Universidad del Pacífico 60th Anniversary Celebration:“University, internationalization and global perspective”
Good morning. It’s wonderful to be here with all of you. It is a great honor for me to be part of this special 60th anniversary celebration.
I wish to offer my deep appreciation to your rector, Felipe Portocarrero for the invitation to join you today and to David for opening and moderating our conversation.
I’d also like to thank our colleague at Universidad Antonio Ruiz de Montoya, Fr. Ernesto Cavassa, S.J. In our time together he has shared the extraordinary work of Jesuit education in Peru and in the more than 30 Jesuit universities across 15 countries in Latin America.
I offer these reflections as someone who was formed in the tradition of Jesuit education—as someone who has called Georgetown, the oldest Catholic and Jesuit college in the United States, my home for more than four decades.
We share an extraordinary tradition—one that provides each of our institutions with unparalleled resources—resources that can guide us as we respond to the challenges of this moment…resources that can enable us to see, in deeper ways, our interconnectedness and our responsibilities as members of a global community.
We honor these resources this year—as we acknowledge the Ignatian Year—the moment of conversion for St. Ignatius and the beginning of the formation of the Jesuit order.
In the context of this gathering, we are focused on the global aspects of our mission—as academic communities and as Catholic and Jesuit institutions—and how we may be uniquely positioned to understand and respond to the global challenges of our time.
Let’s begin with the characteristics that define this moment. For the past few decades, we have seen the increasing interconnectedness of our world—the convergence of forces that include new information, communication and transportation technologies, that create unprecedented opportunities to be engaged, connected, and present in different parts of the world. The term that we use to describe this convergence—globalization. Many have studied and reflected on the elements of globalization: what constitutes globalization, how has it emerged, its impacts—and our responses to it.
Globalization has been a force for economic growth in many parts of the world.
But—at the same time we have seen this growth, we have also seen greater inequalities. Global economic growth has not been shared by all—the rich are getting richer, the poor, poorer.
We have experienced fragmentation and division. There is a growing sense that our international institutions, products of the post-World War II context, are not designed to cope with this new and emergent global context. We face urgent global challenges– climate change, nuclear proliferation, pandemics. New structures are needed.
This morning, I wish to bring the issue of globalization into the context of the University.
It is within this context that I believe we can find the resources for addressing the questions of our moral responsibility.
Specifically, it is the very “ethos” of a university that we can bring to bear on the challenges posed by globalization.
By “ethos” I mean “the characteristic spirit” that animates the identity and purpose of the university.
The “characteristic spirit” of the university is to seek the betterment of humankind.
Consider these words from the Mission Statement of your University;
Universidad del Pacífico contributes to, “[the] sustainable development and…social well-being of Peru in a global, dynamic, complex and increasingly inter- connected world, and promotes the creation of cooperation models and alliances.”
The work that you do here—to contribute to “sustainable development and social well-being”—has a deep resonance with this ethos, this characteristic spirit of the University.
I wish to suggest four areas for reflection that resonate with the ethos of the university. It is my hope that by engaging these four areas of reflection we might open up and broaden our understanding of the meaning of globalization.
The first responsibility of the university is the development of the intellect of the young people who come to our campuses.
The ethos of the university includes, in the words of my colleague at Georgetown, the distinguished historian, Fr. John O’Malley, SJ, a recognition of the “preeminence of truth and the dignity of the quest for it.” We seek to instill the habits of mind that will sustain this quest.
We seek to nurture thinking individuals who are alive to opportunities to make a difference. We see this in the aims of your University—the declared values of your institution:
- Freedom of thought and opinion
- Honesty and veracity
- Respect for the other
- Ethics and social responsibility
No one has captured the ethos and identity of the university more than Saint John Henry Newman. Writing in the 1850s, around the time he was serving as the Rector of the newly established Catholic University of Ireland, in the lectures that became The Idea of the University, Newman describes the purpose of university education as the “real cultivation of mind,” that is, “the intellect…properly trained and formed to have a connected view or grasp of things.”
By “connected view,” Newman means the ability to develop a “comprehensive view of truth, in all its branches, of the relations of science to science, of their mutual bearings, and their respective values.”
Newman is committed to the idea that we can aspire to what would have been called in the 19th century, “Universal Knowledge,” a belief in a unity of knowledge which is within the grasp of a cultivated intellect. We seek to understand each of the disciplines, but also, the relationships of the disciplines to one another.
