Managing global processes

When one studies the philosophy of process, one must keep in mind several points.

Dr Michael Asciak MD M.Phil PhD michael.asciak@parlament.mt

The first point is that, below God, nothing is static and everything is dynamic. Having said that, God is infinite and eternal and each day we can learn new things about Him that we might not have grasped in the past.

So, in that sense also, God changes in our understanding of him although not in essence. Our minds are too small to ever comprehend His totality. Everything is continually changing and if we fail to grasp this point we can set ourselves up for a rude wake-up call.

People versed in science can grasp these changes more quickly than those who study other subjects because they deal with ontic, physical realities, not concepts. The changes are often very slow, sometimes too slow to notice, but – like the passing minutes of the day – change is there and the day passes into the next.

The second point is that, like biological evolution, if we fail to change with the times we set ourselves and our ideas up for extinction.

Those who hang on to the past face certain oblivion. This is not to say that the past is ever extinguished completely, but new things have to be continually grafted onto the past to continue to make it viable. There are several masters of process philosophy: Etienne Gilson, Samuel Alexander and, of course, the one with whose work I am most acquainted, Alfred North Whitehead.

Whitehead’s philosophy of process clearly has its own sets of neologisms but essentially a core ontic principle remains unchanged, as part of an overlying process of new graft is added. For example, we are all, each one of us, the ontic principle that is ever-present in the changing ravages of the different time-frames we inhabit.

We ourselves are ever changing, too; the ontic body I have today is not the body I had 40 years ago, all those cells are long dead and new cells have formed. However, there is in ontic change something that is unchangeable, which unites the present with the past and the future with the present. In our body, this can be seen as the DNA we possess, which is unchangeable and, metaphysically, it is also our active potency principle which, however, I cannot describe as ontic as it lies outside the disciplines of physical science and is a metaphysical process.

The globalised world around us is a new phenomenon which has happened very quickly over the last 70 years. It has always been happening, but now it is happening much faster. There is a process of ontic integration and change that is happening very quickly with people and cultures, aided by the IT revolution.

Some individuals state that this change is ethically neutral, notwithstanding the friction it

creates among cultures and in contrast to established international processes. Come what may, it is a process that cannot be stopped and has to be embraced and managed carefully as one manages the high level of immigration that comes with it. It cannot be stopped! Not all the Trumps, Boris Johnsons, Le Pens or Salvinis put together can ever stop this process and put Humpty Dumpty together again. Globalisation, like diabetes mellitus, can only be managed! Immigration cannot be stopped. It can, however, be managed and managing it effectively allows us to continue on our way without major hiccups.

If you manage diabetes, your body effectively moves on; if you do not, your body effectively closes down very quickly. Up until now, we cannot stop diabetes happening. We cannot stop globalisation processes!

I am not one of those who think that globalisation is an ethically neutral process. I have read, very attentively, the multiple works of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and Bernard Lonergan. It is obvious that from their religious Catholic foundations – they are both Jesuit religious – they could gain insight into a process that is occurring ontically, sociologically and culturally. Chardin’s concept of ascending consciousness, which began ontically through physical evolution, is now moving to society and culture, with the ultimate aim of fostering a closer union and understanding among peoples until this in turn fosters and is pointed to an ultimate meeting with God, the Omega Point.

In short, globalisation could be a tool in God’s hands and, if it is coming from God, we will not be able to stop it no matter how insecure we might feel and no matter how hard we hang on to

“

We need to find common ground between peoples that can easily be built on respect and a common ecology - both human and environmental

the symbols of the past as many populist political parties do! Any success is short-lived. The better option is to embrace it.

I am one of those who believes that the right approach to balancing immigration is by continuing to be humane and to grant political asylum to those who request it while humanely refusing citizenship to those who move about for simple financial advantage or through mafia circles. However, in both cases, the emphasis has to be on our humane approach, and letting people – including children – drown at sea, is not one of them.

Neither am I one of those people who believe that immigration of the refugee kind will rob us of our religion or culture. I am not intimidated by Hindus, Buddhists, Jews or Muslims, and I can use the Christian roots I have to dialogue and learn from other cultures as they can learn from me. The call for apostolate has never been stronger or more available, not necessarily only as an opportunity for conversion but also for understanding each other better. There is, after all, a common humanity, a common human ecology and anthropology, a common natural law!

Politically, we need to adjourn our structures accordingly. We need to move away from the gut insecurity and groping for the past typical of the populists, towards the reconciling attitudes of a popular approach of reconciling humanity in all its forms and variations: a popular politics that allows the reconciling of differences beyond strict religious and nationalist interpretations.

Not all that is immoral should be illegal, said one Cardinal Ratzinger in one of his more widely-read publications. We need to find common ground between peoples that can easily be built on respect and a common ecology – both human and environmental. We need each other and have to build a common solidarity between ourselves and other peoples and nations.

‘Solidarity’ is not a word you hear often enough today. We need to remove the narrow interpretations and cultural superiority complexes which we might have and which are usually inferiority complexes in disguise. We need to let go of the dead symbols of the past and look ahead at a multicultural, multilateral dimension of humanity away from the unilateral approach we see in some contemporary political trends, and build one based on the common principles of an ecological humanism binding humanity together.

Time will not stop, neither will people and information, just because we tell it to or refuse to go along. Evolution has showed us that refusal to change is conducive to certain death and that is as much a principal of metaphysics as it is one of ontic realities.