https://cobb.institute/event/process-thought-at-a-new-threshold/
John Cobb invites the process movement to reflect on the possibility that we are at a new threshold. Maybe, at last, the thinking we have done about creative transformation and ecological civilization will capture the imagination of millions and make a real contribution to radical change of collective behavior. At this gathering we will consider how we can work together to respond to the call to save the world. It’s worth trying.
Conference Schedule
Process Thought at a New Threshold
October 31, 9:00 AM – 12:00 PM
9:00: Welcome and Opening Remarks: John Cobb
How has the work of the process community expanded since 2015?
9:10: Center for Process Studies: Andrew Schwartz
9:15: Pando Populus: Eugene Shirley
9:20: Institute for Ecological Civilization: Philip Clayton
9:25: Cobb Institute: John Fahey
What is happening that suggests greater openness to process ideas?
9:30: Philosophy: Dan Dombrowski
9:40: Christian Theology: Thomas Oord
9:50: Spiritual But Not Religious: Damian Geddry
10:00: Interfaith, Arts, and Spirituality: Jay McDaniel
10:10: Science: Matthew Segall
10:20: BREAK
10:30: Education: Richard Rose
10:40: Economics: Mark Anielski
10:50: Agriculture: Sung Sohn
11:00: Mass Media: Philip Clayton
11:10: Younger Generation: Kathleen Jacobson Reeves
How can we respond effectively to the new openness?
11:20: Small Group Discussions
Led by Pat Beiting, Ignacio Castuera, Louis Chase, Kathleen
Jacobson Reeves, Lynne de Jonge, Carol Johnston, Elaine
Padilla, Richard Rose, Jeanyne Slettom, and Bonnie Tarwater
* * * * * * * * *
Conference Notes
Process Thought at a New Threshold
Healing people ponder things deeply
12:00 Late Start. Equipment Malfunction re Group Zoom Mtg.
Attendance - 100
12:08 Welcome and Opening Remarks by John Cobb
David Griffin remarked of the 21st Century that it would be the "Process Century" or
"Whitehead Century" begun in Russia (1970s), China (1990s), America + the World (2015).
How has the work of the Process community expanded since 2015?
12:13 Andrew Schwartz, Center for Process Studies (1973)
Observed: Modernism = Mechanistic & Reductionistic Philosophies, Industries, Societies
Postmodernism = An Intersection of Change led by Process Thought
12:19 Eugene Shirley, Chief Sustainability Engineer of Pando Populus, Los Angeles County
Networks with municipalities and mid-central California counties.
Central Focus: Creation of the "Hyper-Locality" of Ecological Sustainability
Connected to Cal Tech University; is part of ist CSO Task Force Business to Community
Chief Concern: Sustainability + Justice Models + Social Services
12:23 Philip Clayton, Institute for Ecological Civilization (ECI)
Core Belief: Growing Ecological Societies which are Post-Capitalism + Post-Socialism
Crucial to this belief: Promoting long term wellbeing for people and planet
Book: The New Possible, by Philip Clayton
Process: Hope ---> Societal Impact ---> Build Networks of Collaboration
No time to answer the questions:
> What does Process mean?
> Why does Process matter?
12:29 John Fahey, The Cobb Institute
Process & Practice: Process Thought vs. Mechanistic/Reductionistic Mindset
Interest: Creation of Local, Compassionate, Sustainable Communities
Recommended Video: Cobb Institute - PostModern Development in China
What is happening that suggests greater openness to process ideas?
12:38 Dan Dombrowski - Philosophy
Process Philosophy speaks from everything from relationships to metaphysics
to cosmology to minority voices
Process Philosophy is being incorporated into:
- Analytical philosophies
- Continental philosophies
- PanPsychism groups
- Comparative Religions globally
- Metaphysics, Ontology, Epistemology
- Physical and Social Sciences
- History, Arts, and Literature
- Environmental philosophies
- Ethics, economic, and Political philosophies
- Social Justice, Equality, Race, Gender, etc
12:46 Thomas Jay Oord, Christian Theologian and Author
Prominent theologian of Process-based Open & Relational Theology
Author of recently popular published title: God Can't
Audience: 20-40 year olds; Ex-Evangelicals; Pentacostalists; Catholics;
Ex-Fundamentalists; Nones & Dones; Spiritual but not Religious;
the Disillusioned and Deconstructing of the world
Central Theme: God's love cannot stop a world of sin without overruling
creaturely freewill; God can, and will, do everything possible to partner
and influence a freewill creation but cannot exercise His own divine
agency over that of creation. This is known as the problem of evil and
justice (known theologically as the problem of theodicy
Person of Note: Tripp Fuller who has been speaking on podcasts the last 12 years
Open & Relational Theology
Cross-sects with evangelical open theism, Wesleyanism, feminism, et al
The ORT perspective is gaining a voice in evangelical churches
Analytical Philosophy and Theology is becoming more open to ORT and
Process Theology, Process Panpsychism, Process Evolution, etc.
