Visions of Transmodernity: Difference between revisions

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search
unknown (talk)
No edit summary
unknown (talk)
No edit summary
Line 27: Line 27:
concept as a medium to convey humanity's unified synchronicity, which is part of a
concept as a medium to convey humanity's unified synchronicity, which is part of a
transformation that can be claimed to be 'the new renaissance' of human history."
transformation that can be claimed to be 'the new renaissance' of human history."
(http://www.integral-review.org/issues/vol_9_no_2_ateljevic_visions_of_transmodernity.pdf?)
(http://www.integral-review.org/issues/vol_9_no_2_ateljevic_visions_of_transmodernity.pdf?)


[[Category:Articles]]
 
[[Category:P2P Cycles]]
=Excerpts=
[[Category:P2P Theory]]
 
[[Category:Movements]]
==The [[Transmodernity Paradigm of M.L. Ghisi]]==
 
Irena Ateljevic:
 
"The concept of transmodernity is a very complex thesis which Ghisi (1999, 2006, 2008) primarily explains as a new paradigm of the world which communicates certain underlying values that humans rely on to make their judgments and decisions in all areas of their activities — economy, politics and everyday life.
 
Ghisi begins his thesis with an overview of '''five levels''' of change, which he describes through an iceberg metaphor of human global (un)consciousness and (un)awareness. Like the submerged parts of an iceberg floating in the sea, Ghisi’s lower levels of societal change are the least visible to humanity.
 
* So, the first level is at the darkest and coldest bottom where our global civilization finds itself today, at the edge of unsustainability and what Ghisi describes as the slow death and collective suicide of humanity.
 
* The next higher level relates to the death of command, control and conquest patriarchal values which have turned the world into a competitive and territorial battleground.
 
* Level three refers to the death of modernity as a dominant paradigm through which we see the world as an objective reality rooted in impartial truth.
 
* Level four refers to the death of the industrial type of businesses and decline of the material economy,
 
* while level five concerns the overall crisis of overly bureaucratic and pyramidal institutions.
 
 
While such critical deconstruction of Eurocentric thesis of modernity (based around key mantras of growth, progress and competition) is nothing new and has been very much part of the postmodern critical turn in social science and humanities since late 1980s, Ghisi continues to explain, a transmodern way of thinking is now emerging, as our hope for a desperately needed and newly reconstructed vision. It is claimed that the everything goes of the postmodernists needs to go silenced. Whether they like it or not, there are things that have to have value, there is meaning that must be preserved, otherwise we drown in the coarsest cynicism, an expression of deep disdain for life (Boff, 2009). After the endless postmodern (albeit necessary) deconstructions of modernity in which many intellectuals engaged for the last few decades have led us to eclectic relativity and fundamentalisms that in many ways has paralysed us to claim any possible way forward.
 
 
The postmodern rubble in which we have found ourselves is quite neatly captured by Rifkin (2005):
 
- ''If post-modernists razed the ideological walls of modernity and freed the prisoners, they left them with no particular place to go. We became existential nomads, wandering through a boundaryless world full of inchoate longings in a desperate search for something to be attached to and believe in. While the human spirit was freed up from old categories of thought, we are each forced to find our own paths in a chaotic and fragmented world that is even more dangerous than the all-encompassing one we left behind''. (p. 5).
 
According to Ghisi then, the very concept of transmodern implies that the best of modernity is kept while at the same time we go beyond it. As such, it is not a linear projection which takes us from (pre)modernity via postmodernity to transmodernity; rather, it transcends modernity in that it takes us trans, i.e. through, modernity into another state of being, “from the edge of chaos into a new order of society” (Sardar, 2004, p. 2)."
 
(https://integral-review.org/issues/vol_9_no_2_ateljevic_visions_of_transmodernity.pdf)
 
 
 
==The [[Transmodern Dialectic Triad of R.M.R. Magda]]==
 
Irena Ateljevic:
 
"Magda ... uses Hegelian logic whereby Modernity, Postmodernity and Transmodernity form a dialectic triad that completes a process of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. As expressed in her own words: “the third tends to preserve the defining impetus of the first yet is devoid of its underlying base: by integrating its negation the third moment reaches a type of specular closure” (Magda, 1989, p. 13). In other words, '''transmodernity is critical of modernity and postmodernity while at the same time drawing elements from each'''. ''In a way it is a return to some form of absolute logic that goes beyond the Western ideology and tries to connect the human race to a new shared story, which can be called a global relational consciousness'' (Rifkin, 2005). "
 
(https://integral-review.org/issues/vol_9_no_2_ateljevic_visions_of_transmodernity.pdf)
 
 
=More information=
 
* [[Ghisi’s and Dussel’s Positions on Transmodernity Compared]]


[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Revision as of 05:35, 21 October 2022

* Article: Visions of Transmodernity: A New Renaissance of our Human History? By Irena Ateljevic.

URL = http://www.integral-review.org/issues/vol_9_no_2_ateljevic_visions_of_transmodernity.pdf?


