Teilhard de Chardin and Senghor on the civilization of the universal

I.2.THE FOUNDATIONS OF A RACIAL MORALITY

In order to posit the nuts and bolts of a racial morality, Teilhard de Chardin is faced with a problem: How can the peoples of the earth achieve harmony unless they first agree upon the basis of their union? And how can they find the ardour and courage to perform their duty, once perceived, if they do not feel some attraction to it? He wonders:

[...] there is a grave uncertainty to be resolved. The future, I have said, depends on the courage and resourcefulness which men display in overcoming the forces of isolationism, even of repulsion, which seem to drive them apart rather than draw them together. How is the drawing together to be accomplished? How shall we so contrive matters that the human mass merges in a single whole, instead of ceaselessly scattering in dust?^17(*)

A priori, in Teilhard de Chardin's opinion, there seem to be two methods, two possible roads in order to build up this collectivisation of mankind.^18(*)

The first is a process of tightening-up in response to external pressures. The human mass, because it is in a state of continuous additive growth, in number and inter-connections, on the confined surface of this planet, must automatically become more and more firmly concentrated upon itself. To this impressive process of natural compression there may well be added the artificial constraint imposed by a stronger human group upon a weaker; we have only to look around us at the present time, nowadays, to see how this idea is seeking, indeed rushing towards its realisation. Many countries still behave as masters over others. What is the `G8' all about? Why is it that some countries for example, have the right to own the atomic bomb and not others?

Yet, there is another way. This is that, prompted by some favouring influence, the elements of mankind should succeed in making effective a profound force of mutual attraction, deeper and more powerful than the surface repulsion which causes them to diverge, forced upon one another by the dimensions and mechanics of the earth, men will purposefully bring to life a common soul in this vast body.

And so, the two possible roads are the following: «unification by external or by internal force? Compulsion or Unanimity?»^19(*)

In his days, Teilhard de Chardin experienced the destruction of war and for him, war expressed the tension and the interior dislocation of mankind shaken to its roots as it stood at the crossroads, faced by the need to decide upon its future.

1.2.1. Unity in unanimity.

Instead of humanity to unite through compulsion, since unity imposes itself, the collectivisation of mankind being an unavoidable process, it must unite in total freedom. Learning from the miseries of the past with the world wars, for example, humans must unite in a unanimous spirit. The road to be followed therefore is the road of freedom; we are supposed to engage in the process of totalisation consciously and freely. In effect, Teilhard de Chardin declares:

In my view the road to be followed is clearly revealed by the teaching of all the past. We can progress only by uniting: this, as we have seen, is the law of life. But unification through coercion leads only to a superficial pseudo-unity. It may establish a mechanism, but it does not achieve any fundamental synthesis; and in consequence it engenders no growth of consciousness. It materialises, in short, instead of spiritualising. Only unification through unanimity is biologically valid. This alone can work the miracle of causing heightened personality to emerge from the forces of collectivity. It alone represents a genuine extension of the psychogenesis that gave us birth. Therefore it is inwardly that we must come together, and in entire freedom.^20(*)

The Teilhardian view here reminds us of the Stoic notion of freedom. In fact, happiness consists in obeying nature, living like the gods, living according to the spark of divinity in us, living according to reason. As such, man's happiness consists in following without restraint the prescriptions of Nature. In a determined world, the stoic is still free. He is free to follow nature or not to do so. Like a dog tied behind the chariot, man is supposed to choose to run step by step, following the cadence of the chariot, in all freedom in order to find satisfaction behind the chariot; instead of resisting and ending up being dragged by force.

The process of totalisation imposes itself to us and our happiness consists in uniting in all freedom, in all unanimity in order to avoid being yanked by coercion.

* ¹⁷ Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, The Future of Man, New York, 1964, p. 76.

* ¹⁸ Id.

* ¹⁹ Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, The Future of Man, New York, 1964, p. 77.

* ²⁰ Id.