WALKING ON THE GREAT PATH TOWARD ECOLOGICAL CIVILIZATION. — AN INTERVIEW WITH POSTMODERN ECO-PHILOSOPHER ZHIHE WANG
Summary
This is an interview conducted by three young Chinese scholars, Siqun Yu, Qian Zhang, and Hongyu Lin, with Dr. Zhihe Wang, director of the Institute for Postmodern Development of China and a postmodern eco-philosopher. Dr. Zhihe Wang traces his academic journey, including his shift from deconstructive postmodernism to constructive postmodernism, and from a pure scholar in an ivory tower to a creator and promoter of a new civilization. He explains why he gave up a prestigious position at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences to study constructive postmodern philosophy based on Whitehead's organic process philosophy in the United States. He also unfolds his understanding of "ecological civilization" and the reasons for helping to create the Cobb Eco-Academy, what constitutes a "high-life-quotient eco-person," what is the Second Enlightenment, how to reflect on the global pandemic from the perspective of the Second Enlightenment, and what this disaster means for humanity, what is China's unique role in the "Second Enlightenment", and does this planet have a future.
Keywords: constructive postmodernism, Whitehead philosophy, second enlightenment, ecological civilization, high-life-quotient eco-person
Brief information about the interviewee:
Zhihe Wang, born in Beijing, holds a Ph.D. in philosophy. He entered the Department of Philosophy at Peking University in 1978. In 1985, he returned to Peking University to study Western philosophy under the supervision of the renowned philosopher Zhu Desheng, receiving his master's degree in 1988. From 1988 to 1998, he worked at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, serving as the deputy editor-in-chief of Social Sciences Abroad. In 1998, he went to the United States for further studies, earning his Ph.D. from Claremont Graduate University, where he studied under world-renowned constructive postmodern thinkers David Ray Griffin and John B. Cobb, Jr. He is currently the director of the Institute for Postmodern Development of China, and also serves as co-director of the China Project of the Center for Process Studies, co-editor of the Journal of Ecological Civilization Studies, a visiting professor of the Center for Whitehead Studies at Beijing Normal-Hong Kong Baptist University, an advisor to the Budapest Center for Sustainable Development Studies in Hungary, and an advisor to the Korea Institute for Ecological Civilization. He has edited, authored, or co-authored 11 books in Chinese, English, and Russian, including A Dictionary of Postmodernism, The Second Enlightenment, Studies on Postmodern Philosophical Trends, Whitehead and China, Process and Pluralism, and On the Road to Ecological Civilization. He has published over 160 academic papers.
Question (Q): What were your reasons for deciding to go abroad, giving up your position as deputy editor-in-chief of a national journal, and choosing to return to doctoral studies?
Zhihe Wang (Z.W.): Honestly speaking, making this decision was very difficult at the time. I was already a mid-level official, and my Academy was preparing to promote me to editor-in-chief. I was also one of the ten outstanding youth of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. My career was undoubtedly on the rise. But after much consideration, I decided to give it all up. Although my Academy tried to persuade me to stay, I was resolute in my decision. Of course, this journey is not an easy one. Going from a well-situated position at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences to becoming a student in the US, I worked while studying when I first arrived, but I'm very grateful for these valuable experiences. If I had to summarize this process in one sentence, it would be: wanting to change my way of life. And I had already come into contact with constructive postmodernism. I think it transcends the limitations of modernity, compensates for the shortcomings of deconstructive postmodernism, and also has a profound connection with traditional Chinese culture. I find this kind of thinking very meaningful. And this base camp is in Claremont, with David Ray Griffin as the leading figure. I thought it would be better to study under him, so I enrolled as a doctoral student at Claremont Graduate University. There's an English saying, "Life is all about the choices you make." Your entire life revolves around choices; what you choose essentially determines what your life will be like. Looking back, I think my life choices were correct, and I have no regrets.
Q: Why did you choose Whitehead's philosophy and the constructive postmodern stance? Could you talk about how you chose and confirmed this stance?
Z.W.: In my own academic journey, I was initially drawn to deconstructive postmodernism. But I soon discovered that while deconstruction might work in the West, it wasn't quite suitable for China. Because after the May Fourth New Culture Movement, the Great Cultural Revolution, and other political movements, we've already deconstructed too much. Our times call for construction. We need a constructive philosophy. As Polish poet and Nobel laureate Wisława Szymborska wrote in her poem "Ending and Beginning":
Someone has to drag in a girder
to prop up a wall.
