Area	Spring Points

	advancing public support for political investment in generalizing higher quality of lives gary e. davis	June 2020

Recently, the American Academia of Arts and Sciences teamed with the Rocke-feller Foundation and Harvard University to convene a group of political experts and prominent influencers to shape a program for “Reinventing Democracy for the 21st Century.” That venture could be rightly called the work of a virtuous circle, resulting in a narrative skeleton—a discursive scaffold—to help “achieve” fair scale of “voice,” “empower voters,” “ensure political responsiveness,” “dram-atically expand civic” capability, “build civic information archiecture” for “common purpose,” and “inspire a culture of commitment” to constitutionality and with each other. The conception of their model overtly includes a notion of “virtuous circle” (3) or “virtuous interplay of culture, institutions, and civil society” (21). The scale of the challenge is huge, which I prospected prior to the AAAS report, but in complement to it, I think. Why not regard the continental rhizome of higher education as a uniquely distri-buted circle of virtuous potential (in a manner of advancing a philosophy of higher education), a centripetal convening, a potentially generative consilience for advancing higher quality of lives? A cohering of interdomainity in the interplay of its domains would be regarded by literary theorist Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak as “an aesthetic education in the era of globalization,” “teaching for the times,” 2012 (ch. 6), to an “imperative” scale that “re-imagines the planet” (ch. 16)—echoing Heidegger’s call for “planetary thinking,” On Time and Being, 1962; and every Earth Day since April 1970, to the “inconventient truths” causing the Paris Accords of 2015, and now a genera-tion of teens gaining voice at the UN . next—> biophilology: nature of human intelligence

 

 

Be fair. © 2020, gary e. davis