About fifteen years ago, as a graduate student at Claremont School of Theology, I remember finding myself at a conference on campus listening to John Cobb speak about a recent visit to China. If the world had any hope of making progress toward climate neutrality, he said, it would only be if China could avoid the disastrous path of development that Western countries had taken over the past two hundred years. The philosophy of modernity with its mechanical, individualistic worldview has provided the United States with few cultural resources for facing a collective environmental crisis. He was hopeful, however, that China still had the opportunity to adopt a constructive, postmodern philosophy that would lead the country toward ecological development.
In the years since then, the reality has, of course, proven to be more complicated than the vision. The Chinese economy has increasingly adopted elements of market capitalism that have proved to be so ecologically problematic in the West. But China has also become a world leader in alternative energy and electric vehicle production, and has made important strides in reducing pollution and restoring forests. The progress has not been fast enough, in China or in Western countries, to avoid many tragic consequences of climate change. Yet China has charted a path that aims toward ecological civilization, while in the United States climate change is still debated as a partisan issue.
On the other hand, there is no doubt that “constructive postmodernism” has found fertile ground in China as Cobb predicted. I had been aware of the prodigious work by the Institute for Postmodern Development of China (IPDC) and the China Project of CPS to establish research centers for process philosophy and make connections with partners who are putting its core principles into practice, but I had not had the opportunity to visit China in person until this year’s symposium and summer academy in Zhuhai. Participating in these events, it was gratifying to see not only that Whitehead’s philosophy has taken deep root in China, but that China is becoming one of the most important centers of gravity for process thought worldwide. New publications, conferences, research centers and translations in process philosophy seem to be constantly on the horizon.
For example, the Chinese government decided to invest two millions (RMB) to publish The Complete Works of Whitehead. In total, it will be 20 volumes published by Central Compile and Translation Press, which also published Process Theology by John Cobb and David Griffin, Reenchantment of Science, and Sprituality and Society by David Griffin. Many of the participants in the summer academy noted that, from a Chinese perspective, Whitehead’s philosophy is easier to grasp than the philosophy of modernity. It already makes intuitive sense to think of reality as organic and processual rather than mechanistic.
Our week-long event started with the “International Symposium on Process Philosophy and Comparative Studies of Chinese Thought,” which aimed to explore the compatibility and mutual enrichment between Whitehead’s philosophical framework and traditional Chinese philosophies. Dr. John Cobb delivered a very profound remark at the opening ceremony, in which he also offered his blessings. The symposium brought together 50 researchers from across China, the United States and Germany to explore themes such as:
- Organic and Process Thinking: Discussions centered around Whitehead’s concept of process as fundamental to reality and its parallels with Buddhist, Taoist and Confucian notions of change and transformation.
- Holism and Organic Unity: Exploring how Whitehead’s holistic approach resonates with the holistic views embedded in Chinese cosmology and metaphysics.
- Creativity and Harmony: Analyzing Whitehead’s emphasis on creativity and the aesthetic dimensions of experience alongside the Confucian ideal of social harmony and balance.
- Ethics and Society: Addressing the ethical implications of Whitehead’s process philosophy and its potential applications for ecology and education, drawing parallels with Confucian ethics.
Social Sciences in China reported on this conference on July 12, 2024.
Participants in the International Symposium on Comparative Studies of Process Philosophy and Chinese Thought
This year’s summer academy, July 8-13, was called “Zhuhai Process Academy”—the 17th process summer academy hosted in China. The inaugural summer academy can be traced back to 2006 and was held in Guilin, Guangxi Province. The “Zhuhai Process Academy” offered participants an introduction to Whitehead’s process philosophy, including basic metaphysical ideas and vocabulary, ontology and epistemology, biography of Whitehead, a history of the connection between process philosophy and China, and personal and social implications of process thought. Another series of sessions led participants through Whitehead’s 1925 book, Science and the Modern World, which contains Whitehead’s critique of modern scientific materialism and outlines the alternative philosophical scheme that would be expanded in Process and Reality.
Speakers included Prof. Haipeng Guo, director of Zhuhai Whitehead Research Center, Dr. Fubin Yang, translator of Process and Reality, Prof. Kun Wang, Dean of Marxism School of Zhejiang Normal University, Dr. Zhihe Wang, executive director of China Project of Center for Process Studies, Dr. John Becker, California State University Long Beach, Prof. Li Yang, Harbin Normal University, and myself.
Participants brought insights from their own studies and professional lives, greatly enriching the content of the sessions. According to Dr. Zhihe Wang, the biggest difference between this year’s process summer academy and previous academies is the diversity of participants. The participants of previous summer academies consisted primarily of academics—PhD students, master students, and college students. But many non-academic people from NGOs, the business community, and even workers and new farmers participated in this year’s process summer academy. Their inclusion really made a big difference to the success of the academy.
As is often the case, many of the most illuminating discussions happened in the informal space between sessions. One might be drawn into conversations about the implications of Whitehead’s philosophy for meditation practices, for global economics, or for vocational education. The academy overall struck a good balance between the abstract philosophical concepts and the application to practical concerns brought by instructors and participants.
The summer academy was also a chance to build relationships with colleagues and students across China. There were many opportunities for personal connections, including a day of sightseeing in Zhuhai, a karaoke session, and many lunches and dinners together. Process philosophy is unique among philosophical schools, I believe, in its ability to draw people together from diverse backgrounds and create a spirit of community rather than competition. Whitehead himself was famous for hosting popular philosophical discussions with students at his home. The summer academy seems to be animated by that same tradition of open dialogue and community building.
We were hosted by Beijing Normal University-Hong Kong Baptist University United International College (UIC) in Zhuhai, China. The Institute for Advanced Study at UIC has just opened a new Center for Whitehead Studies, making this symposium the inaugural event in that space. We were also able to hear about and experience UIC’s educational model as the first liberal arts college in mainland China since the 1940s. Inspired by Whitehead’s educational philosophy and the Six Arts of Confucianism, UIC has developed a general education curriculum that helps students explore Chinese cultural traditions, including courses on archery, classical Chinese music, calligraphy, and meditation. UIC thus provided a case study for the integration of Whiteheadian and Confucian educational philosophies that fit well with the themes of the symposium and academy.
The annual summer academies have been important venues for advancing process philosophy in China and for encouraging the influence of Chinese philosophies on the interpretation of process thought. As Whitehead said, “the philosophy of organism seems to approximate more to some strains of Indian, or Chinese, thought, than to western Asiatic, or European, thought” (Process and Reality, 7). The summer academy helped to highlight the long history of interaction between process philosophy and Chinese thought, and re-emphasized to me the importance of the connection between U.S. and Chinese perspectives on process philosophy.
The author, Dr. Justin Heinzekehr, at the Process Summer Academy
Justin Heinzekehr is Director of Institutional Research and Assessment and Assistant Professor of Bible and Religion at Goshen College, Indiana. His most recent work has focused on the intersection of political philosophy, religion, and environmental ethics, with titles such as The Absent Christ (2019) and Organic Marxism (2014).