Newman’s conception of a “unity of knowledge” would not be held in our contemporary academy. Our practices of disciplinary specialization and the sheer complexity of what we now know make the thought of such integration implausible. But what if, in our pursuit of new concepts that could guide us in responding to globalization, we re-examine this key insight of Newman: that the purpose of University education is to grasp the truth and the connection between and among the disciplines?
A second responsibility of the University entails the formation of character. We use different words to capture this idea. At Georgetown we describe this aspect of our mission as educating our students to be “responsible and active participants in civic life, and to live generously in service to others.” For you—“entrepreneurial students dedicated to service and…to building a fair society”.
This idea is deep in the ethos of the Academy and the tradition of the Jesuits, who—were shaped by the ideas of Cicero. Another insight from my colleague John O’Malley…he identifies Cicero’s De Oficiis as a foundational influence on St. Ignatius and the first Jesuits. De Oficiis is often translated as On Public Responsibility. He identifies this passage as having foundational resonance:
“We are not born for ourselves alone…we, too, as human beings are born for the sake of other human beings; that we might be able mutually to help each other. We ought, therefore to contribute to the common good of humankind by reciprocal acts of human kindness, by giving and receiving from one another and thus by our skill, our industry and our talents work to bring human society together in peace and harmony” (Cicero, De Oficiis).
In these conversations today, and as you mark this special anniversary, you are taking on this challenge—responding to the question: what is required of us, to educate students of character in a global world?
We offer the very best settings in the world for living with these questions. We are the homes to the most extraordinary young people, with access to the best that has been thought and written, and connected to one another in ways that are unprecedented in the history of our world. For our students, globalization means connectedness. It means access to ideas. It means an ability to participate in the construction of knowledge and the building of communities.
How do we understand the nature of the interior lives of our young people? How are they making sense of our world and their place in it? What affect are new technologies for connecting with one another having on their ways of making meaning in their lives? How are their imaginations being formed, and how do they understand the depth and breadth of their possibilities?
An important insight for us to consider was provided in 2010 by former Superior General of the Jesuits, Adolfo Nicolas—I know he spent time with you here, just two years later. He shared this insight in a speech to a gathering in Mexico City of educators from Jesuit colleges and universities from throughout the world. In that convening, he expressed that,
“We need to understand this complex new interior world created by globalization….”
This interior world—the conscience and imagination that emerges—shapes the nature of one’s engagement in the world. Can we imagine a global citizen? Can we ensure that our engagement provides our students with the resources to inform an interior life capable of emerging with a sense of responsibility for others in the world?
This leads me to a third set of reflections that emerge from the ethos of the university and that I hope can expand our conception of globalization. There has been a development that has been underway now for the past three decades, a development that can transform the way we understand the nature of our responsibilities to one another.
Beginning in 1990, the United Nations has produced an annual Human Development Report. The intellectual father of this initiative is the Nobel Laureate, Amartya Sen, who over the course of his career has developed a set of ideas that is transforming the way we understand our responsibilities to one another.
We refer to this set of ideas as the Human Development and Capability Approach. This Approach seeks to address the underlying economic, social, and political conditions that enable each of us to fulfill our promise and potential. This is “an approach to development in which the objective is to expand what people are able to do and be….”
The animating concepts were established in the very first Human Development Report. Human development was defined as “both the process of widening people’s choices and the level of their achieved well-being.” The core idea: “…The purpose of development is to enhance people’s capabilities…”
What is meant by ‘capabilities?’
A capability is the “freedom to promote or achieve what [one] values[s] doing and being.” It is the freedom to engage in the practices and activities that one values doing and for which there is a value doing. It is through these activities that one achieves “well-being” or “human flourishing.”
The question that Sen asks and that is at the heart of the Human Development approach is: do you have the capability to engage in the activities, the practices, what Sen calls the “functionings,” that matter most to you? Do the social, political, and economic structures provide you with the framework to achieve this capability?
For so much of the modern era we have considered our responsibilities to each other within the poles of utilitarianism and duty-based theories – between the poles of Mill and Kant. For so much of the modern era, in our understanding of political economy, this has translated into a focus on GDP.
