scientific arena. further, an integration of Western and Indian ways of thinking must occur if we are to develop research strategies and outcomes which are acceptable and respected by both cultures. (“Integration” refers to a blending of research findings, not the domination or extension of ideological control by one culture’s science).

A bi-cultural research model must be both valid and reliable; strengthen traditional Indian science and enhance cross-cultural communication and understanding, and simultaneously promote the growth of both sciences. This paper will present an epistemological foundation of Indian science and will explore the possibility of creating a scientific, intercultural, infrastructure.