The Organization, Center for Open & Relational Theology, is visited and
used by Christians, Muslims, Jews, even Atheists re pros and cons
12:56 Damian Geddry, Spiritual but not Religious
The Spiritual but not Religious category is another phrase for the "Nones
and Dones" of the Christian Church (approx 25% of the United States)
The SBNR category rejects a persecuting, judgmental, condemning God
Many are from hardline denominations and fundament bible churches
They reject a God who has fated us with our future
Of a god who uses evil and suffering to harm/direct/rule the world
They may be considered mindful souls, contemplatives, emphasizing
soul-cycles, body-soul spiritual healing new age methods, TM,
meditative yoga, meditative nature soul healing, etc
They are very open to a God who is relational, natural, interactional, etc
They see a responsible freewill as a center to future societal interaction
They value beauty, truth, art, peace, meaning, purpose, suffering, evil
They see God and mankind and nature as interactive processes together in life
1:04 Jay McDaniel, Interfaith, Arts, and Spirituality
Mentions a book, "The New Openess" re Process Theology
Mentions Bob Measle re "What is Process?" which approaches Process
theology from a non-theistic, spiritually engaged perspective
States that Process Theology is not limited to Christianity alone but is
a universal process found throughout the world, its disciplines, and
livelihoods.
As examples, mentions art and music (sic, Miley Cyrus), film makers, etc
1:14 Matthew Segall, Science
Shares how science and the bible, cosmology and metaphysics have become
fragmented from one another and how Process Philosophy aka Whitehead
is helping to heal the rifts
Shares how Process Thought speaks to the rhythms of nature, to human
civilization with one another
How Process Thought is an Integral Theory of Everything that has gone on
before and will go on into the future. That Process is found in all the
complex interlinks, expressions, and relationships as a holistic cosmic
network spun out from the heart of God as a building block of becoming,
being, and purpose.
That the universe is not a giant entropy system, clock, or computer, running
like a Newtonian mechanistic and reductionistic machine. But that it is
living, chaotic, random, and being driven by its own internal process
affairs imaged in the Creator and struggling to come to fruition.
That Whitehead envisaged holism, comprehensive process cosmology and
metaphysics this is always novel, unique, and never alone in its vast
matrix array of relational connections unlike how the 19th, 20th, and
even early 21st century philosophers, scientists, and theologians thought
of the cosmos/world/nature/humanity/civilization/society/etc
That cosmology is a world view and branches its networks in complex
arrays of living, dying, propagating forms of new process networks
moment-by-moment everywhere and at once.
That physics is re-envisioning quantum physics as a process-based event
becoming described as a Process Cosmology (David Bowne) where
time-and-space is even being envisioned as extensions and intensions
of conscreascing time event (where time's identity is not in the particle
or wave, but in its relationship to other relationships; that time cannot
exist alone. That it must have interaction if it is to be).
Bruce Dayman (sp?) and David Deimer (sp?) are using Process Biology
as a way to describe the "Biogenesis" of first originating earth life
not through the salt water seas but around the surface geysers of earth's
freshwater pools. That evolutionary life can best be described as a
series of every growing complex relationships between "being and event".
BREAK
1:30 Richard Rose, Education
1:40 Mark Anielski, Economics
1:50 Sung Sohn, Agriculture
2:00 Philip Clayton, Mass Media
2:10 Kathleen Jacobson Reeves, Focus of Younger Generations
BREAK
SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS
* * * * * * * * *
First Letter by John Cobb Conference Invitation
PROCESS THOUGHT AT A NEW THRESHOLD
Date: October 31, 2020
Time: 9 am to 12 noon
ZOOM Meeting
An Invitation from John Cobb
In the forties and fifties, the neonaturalist faculty in the Divinity School of the University of Chicago provided a community in which a process understanding was nurtured. By the sixties, the Divinity School joined the mainstream, and the academic disciplines tightened their control of university curricula. There seemed to be no future for the study of Whitehead.