Someone has to glaze a window,
rehang a door.
It was at that moment that I discovered constructive postmodernism and its underlying philosophy—process philosophy, which Alfred North Whitehead himself referred to as the “Philosophy of Organism.” I personally prefer to call it “organic process philosophy.” I felt that the world today urgently needs a lofty spirit of integration, a doctrine that can integrate fragmented knowledge into a comprehensive vision, and constructive postmodernism precisely meets this requirement. Facing the near-catastrophic world left by modernity; facing the increasingly severe ecological, social, psychological and faith crises; striving to find a way out of the predicament is a far more difficult path. Remarkably, constructive postmodern thinkers have chosen the latter. They not only bravely resist all forms of hegemony, advocating for others and speaking out for the weak, but also dedicate themselves to the common good of both humanity and nature, to the pursuit of the deeper meaning of life, and to finding a "possible spiritual home" for our time. These qualities greatly attract me. This might explain why I chose a stance of constructive postmodernism and organic process philosophy.
Q: What is your view on deconstructive postmodernism? What is the relationship between deconstructive and constructive postmodernism?
Z.W.: I have great respect for deconstructive postmodernism. Griffin fully affirmed Derrida's goodwill, believing that his deconstruction was "driven by a profound ethical force." In fact, Derrida himself was a "steadfast critic of imperialism." Michel Foucault, even more so, devoted his entire life to advocating for the marginalized, the vulnerable, and those subjugated by power, including homosexuals and other oppressed groups. Considering the dominance of modernity, there is no doubt that we need to unite. That is to say, constructive and deconstructive postmodernism need to join forces to resist modernity.
As for the differences, the main difference lies in their respective focuses. One emphasizes destruction, the other emphasizes construction. In fact, Derrida in his later years had already begun to adjust his early radical critical stance. More importantly, in his later years, he began to focus on animal ethics, which is evident in his book The Animal That Therefore I Am. Foucault, too, later began to consider the issue of human self-management. However, significant difference is that constructive postmodernism has a strong ecological concern, making the resolution of the ecological crisis its primary consideration, while deconstructive postmodernism largely lacks this ecological concern, focusing primarily on culture and language.
Q: We only discovered the problems of modernization over a long period of time. Do you think postmodernism itself has flaws? While solving the problems brought about by modernization, will it also generate new problems?
Z.W.: As I have discussed in other interviews, postmodernism grows within the limitations of modernity. That is to say, as long as the problems of modernity remain unresolved, postmodernism has its reason for existence. Looking to the future, some purely fashionable aspects of postmodernism are destined to fade away, but its many vital ideas will serve as a unique perspective and a fresh viewpoint in the 21st century, inspiring Chinese people to think and create.
Constructive postmodernism is by no means the ultimate embodiment of truth. If one day we discover its problems, then we will launch a third enlightenment, which aligns with the process-oriented approach. However, the current problem is that people haven't adequately considered the issues raised by postmodernism; therefore, it's difficult to say whether humanity can overcome the current ecological crisis. As Clifford Cobb, a senior researcher at our Institute for Postmodern Development of China and hailed as one of the "most insightful visionaries of the 20th century," states: a global crisis capable of destroying civilization is not a distant threat. In fact, it already hangs over our heads. The increasing harm from floods and hurricanes, new viruses such as AIDS, avian flu, and mad cow disease all remind us that crisis is ubiquitous. Jared Diamond, author of the renowned book Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, also points out: “We are rapidly advancing along this non-sustainable course, the world’s environmental problems will get resolved, in one way or another, within the lifetimes of the children and young adults of today. The only question is whether they will become resolved in pleasant ways of our own choice or in unpleasant ways not of our choice, such as warfare, genocide, starvation, disease epidemics, and collapses of societies.” These warnings from our predecessors undoubtedly highlight the severity of the current human crisis.
Interestingly, while we in China are wholeheartedly embracing modernization and reveling in double-digit GDP growth, some insightful individuals in the West have already begun to consider post-disaster survival issues. A recent ecological conference in Claremont, attended by over 300 people, focused on the theme of "How to Rebuild After a Disaster, How to Survive After a Disaster." Dr. John B. Cobb Jr., a renowned constructive postmodern thinker and the founding president of our Institute for Postmodern Development of China, laid the foundation in Claremont for eco-houses designed for post-disaster survival. As one of the proponents of Green GDP in the Western world, Dr. Cobb asserted that the modern Western development model is destined to collapse, and modern metropolises are inherently unsustainable. He argued that in the event of disaster, these small eco-houses with organic vegetable gardens would be more reliable.