Abstract

"In this paper I will engage with a broad range of literature that provides us with many signals and evidence of an emerging and significant paradigm shift in human evolution. In doing so, I will offer the concept of transmodernity as an umbrella term that connotes the emerging socio-cultural, economic, political and philosophical shift. My research across boundaries of many different fields such as critical economics, philosophy, subaltern and postcolonial studies, social anthropology and psychology, cultural studies, political science and social activism literature will illustrate how an integrated approach and dialogue is urgently needed, indeed more than ever before. Different authors use a variety of terms to capture what can essentially be described as the synchronised phenomenon of emerging higher collective consciousness— transmodernity paradigm (Ghisi); transmodern philosophy of political liberation (Dussel); Hegelian dialectical triad of thesis, antithesis and synthesis (Magda); the reflective/livingsystems paradigm (Elgin); the partnership model of caring economics (Eisler); the relational global consciousness of biosphere politics (Rifkin); love ethics (hooks); the circularity paradigm of interdependence (Steinem). With a reference to a variety of authors I will argue that the reason we do not hear much about this movement is because it is not centralised and coordinated under a single unifying name. 'Transmodernity' ropes together many concepts/tenets of other writings that do not necessarily use the same term, but I chose it in order to communicate the overall idea of the emerging paradigm shift as the next cultural and material development in human history. I have opted to use the concept as a medium to convey humanity's unified synchronicity, which is part of a transformation that can be claimed to be 'the new renaissance' of human history."

(http://www.integral-review.org/issues/vol_9_no_2_ateljevic_visions_of_transmodernity.pdf?)


Excerpts

The Transmodernity Paradigm of M.L. Ghisi

Irena Ateljevic:

"The concept of transmodernity is a very complex thesis which Ghisi (1999, 2006, 2008) primarily explains as a new paradigm of the world which communicates certain underlying values that humans rely on to make their judgments and decisions in all areas of their activities — economy, politics and everyday life.

Ghisi begins his thesis with an overview of five levels of change, which he describes through an iceberg metaphor of human global (un)consciousness and (un)awareness. Like the submerged parts of an iceberg floating in the sea, Ghisi’s lower levels of societal change are the least visible to humanity.

  • So, the first level is at the darkest and coldest bottom where our global civilization finds itself today, at the edge of unsustainability and what Ghisi describes as the slow death and collective suicide of humanity.
  • The next higher level relates to the death of command, control and conquest patriarchal values which have turned the world into a competitive and territorial battleground.
  • Level three refers to the death of modernity as a dominant paradigm through which we see the world as an objective reality rooted in impartial truth.
  • Level four refers to the death of the industrial type of businesses and decline of the material economy,
  • while level five concerns the overall crisis of overly bureaucratic and pyramidal institutions.


While such critical deconstruction of Eurocentric thesis of modernity (based around key mantras of growth, progress and competition) is nothing new and has been very much part of the postmodern critical turn in social science and humanities since late 1980s, Ghisi continues to explain, a transmodern way of thinking is now emerging, as our hope for a desperately needed and newly reconstructed vision. It is claimed that the everything goes of the postmodernists needs to go silenced. Whether they like it or not, there are things that have to have value, there is meaning that must be preserved, otherwise we drown in the coarsest cynicism, an expression of deep disdain for life (Boff, 2009). After the endless postmodern (albeit necessary) deconstructions of modernity in which many intellectuals engaged for the last few decades have led us to eclectic relativity and fundamentalisms that in many ways has paralysed us to claim any possible way forward.


The postmodern rubble in which we have found ourselves is quite neatly captured by Rifkin (2005):

- If post-modernists razed the ideological walls of modernity and freed the prisoners, they left them with no particular place to go. We became existential nomads, wandering through a boundaryless world full of inchoate longings in a desperate search for something to be attached to and believe in. While the human spirit was freed up from old categories of thought, we are each forced to find our own paths in a chaotic and fragmented world that is even more dangerous than the all-encompassing one we left behind. (p. 5).

According to Ghisi then, the very concept of transmodern implies that the best of modernity is kept while at the same time we go beyond it. As such, it is not a linear projection which takes us from (pre)modernity via postmodernity to transmodernity; rather, it transcends modernity in that it takes us trans, i.e. through, modernity into another state of being, “from the edge of chaos into a new order of society” (Sardar, 2004, p. 2)."

(https://integral-review.org/issues/vol_9_no_2_ateljevic_visions_of_transmodernity.pdf)


The Transmodern Dialectic Triad of R.M.R. Magda

Irena Ateljevic:

"Magda ... uses Hegelian logic whereby Modernity, Postmodernity and Transmodernity form a dialectic triad that completes a process of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. As expressed in her own words: “the third tends to preserve the defining impetus of the first yet is devoid of its underlying base: by integrating its negation the third moment reaches a type of specular closure” (Magda, 1989, p. 13). In other words, transmodernity is critical of modernity and postmodernity while at the same time drawing elements from each. In a way it is a return to some form of absolute logic that goes beyond the Western ideology and tries to connect the human race to a new shared story, which can be called a global relational consciousness (Rifkin, 2005). "

(https://integral-review.org/issues/vol_9_no_2_ateljevic_visions_of_transmodernity.pdf)


More information