In the avoidance of disappearance there have been two thresholds. The first was institutional. We established a journal (1970) so that scholarly discussion could continue. And we established an official Center for Process Studies (1973). The journal, edited by Lewis Ford, emphasized philosophy and philosophical theology. The Center, co-founded by David Griffin and me, focused on important topics from the process perspective. It cultivated an interest in process thought in many fields.
All of this was extremely marginal in every field. Nevertheless, it created a unique community, directly contrary to the disciplinary fragmentation of the university. Whereas the university disciplines prided themselves on their academic purity, the process community had, as its primary concern, “saving the world.” It adopted from China the term “ecological civilization” to name the alternative (saved) world for which Whitehead’s thought called. It included philosophy and theology, but its greatest success was in officially atheistic China.
By 2015, I thought we could reasonably claim to have an alternative to the university. We held a conference showing that on 80 topics process thinkers were working at the cutting edge, dealing with their assumptions. I thought we could also show that what we offered was urgently needed for practical purposes as well as theoretical.
In the following five years, the urgency of change became more widely manifest. Society needed to move away from the value free compartmentalized academic disciplines to a passionately committed holistic vision of the world we need to create. This could happen only with the change of key assumptions offered by process philosophy. Our conference had shown we were ready to help, but the number (outside of China) who cared enough to look were in the thousands.
Nevertheless, we made real progress toward a public role. Process organizations began working with cities, counties, and even states. Locally they gained public visibility and their contributions have been appreciated. But in the national public arena, we remained largely invisible and unheard. Despite our still marginal status, can we help? Can we reach millions? That possibility may be emerging as the global crisis forces itself on the world’s attention. Many of us feel that the cultural climate is changing
dramatically, and that many more people are ready to hear what we have to offer if we find ways of getting the ideas to them. This is the threshold that we now may have the opportunity to cross.
Our chances of crossing may be increased if many of us working in different fields and in diverse ways work together as one community to make the needed changes. That is why I have planned with the heads of major American process organizations a mini conference to help us shift our thinking and perhaps our priorities in ways that increase chances of success. First, we will hear from leaders of four process organizations. What have they achieved in the last five years? In my view, quite a lot. I think we have become ready for “the big time.” Is “the big time” ready for us? We will hear from astute observers in ten fields whether the time for process thought has come.
We’ll begin with philosophy. In recent years it has certainly improved on the European continent. In the non-academic community of thinkers, it has improved in the United States. Even the American philosophical guilds are more open to ideas important to process thought. Can we hope for a major breakthrough in the U.S.?
I propose that we hear about the thinking of church people, and here I consider the success of Tom Oord’s “God Can’t” as a real breakthrough. We also need to hear from those with spiritual interests separate from the Christian churches. Finally, among liberal religious thinkers who are interested in interfaith, political, and cultural matters, Jay McDaniel will tell us where process thought stands.
The physical sciences have an immense influence on our world view. They contribute especially to cosmology. Whitehead thought the time had come for a changed science and cosmology. The scientific guilds have not changed, but their limitations have become more apparent. Might they shift from substances to events? Is there anything the process community can do to increase the chances of change? Matthew Segall will share his expectations.
The survival of whole populations depends on the products of agriculture. The modernization of agriculture has been a catastrophe. Awareness of the destructiveness of factory farming and raising animals for meat has increased. Interest in regenerative farming has increased. Process thought can undergird this interest philosophically. Has the time come to show the importance of how we think for what we eat?
Most Americans are not, today, enthusiastic about the American or the global economy. Some of them recognize that the problems are partly rooted in the dominant economic theories. Although academic economics still largely supports the current neoliberal economy, that concentrates wealth in fewer and fewer hands, there is much greater openness to call for changes that were barely discussable in the past. Can we hope for an economics that strengthens local communities?
Our minds are largely shaped by our many years in schools. Schooling has been shaped by modern beliefs such as the Kantian separation of facts and values. Dissatisfaction with the results increases. Is there a chance for a different kind of education oriented to the needs of students and of the world?
For generations young people have known that collective human behavior has been unsustainable. But more important for them has been doing well in the present context. The present young adult generation seems to be aware that it is their future that is at stake. Their commitment to change seems deeply rooted. Can process thinkers form an alliance with this community of shared concern?
We will conclude by considering quite directly the question of access to the determinative media. Even if there is change, those who control the media may contain by excluding it from widespread knowledge. Might process thought circumvent this in some way? The news that Philip Clayton’s ECI had partnered with a major organization gives promise that the idea, and eve the content, of ecological civilization may get a wide public hearing. If the news is good on many of these fronts, we have the opportunity and the responsibility to find new ways to spread the word. To conclude the conference, we will break up into smaller groups to start the conversation about how in any and all these fields to reach a much larger audience. The goal is to arouse enough people that politicians will pay attention. In conclusion, I will mention three possible projects that might help us reach more people.
We might form alliances with other organizations that are already contributing to that goal in ways we are not. This could make clear that ecological civilization is an inclusive vision of the world we need. It would certainly not be racist or sexist, but other organizations are doing much more on those fronts than are we. We think all humans should have rights, but we may be critical of the excessively individualist emphasis. Is there an organization working for individual rights that recognizes the importance of community? We certainly favor peace, and we can probably find a peace organization that is very congenial to our understanding of ecological civilization.
I have been thinking for some time about a website that invited wide participation in proposing how ecological civilization would differ from modernity: a kind of Wikipedia of ecological civilization.
Universities may be in a vulnerable situation and willing to consider a change in curriculum. Some of them may consider that the global crisis is so serious that they should allow it to affect what they teach and the way they teach it. There have been encouraging developments at Willamette and LaVerne. We might work together to persuade other universities to experiment. We think there are students who would be attracted to a university that was working to save the world and to prepare students to take part.
Our meeting will be on Saturday, October 31, from 9 to 12. Please join us. We are called to do what we can to save the world. Maybe, at last, the thinking we have done about this will capture the imagination of millions and make a real contribution to radical change of collective behavior. It’s worth trying.
- John Cobb
* * * * * * * * *
Second Letter from John Cobb Conference
PROCESS THOUGHT AT A NEW THRESHOLD
Date: October 31, 2020
Time: 9 am to 12 noon
ZOOM Meeting
An Invitation from John Cobb
Dear Fellow Members of the Process Movement,
I hope that you have all received and read my earlier letter about a conference on preparing ourselves to respond to a new openness to process ideas and especially the idea of ecological civilization. I hope that many of you have reserved the time, October 31, 2020, from 9am to 12pm. I am writing now with a few more details about the program, and am attaching a schedule.
The purpose is to get many of us thinking about how to get the attention of a much wider public, and to communicate the most relevant and urgent ideas to it. I speak of urgency because of my judgment that the time that changing policies will help very much is short. I encourage you to listen to Pope Francis’ recent Ted talk. I am very grateful that, under the rubric of “integral ecology,” he shares our concern for transforming society and our sense of urgency. What is most hopeful is that he already addresses the people of the world.
We are experiencing a mild foretaste of an ever-worsening future unless there are profound changes. The process community has been reflecting about the needed changes longer than any other. We believe that, if we are heard, we can help, and there may be a real chance of being heard. Philip Clayton has co-edited an important new book called The New Possible, a title that would have worked for this conference. Zack Walsh told us in our weekly gathering with friends of the Institute that his colleagues in Silicon Valley are influenced by process-relational thinking and know that we must shift in that direction. But unless we use the new opportunity wisely, the door will slam shut. Hence, the urgency!
The most important part of the conference will be the breakout groups at the end. We hope they will begin the conversation about what we need to do, and that all of us will continue that conversation and find ways to implement our creative ideas. One realistic topic for discussion is whether the process community should seek to work together or any one project.
Actually, the conversation is already beginning. Andrew Schwartz wrote me that a correspondent made the point that to influence most people in any topic in which they are not specialists, the point must be made in a single step. Speaking for myself, I find that hard. Process thinking believes that everything is connected and that, therefore, all adequate explanations are complex. But Andrew is right that we must learn how to make crucial points simply and well.
For example, a crucial need is to shift from a global economy to local ones. I have been making that point since the eighties, but I have made it as part of complex proposals for reorganizing society. Recently the idea of a local economy has caught on. The leader of this very promising movement is Helena NorbertHodge.
The way she promotes it, as in the excellent film, “The Economics of Happiness,” leaves many questions unanswered. But in its simple presentation, it is having an influence on the way cities think of their economy. Of course, actual efforts to localize will bring many issues to the foreground, and we may be able to help. But simplifying is required in order to get cities to ask those questions. I must learn new skills, and I do not think I am alone, especially among academics. We have ten people who have agreed to lead or facilitate discussion after the presentations. In my previous letter I briefly described some possible projects. The purpose of including this was to stimulate imagination, not to gain priority for these proposals. Please begin thinking now. Then come and get a clearer idea of what we are already doing and what the openings seem to be in diverse fields. Be prepared to think boldly, as if life depends on you. Perhaps it does.
- John B. Cobb, Jr.