You may scoff at Dr. Cobb's "unnecessary worries," but considering that he wrote his seminal ecological work Is It Too Late? in the early 1970s, we should give sufficient weight to his foresight. Moreover, as the Chinese saying goes, "He who does not plan for the future will have trouble in the present." The extreme vulnerability shown by large cities during the global pandemic has once again confirmed the wisdom and insight of this “eco-sage of our time.”
Q: We see that you not only engage in theoretical research on ecological philosophy, but also put it into practice, immersing yourself in the fields. How do you understand "ecological civilization"?
Z.W.: "Ecological civilization" is a new form of civilization; it marks a move beyond industrial civilization. According to Mr. Pan Yue, former head of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment of China, the Western industrial civilization, which lasted for 300 years, was driven by the unlimited pursuit of profit, based on the modern capitalist system, and centered on cities built on industry, commerce, and finance. While creating unprecedented material and social wealth, it also depleted natural reserves, bringing insurmountable economic and globally ecological crises, and is therefore unsustainable. “If China continues down the old path of Western industrial civilization, it will only be a dead end.” Continuing down this path will not only affect global harmony but also cause internal disharmony. Therefore, our times call for an ecological civilization that achieves harmony between humanity and nature, and harmony within humanity, too.
Compared to the industrial civilization, which adheres to mechanical thinking, ecological civilization, with respect for others as its core value, is a compassionate civilization （厚道文明）that respects nature and appreciates life, grounded in the principles of organic process philosophy and the Second Enlightenment. The so-called ‘compassionate civilization’ is one that respects nature and treats others with kindness. It cherishes tradition, appreciates differences, and both advocates a dynamic harmony and leaves ample space for the free development of the individual. It is a civilization with a moral foundation. The specific manifestations of compassionate civilization include 1) reverence for nature, 2) cherishing tradition, 3) respect for farmers, 4) the appreciation of heterogeneous cultures, 5) respect for non-science, 6) treating others kindly, and 7) treating yourself kindly.
Q: We know that the Cobb Eco-Academy is a benchmark for combining the theory of organic process philosophy and practice. The academy's educational vision is to use postmodern process philosophy as its theoretical foundation, advocate the idea of ecological civilization, and cultivate young leaders for ecological civilization, who are rooted in the land and traditional culture yet possess a global perspective. So, under what circumstances was the Cobb Eco-Academy established?
Z.W.: The story begins in 1972, when Professor Cobb published Is It Too Late?, which has been translated into Chinese by Chinese scholars, but has not yet been formally published. Professor Cobb's personal ecological turn began in the 1970s and continued for over fifty years. In 2018, we held a conference in Claremont about farmers and philosophers, where we emphasized advocating for ecological civilization and protecting our planet. John Cobb believed that the current education system serves the industrial empire, industrial civilization, and capitalism. For so many years, many have only criticized them, but no one has suggested trying to put ecological philosophy into action and practice. Echoing his ideas, we decided to experiment in education, and thus the Cobb Eco-Academy was born.
In essence, it's an experiment to implement some of the educational concepts of organic process philosophy. Dr. Meijun Fan played a crucial role in this, as she was a professor at Beijing Normal University, had long been involved in aesthetic education, and was a co-founder of the Global Eco-Education Alliance. She served as the first dean of the Cobb Eco-Academy. The lifetime honorary deans included the late Dr. John B. Cobb Jr., the "eco-sage of our time," and Professor Zhang Xiaode, director of the Eco-Civilization Research Center of the Central Party School (National Academy of Governance). Why is it called an academy? Everyone knows that establishing a high school in China requires numerous procedures and documents. Moreover, what we're building is intended to cultivate talent for ecological civilization, not industrial civilization. Of course, to make such an attempt, you have to be bold, to be a little unconventional. Being unconventional means breaking free from the confines of modern education. Once you've broken free, you don't need to care about what modern education says. We previously tried an ecological civilization master's program at the Claremont campus, but it required a lot of application materials and various tests, which was incredibly tedious. However, we wanted to try this approach, even if it failed, it wouldn't matter; at least it would show future generations that it was a detour.
