Ref. :  000029101
Date :  2008-03-28
Language :  English
Home Page / The whole website
fr / es / de / po / en

10 Thesis about the present meaning and orientation of Global research

Against the unending sleep of “obviousness”


(This paper, written following a friendly request from Professor Endre Kiss, is conceived as a short contribution to the ENG conference to be held in Fürstenfeld on 28th and 29th March 2008)


Introduction

In 2008, as in 1999 (the Seattle WTO’s meeting moment), what we have used to call “Globalisation” — following Bill Clinton, Mikhaïl Gorbachev, Arjun Appadurai or Joseph Stiglitz — remains an extraordinarily complex, multi-faceted and confusing issue. The profit and loss account of economic Globalisation stays fiercely debated by “pro” and “anti”. The major social, cultural, environmental, epidemiologic and financial disasters contemporary of the ongoing Globalisation wave are widely considered as its “results” or side effects, but other analysts strongly deny such interpretation. More and more, Globalisation is conceived as a “well known” process, phenomenon or subject. More and more it is used as a striking argument or universal explication: an unlimited source of ready-to-wear “answers”... But less and less, it looks problematic per se. On the contrary, the so-called “Globalisation debate” appears as no more than a new Realm of Obviousness. That is why I would like to propose a critical and trans-disciplinary discussion of the ten following theses:


1st Thesis:

Global issues, Global studies, research on Globalisation(s) are certainly neither obsolete nor outdated. The more “Globalisation” is perceived as a mere “fact” that we should only accommodate to, the more it proves a suspect, ambiguous and deceiving concept upon which we need to mobilise all the critical resources of Philosophy and the Humanities.

2nd Thesis:

“The End of Globalisation” motto should be heard as the expression by its promoters of the following wish: that with such a “Globalisation death” decree will simultaneously cease all critical investigation, all comparative approach, all philosophical enquiry, all scientific revaluation of conflicting Globalisation figures and processes.

3rd Thesis:

On the reverse, we should sustain this standpoint that the considerable field of “Research and studies on Globalisation(s)” — field which was invested by critical thinking for no more than ten years — currently experiments only its initial phase.

4th Thesis:

What has been achieved worldwide for about ten years by different individual contributions and collective work — be they academic or not —, is not to be neglected: i.e. an already impressive de-construction work (sub-field by sub-field), associated with a deeply rooted conceptual discussion, completed by a decisive reformulation of the Globalisation(s) vocabulary, and therefore of its dictionary.

5th Thesis:

The limits that have been reached by this multilateral, trans-national, trans-disciplinary movement of critical thinking, weakly organised but lively and performing, were above all: i) an insufficient circulation of concepts and research produced within the media, political and economical spheres, and, correlatively ii) a poor capacity to modify normative paradigms on Globalisation used by journalists, political and economical leaders — and subsequently: to generate inflexion of their “Global affairs” vision and management.

6th Thesis:

The future of “Research and studies on Globalisation(s)” is nothing but obvious, first of all due to the point stressed in Thesis n°2. Not only these research and studies motivate very few people — even within the academic world —, but they are also widely considered as useless, even within the so-called “progressive” groups and parties. Such statement implies that the next step should be focused on a quasi lobbyist strategy, aimed at circulating core ideas developed for the last decade and at convincing more and more people of the pertinence and usefulness of Global research.

7th Thesis:

The huge and compulsory trans-disciplinary effort that it requires proves to be a very strong limit to the expansion of such research field. Indeed, we do not live in the times of Diderot, Condorcet, Kant, Hegel and their like, who would have been much better intellectually equipped than we are to “think Globalisation(s)”, due to their multi-faceted Bildung. What appears critical for the advancement of Global research is therefore both i) to become individually more and more “trans-disciplinary”, and ii) to convince usually reluctant Universities to change their mind about trans-disciplinary studies, so that they favour those which are more particularly concerned with the “Globalisation(s) field”.

8th Thesis:

Emphasis on the multilingualism issue is also critical for a true development of Global research out of its normative expansion path. Indeed, it looks daily more dangerous to approach Global issues through the sole bias of English, German, Spanish or French. “Globe”, “Welt”, “monde”, “Globalisation”, “mondialisation”, aside their translation in other Indo-European languages, need to be confronted with their “equivalent” and their "different" in the Buddhist, Islamic, Guarani, Yoruba or Inuit traditions — a confrontation to be carried out in the long run.

9th Thesis:

We should never forget that “Globalisation” is a cultural issue — i.e. i) it is first of all a cultural issue and ii) it is a cultural issue. First of all means that the perception, understanding, description of “Globalisation” is cultural before being economical, political, social… Cultural means that the substance, features or evolution of “Globalisation” are intimately linked to cultural references and cultural debates.

10th Thesis:

The future of “Research and studies on Globalisation(s)” is not written. As of now, it even looks “open”. But it will soon be judged on the capacity of such research and studies of modifying the own judgement of non-intellectual leaders about the diverse and contradictory Globalisation projects. And of providing these leaders with objective and serious reasons of privileging the emergence of a true “Cosmo-political citizen” (Weltbürger) rather than of a mere “Global consumer”.