The Human Development and Capability Approach asks us to consider a different way. Again, in the words of that first Human Development Report:
“The basic objective of development is to create an enabling environment for people to enjoy long, healthy and creative lives. This may appear to be a simple truth. But it is often forgotten in the immediate concern with the accumulation of commodities and financial wealth.”
This idea of human development deeply resonates with the ethos of the university. Can you imagine an account more focused on the betterment of humankind? I believe we need to embrace this new understanding of our responsibilities to each other for full “integral” development. It would be invaluable if we could support efforts to expand an understanding of globalization that accepts this understanding of human development. But beyond that, could we imagine, in the exercise of our institutional agency, the university playing a deeper role in this work of human development?
One place where Universities have taken on this challenge in a way not fully captured in those early Human Development Reports: through our care of the environment and sustainability. There is a strong resonance with the commitment that you have made to Social Responsibility at this University—a foundational aspect that guides your work…described as:
“the need to transform society on the way toward a more humane and sustainable development, through the exercise of its main functions: teaching, research, outreach and internal management.”
When we look at the challenges we face now—thirty years after the Capability Approach was first articulated, we have a much greater awareness of our connection to the environment and the urgent threats facing our planet.
In its most recent reports, including a landmark report in 2020—” The Next Frontier: Human Development and the Anthropocene”, the U.N. Development Program has begun to track metrics that look at, quote, “[the] health of people and the planet in different ways and the interaction between them”.
Some of these metrics:
- Mortality related to air pollution
- Deaths related to disasters
- Reductions in forest areas
- Overuse of freshwater
- And they track closely indicators of global biodiversity.
Again—connection—we cannot disconnect ourselves from the changes taking place across our planet. As Universities, there is an urgency for us to contribute to this work—of understanding our impact on the environment, and identifying solutions to mitigate and reverse the harm of climate change—as a moral responsibility, but also in recognition of the fact that our flourishing as a global people is integrally related to the protection of our common home. A fourth set of reflections: I believe we are uniquely capable of expanding the conception of globalization to capture a greater capacity for understanding one other across boundaries and differences. Our campuses have long been “melting pots,” with students and faculty coming together from throughout the world, creating academic communities shaped by a common commitment to learning, scholarship, and research. Your own institution has more than 160 global agreements to create opportunities for exchange.
Can we draw from this characteristic of our campuses and commit to deepening our efforts at mutual understanding?
There is one area I wish to propose that I believe is of critical importance at this time. Can we consider the possibility of more deeply engaging our religious traditions in the work of the Academy?
I don’t mean simply as objects of study – we have pursued the formal study of religion for nearly one-hundred and fifty years in our universities.
I mean engaging the intellectual dimensions of our religious traditions on their terms, bringing them into the discourse that takes place in the contemporary academy.
I make this suggestion, particularly in the context of expanding our conception of globalization, for two reasons: first, our world has become much smaller.
Those with different faiths are in much more proximate contact with one another, both physically and through advances in communications technology. We can no longer ignore those of a different faith. We need to know each other at ever deepening levels.
If a significant part of an individual’s identity is animated by faith, we need to be able understand the dimensions of that faith.
Second, our religious traditions are the repositories of deep wisdom. As we seek to explore the impact of globalization on the interior lives of people, these wisdom traditions offer important resources for self-understanding and mutual understanding.
As I close, I’ll would characterize my account this way.
Despite its challenges, globalization has provided us with unprecedented opportunities to better humankind.
The ethos of the university, our characteristic spirit, is to seek the betterment of humankind.
We need to enrich our conception of globalization.
There is work that is properly that of the university that can enrich our understanding of globalization.
Is it possible that one day, when people think of globalization, the ideas that come to mind are the search for the unity of knowledge? Is it possible that globalization will entail a commitment to global citizenship and global civic responsibility?
Could globalization come to capture the idea of integral human development and articulate the expectation that in the exercise of institutional agency, the university would play a role in such development? Can we bring forth a more sustainable and live- able world for all of us? Could globalization mean a capacity to know one another more deeply, to understand one another and the deepest sources of our commitments with empathy? Could globalization come to mean an understanding of a more profound responsibility we have for our world and for one another?
Now is the time for us, for our communities of learning, to step in and offer our contribution to our understanding of globalization…an understanding that has, at its core, an acknowledgement and appreciation of the inherent human dignity of every individual in our global community.
Thank you.