The biggest difference between our curriculum and that of established universities is that we teach in rural areas, in the fields. In the modern education system, becoming a teacher requires a teaching certificate; otherwise, you're considered unqualified, "teaching illegally." At our Cobb Eco-Academy, farmers can be teachers, carpenters can be teachers. What does it mean to be qualified? It means they possess knowledge and wisdom—that's their qualification, and they can share their knowledge and wisdom. Therefore, we hope to conduct an interdisciplinary teaching experiment because many of the problems facing humanity today cannot be solved by individual disciplines; they require collective collaboration and co-creation.
Students there learn both theoretical and practical knowledge, experience the breath of nature itself. This is a form of learning. I think the students who graduate from there may surpass even those who go to Tsinghua and Peking University. I dare not predict their future achievements, but at least their lives will be lived consciously, and they will become fulfilled, soulful human beings.
Q: We have noticed that in recent years you have not only vigorously promoted ecological civilization and ecological education, but also proposed the concept of “high-life-quotient eco-person.” Could you briefly explain what “High-Life-Quotient Eco-Person” means?
Z.W.: The so-called "High-Life-Quotient Eco-Persons" are people who not only possess ecological consciousness and ecological wisdom, along with the capacity to survive, but also embody a resilient will to live and a full, vibrant state of being. They are people who pursue the depth of life. A person with high-life-quotient (HLQ) is an "eco-person," also known as a sensitive and empathetic person, possessing the following four characteristics: 1) Sensibility towards their own body and mind—taking good care of themselves; 2) Sensibility towards others—respecting and caring for others; 3) Sensibility towards nature—revering and caring for nature; 4) Sensibility towards beauty—being able to appreciate beauty and being adept at creating beauty.
Q: The global COVID-19 pandemic of recent years left a profound mark on humanity. What does such a disaster reveal about homo sapiens?
Z.W.: First, I want to express my deepest condolences for all the lives lost in the pandemic. Secondly, I would like to take this opportunity to thank those friends in China who sent masks and other protective equipment to Professor Cobb and us in the United States during the most intense period of the pandemic. We will remember the warmth you sent from afar for the rest of our lives.
Unlike many who view this pandemic as a public health crisis, we believe it is actually an expression of ecological crisis, and the result of humanity's long-term distortion of the relationship between humans and nature. In fact, as early as October 8, 2018, the United Nations warned humanity that the planet would face a crisis within 12-22 years. However, many of us ignored this warning. Perhaps influenced by my mentor Dr. Griffin and Dr. Cobb, I had some anticipation of this crisis, provided, of course, that you also agree that this pandemic is indeed an ecological crisis. As a constructive postmodern philosopher who practices the unity of knowledge and action, Griffin built an "eco-house" in Santa Barbara that doesn't require air conditioning, while Cobb mobilized people in Claremont to build "postmodern cave dwellings." (Many Chinese scholars and media figures had visited these two places.) Cobb's son, Clifford Cobb, a renowned social and public policy expert and a senior fellow at the Institute for Postmodern Development of China, emphasized in a speech at Peking University, Beijing Forestry University, and Anhui University in October 2019 that ecological disasters are very likely to manifest as large-scale infectious diseases. It's no wonder he was hailed as one of the "most insightful visionaries of the 20th century," alongside Rachel Carson, the author of Silent Spring.
Influenced by them, I wrote articles such as "Can China Remain Unaffected When Ecological Disaster Strikes?" (Green Leaves, 2013) and "Why Not Have More 'Ecological Disaster Awareness'?" (Global Times, 2013), aiming to awaken people's awareness of the ecological crisis. The "Second Enlightenment" that Dr. Meijun Fan and I have advocated in recent years is considered to be a form of "ecological enlightenment," with "enlightenment" best translated as "awakening."
For humanity to escape the crisis, to survive, and to avoid destruction, it must thoroughly reflect on its ways of thinking, development models, mode of production, consumption patterns, and lifestyles. Whether in power or among ordinary citizens, everyone should fully realize that environmental protection is the most important aspect of people's livelihood, and ecological civilization is the most important political issue.
As the crisis draws ever closer, it's truly time for humanity to wake up. In 2018, we launched the "Count Me In—Join the Ecological Self-Rescue Movement." All of this is to encourage people to have a sense of crisis, to plan ahead, and to prevent problems before they arise. In the words of our ancient Chinese wisdom, “Life springs from sorrow and calamity, death from ease and pleasure,” we hope the pandemic would awaken more people.
Q: You and Professor Meijun Fan's 2011 book The Second Enlightenment explicitly defines the "Second Enlightenment" as "ecological enlightenment." From the perspective of ecological enlightenment, what reflections and insights have you gained from the pandemic?
Z.W.: Constructive postmodernism emphasizes "respect for the other," which is also a core value of the Second Enlightenment. This contrasts sharply with the "self-exaltation" championed by the First Enlightenment. It's important to note that the "other" in the Second Enlightenment includes not only others, especially marginalized groups, vulnerable populations, other ethnicities, and other cultures, but also nature, and all sentient beings. It emphasizes the value of every life. Therefore, it rejects the imperialist attitude towards nature held by the First Enlightenment, upholding ecological consciousness and advocating for compassionate treatment of all sentient beings. Ecological consciousness means recognizing that humanity, as an organic component of the Earth's ecological environment, is part of the open process of the universe, and has an intrinsic connection with everything. Humanity and nature are a community of shared destiny; one's loss is the other's loss, and one's prosperity is the other's prosperity. From this perspective, it's not difficult to see the fallacy of anthropocentrism. Faced with the overwhelming onslaught of the global COVID-19 pandemic, humanity's arrogance has exposed its absurdity. However, anthropocentrism and individualism are intrinsically linked. Therefore, this pandemic will prompt us not only to deeply reflect on the relationship between humanity and nature, and to correctly position ourselves within nature, but also to deeply reflect on the relationships between people, and to correct our relationships with others.
Q: The various ideas of the First Enlightenment were proposed by the West; China merely accepted them without participating in their creation. Dr. Cobb in his preface to your book, The Second Enlightenment, mentioned that you were the first scholar who clearly proposed the concept of "Second Enlightenment." Do you believe China can play a unique role in this process?
Z.W.: To say that the 'Second Enlightenment' was proposed by us—that was Dr. Cobb's encouragement to us. In fact, Ulrich Beck, the renowned German sociologist and the originator of the "risk society" concept, used the term when discussing "ecological enlightenment," but he ultimately chose "ecological enlightenment" to summarize the "Second Enlightenment." This is because Beck primarily refers to a higher environmental awareness and a constant vigilance regarding science and its applications, without encompassing reflection and transcendence of enlightenment in other areas. Our "Second Enlightenment," however, focuses on a comprehensive reflection on and transcendence of the First Enlightenment.
Another major difference between the Second Enlightenment and the First Enlightenment, as you are aware, lies in the introduction of Chinese elements. It can be said that the concept of our "Second Enlightenment" owes much to the nourishment of Chinese culture. Constructive postmodern thinkers all have a natural affinity for China. Whitehead, in Process and Reality, explicitly states that his process philosophy, or "philosophy of organism," is closer to Chinese tradition. Cobb once predicted that "China will become the center of process thought research within fifty years," and believed that China is the hope of our planet. Griffin believes that in resisting American imperialism and achieving the postmodern turn, China plays a unique leading role. In their view, Confucian concepts such as the “unity of heaven and humanity” and “universal love,” the Taoist principle of “following the natural way,” and the Buddhist theory of “non-duality” all contribute to this. Likewise, the Confucian Doctrine of the Mean, the Buddhist Middle Way with its emphasis on balance, as well as ideas such as the equality of all things and harmony in diversity, can provide rich intellectual resources for the Second Enlightenment or for China’s postmodernization.
Of course, they do not intend to romanticize China like some overseas scholars; they are also clearly aware of the serious realities facing China. However, they remain optimistic about China. In a 2011 conversation with Professor Feng Jun, chairman of the Chinese Association for the History of Foreign Philosophy and Executive Vice President of the China Executive Leadership Academy Pudong, Dr. Cobb gave his answer, explaining why he was optimistic about China. He listed the following three reasons:
- First, China has not yet completely become a country ruled by the wealthy. The Chinese government's voice still carries weight.
- Secondly, despite being suppressed for nearly a century, traditional Chinese culture still wields immense influence. The concept of a "harmonious society" proposed by the Chinese government in recent years can, to some extent, be seen as a result of this traditional influence. In other words, Western-style modernity, such as extreme individualism, has no roots in China and is easily eradicated.
- Thirdly, and most importantly, the Chinese people understand that significant social change is possible. China's current modernity is not yet in its worst sense; its modernization is not yet finalized. China still has the opportunity to adjust itself, forge its own path, and create a new way forward. This is because China is a nation rooted in the "I Ching" (Book of Changes), deeply understanding that “change leads to progress, progress leads to longevity.” This partly explains why Whitehead’s organic process philosophy, along with the constructive postmodernism derived from it, has been accepted to some extent—whether intentionally or unintentionally—by both the Chinese government and the broader public.
Q: We know that your teacher, David Griffin, recently passed away. As “one of the most important thinkers of our time” (Richard Falk), he was hailed by our Chinese as “the ecological chivalrous philosopher of our time.” As his student, what profound lessons do you think he left you with?
Z.W.: Mr. Griffin was my teacher, and I am deeply proud of that. His passing is not only a great loss to the American process community but also a great loss to the global ecological movement. In our 20 years of teacher-student interaction, I learned a great deal from him. The two most important points are: First, Dr. Griffin led us to believe in another kind of person—one of great love, who follows the Dao and treads the straight path, a true solitary hero; second, everyone can become a super individual, and one person can do many remarkable things in their lifetime, shine brightly, and influence and warm countless people.
Professor Griffin once encouraged people to "look forward to a Whitehead century," and at the 2015 Claremont Forum on Ecological Civilization, he reiterated that "the 21st century will be the Whitehead century." Because Whitehead's philosophy is deeply ecological, calling the 21st century the Whitehead century also means the 21st century is the century of ecological civilization. He hoped that the participants would work together to usher in this new century. Throughout his lifetime, Professor Griffin harbored a deep amity toward China and placed great hope in the nation’s pursuit of an ecological civilization. He sincerely hoped that China could successfully avoid the drawbacks of Western-style modernization and embark on a path of postmodernization—that is, a path of ecological civilization. I think these are all precious intellectual legacies he left us.
Q: In life, we often lose many things along the way. Although we possess abundant material wealth today, it is often the more abundant this wealth is, the easier it is to feel empty and lacking deep meaning in life. Therefore, at the end of this interview, we would like to ask you to answer the question about the meaning of life: What is the meaning of our existence as human beings? Or, how can we live out the value and meaning of our lives?
Z.W.: This question seems simple, but it's actually quite difficult to answer because there is no single, standard answer. If you ask philosophers from different schools of thought, they will give you different answers. Here, I only want to share my own perspective from the viewpoint of organic process philosophy. If you ask me whether life is meaningful or meaningless, my answer is that life is both meaningless and meaningful. To say that life is meaningless means that life doesn't have a pre-determined meaning. We didn't choose to come into this world, so what meaning does our life have? To say that life is meaningful means that the meaning of life is discovered, created, and lived out by ourselves. We were fortunate to meet Dr. Cobb—the "eco-sage of our time”—and Dr. Griffin—the "ecological chivalrous philosopher of our time"—in the United States, thus realizing that another kind of person exists, and that here is indeed meaning in life.
According to the philosophy of organic processes, the meaning of life lies in transcending the self, extending one's love to others, and bringing beauty to the world. Simply put, the meaning of life is to bring love to others and create beauty for the world. If our existence brings warmth and hope to others, then our existence has value. As the renowned Chinese singer Faye Wong sang in one of her early songs: “There was once someone who made me realize how wonderful it is to be alive in this world.” Confucius's saying in Analects, "To bring peace to the elderly, to be trusted by friends, and to cherish the young," essentially conveys the same meaning. Unlike Descartes' "I think, therefore I am," the organic process philosophy emphasizes “I give, therefore I am,” believing that the more you give, the more you receive. Those who bring love to others and beauty to the world are destined to be warm-hearted people, possessing a strong magnetic field; naturally, they will have good interpersonal relationships and are more likely to succeed. Everyone knows that Chinese women have traditionally upheld the reserved nature of Eastern women. However, I personally witnessed many Chinese women, admiring Professor Cobb's character, rushing to embrace him when he was in China. Professor Cobb was deeply moved, and so was I. At that moment, I understood the meaning of “If you blossom, butterflies will come.”
We must all realize that without innovation, neither love for others nor beauty in the world can truly flourish. This is why constructive postmodernism and organic process philosophy emphasize innovation so much. According to Griffin, creativity is an essential human attribute. You might say that great thinkers like Professor Cobb and Griffin created a new theoretical school like process theology, opened up a new research field, and creatively proposed "green GDP." What can a person like me do? I hope the following short story will help answer your questions.
I once had a female graduate student who insisted on studying "adolescent abortion" from a constructive postmodern perspective in her master's thesis. I said, "You're a young girl who isn't even married yet, why are you choosing such a topic?" With so many Western philosophers to choose from, one could easily write an excellent master's thesis. Why choose such a sensitive and controversial topic? She explained her reasons in detail: she discovered that the abortion rate among Chinese teenagers remains high, reaching 13 million abortions annually, with a 75% abortion rate among women under 20, and repeat abortions being particularly severe. Meanwhile, advertisements for painless abortions are everywhere, claiming it's "as easy as eating ice cream." Everyone knows that for teenage girls just beginning puberty, their bodies are not yet fully developed, and abortion can cause significant damage, even affecting fertility in adulthood. For such an issue concerning the health of millions of young girls, our philosophical community has remained silent. She wanted to fill this gap. While some in sociology have researched this, it's mainly focused on statistical data; no one has studied the philosophy behind teenage abortion or how to address it philosophically. I thought the student's reasoning was sound, so I supported her research on this topic. The paper was later written and published, and it is estimated to be the first academic paper in contemporary Chinese philosophy to explore "adolescent abortion" from a philosophical perspective, which is very significant. This paper expounded the compassionate concept of treating life with kindness, found a third way, not only protecting the health of countless young girls but also saving countless lives—a truly great deed.
Furthermore, Shi Yan’s story provides yet another compelling example. After earning her Ph.D. from Renmin University and completing postdoctoral research at Tsinghua University, she was widely regarded as a rising academic star who could easily have secured a prestigious teaching position within the established system, but she defied the odds, choosing to dedicate herself to organic farming and creating Little Donkey Citizen Farm—China's first community-supported agriculture farm—and later, Sharing Harvest Farm. Ten years later, her farm not only earns over 8 million yuan annually but has also trained thousands of new farmers. Under her influence, there are now nearly a thousand community-supported agriculture farms in China. This is what it means to create an extraordinary life, bringing love to others and beauty to the world. Her selection as a 2016 Global Young Leader and her receipt of the 2023 John Cobb Common Good Award are truly well-deserved.
The ETU School founded by Ms. Li Yinuo is also a prime example of bringing love to others and beauty to the world. She once held a partner position at McKinsey Company, undoubtedly a successful person. However, McKinsey has over 600 partners globally; one more or one less makes no difference. But there is only one ETU School. By bringing ETU School to the world and the joy it has brought to countless children, Li Yinuo's life has been elevated and given meaning.
People may wonder: Shi Yan and Li Yinuo are wealthy—what if I am not? You may not be as wealthy as Shi Yan and Li Yinuo, and I may not be either, but do you have even one yuan in your pocket? Professor Liu Xiaoting of Beijing Normal University initiated the “One Yuan Project.” He encouraged his graduate students to prepare one yuan each time they went out, intending to give it away. At bus stations, subway entrances, and under pedestrian overpasses, they were to give this one yuan to elderly people living alone, people with disabilities, and those in need. Don't underestimate this one yuan; after giving it away, your will feel different, and over time, your entire being will be transformed. You might say, "I don't even have one yuan." That's okay. Do you have a smile? You give it to others; if you give me a smile, I'll return it with a smile. How wonderful would a world be if everyone was full of love and everyone smiled! In this process, through the transformation of each of us as individuals, a new kind of civilization might emerge.
Note: The authors would like to thank Professor Paul Delaney in the English department at Westmont College，USA for his editorial assistance and language polishing of this manuscript.
Interviewed by:
Siqun Yu
ecological writer/postmodern farmer, director of the Ecological Project at the Institute of Postmodern Development for China
Qian Zhang
freelance writer, farmer COO of Organic.com (China)
Hongyu Lin
doctoral student at the School of Educational Sciences, Harbin Normal University (China)
Suggested citation note
Yu, S., Zhang, Q., Lin, H. (2026). Walking on the great path toward Ecological Civilization. —An interview with postmodern eco-philosopher Zhihe Wang. Ecopoiesis: Eco-Human Theory and Practice, 7 (2). [open access internet journal]. – URL: http://ecopoiesis.ru (d/m/y)