Final note

What is and remains at stake in this process would be a shared understanding of the ontological difference existing between, on the one side: : i) a authentic “world” (mundus politicus) where could be experimented plural “mondialisations” (mundializations), respectful of human rights, human dignity and cultural diversity, and, on the other side: ii) a pure “globe” where could only reign — without alternative — a unique and lethal pattern of Globalisation.


Rate this content
 
 
 
Average of 135 ratings 
Rating 2.33 / 4 MoyenMoyenMoyenMoyen
Same author:
 flecheL’intelligence de la bibliothèque publique
 flecheTriomphe de la post-citoyenneté
 flechePublication de L'Homme post-numérique
 flecheCharlie : comment répondre au défi ?
 flecheDigital Domination
 flecheAcerca de los Megaproyectos en Uruguay
 flecheEurope, Maghreb, Machrek : Que faire ensemble du monde euro-méditerranéen, maintenant et pour les dix prochaines années ?
 flecheWhy the need for a Universal Declaration of Democracy?
 flecheThe meaning of “carnage”?
 flecheLa « culture numérique » : à problématique « nouvelle », approches et solutions différentes ?
 flechePiratage (Modifier l'approche du ---)
 flecheDiversité culturelle et dialogue interculturel : confusion ou exigence ?
 flechePiratage (modifier l’approche du ---)
 flecheRéévaluer « l’économie de la création » à l’âge de la dématérialisation numérique
 flecheAbstract of a keynote speech at the "Dialogos da Terra no Planeta Agua" (November 26-28, Minas Gerais - Brazil)
 flecheCosmopolitical approach to Water
 fleche« Fin d’un monde » ou crise de son modèle ?
 flecheLa culture pour rendre le monde vivable
 flecheTransparence (Révélation de l’opacité, mondialisation de la --- ?)
 flechePour une éducation à la diversité culturelle et au dialogue interculturel
 flecheTravail et emploi : la confusion permanente
 flecheCultural diversity
 flecheLa Convention sur la diversité culturelle reste à mettre en œuvre!
4 tâches prioritaires pour la société civile

 flecheCultures et mondialisations : les sons de la diversité

 flechePhilosophie des mondialisations et mondialisation de la philosophie

 flecheLaw of Globalization and/or globalization(s) of Law ?
 flecheAltermondialisation
 flechePauvreté et Violence
 flecheDiversité culturelle : un projet cosmopolitique
 flecheFor an offensive concept of cultural diversity
 flecheCultural diversity, globalisation and mondialisations
 flecheLa Puissance du rituel mondial
 flecheWord Social Forum n°5 : A trial of truth
 flecheComercio de la democracia, democracia del Comercio
 flecheOMC : la refondation ou la fin ?
 flecheFor a reassessment of the concept of cultural diversity
 flecheWar, the supreme stage of poverty?


 fleche‘Fight against poverty’: for a new order


 flecheGlobal and mondial
 flecheTowards a philosophical pedagogy of NICTs
 flecheThe critical sharing of globalisation(s) could be achieved by appropriate intercultural education and training
 flecheAway with "anti-globalisation"
 flecheJohannesburg (Le risque de...)
 flecheQue peut être "l'exception culturelle" ?
 flecheLa diversité culturelle : du consensus mou au projet politique
 flechePrivatisation or sharing of cultural identities and diversity?
 flecheMorale et politique
 flecheTemps fragiles
 flecheDématérialisation de l’argent, déresponsabilisation du sujet politique
 flecheDématérialisation de l’argent
 flecheLe GERM : un laboratoire de la diversité culturelle pour comprendre «la globalisation» et les mondialisations
 flecheLa Bonté des maîtres du monde
 flecheProblématique des mondialisations
 flecheLe Monde est-il un village ?
Et peut-il être une Cité ?

 flecheLe cas Napster
 flecheDemocracy
 flecheGlobalisations
 flecheLa controverse de Gênes
 flecheOSCI
 flecheUnemployment
 flecheEconomie de la matrice, cosmopolitique de la diversité
 flecheLe cheval de Troie des Amériques
 flecheThe Napster affair
 flecheDomination
 flecheRien de nouveau sous le Soleil noir de la mondialisation
 flecheDe la mondialisation aux mondialisations : domination ou partage du monde ?
 flecheLe Monde en perspective
 flecheGlobal Village
 flecheFractures (résorber les --- )
 flecheGlobalisation : the law of the strongest ?
 flechePour une ''philosophie des mondialisations''
13
SEARCH
Keywords   go
in 
Translate this page Traduire par Google Translate
Share

Share on Facebook
FACEBOOK
Partager sur Twitter
TWITTER
Share on Google+Google + Share on LinkedInLinkedIn
Partager sur MessengerMessenger Partager sur BloggerBlogger
Other items
where is published this article: