1.We who have lived through much of this century are now pondering what our lifestyles should be like in the next. In this context I would like to consider what values we inherited form the 19th century, and the lifestyle we have built around them. Time does not allow a comprehensive study, so I intend to take up certain particular aspects.
It seems to me that PROGRESS is one of the main ideals we inherited from the 19th century. People everywhere strive for a better life, and we have put all our energies into realizing our dreams. Among our achievements we can include science and technology that have driven modern industry, and the concepts of the modern state and human rights. Satellites orbiting above our heads allow us to talk to each other no matter where on the planet we may be. Many countries have gained independence, and the concept of basic human rights for people everywhere has been recognized.
Yet if we stop and ask whether we can confidently recommend our 20th century values and way of life to the 21st century, we are forced to admit some doubts. Why should this be? I suspect it is because we realize that during this century we have not had sufficient respect for the concept of 'life'. The 20th century has certainly been a century of war, with the loss of many lives. All too often it is research for the military that pushes back the frontiers of science and develops new technologies. Japan has worked hard in the peace it has known since World War II to achieve industrial development, but this has led to environmental problems that are now seen around the globe, threatening our way of life and robbing other species of their very existence. That's not all. We are overwhelmed with problems that have a bearing on life itself: in food and energy supply and the size of populations, and at the everyday level, in health care, agriculture, education, and so on. So much so that a new term has been coined: survivability.
RESPECT FOR LIFE. As we move into the 21st century, we will have to tackle these problems head on, and find ways of living that hold all forms of life in greater respect. It's not a novel idea but this is what I believe.
How do we change our attitudes? I would like to put a question mark against the term 'progress', and highlight instead the term 'evolution', as the way that all life has reached the point we are at today. (In the 19th century this term was interchangeable with the idea of 'progress', so it is not so easy to use. But there is no other term to express the meaning of 'change that has supported a history of life that goes back 400 million years', so I would like you here to think of 'evolution' as simply meaning 'bald change'.)
If we compare the implications of the two terms, we find there are vast differences between them:

Progress Efficiency Uniformity Quantity Closed systems Divisive Rational

evolution process diversity quality open systems holistic irrational

2.Thinking about the future of humankind, as we confront the crises to 'life' even as globalization proceeds, we must surely find our basic values among those listed under 'evolution', and only make the most limited and specialized use of those listed under 'progress'.
For example, in dealing with the present challenge of globalization, we can hold no to the identity we have as a 'country', but it's essential we make it an 'open system' in order to preserve the diversity of people's ethnicity, culture, lifestyle etc. It is simply not possible for a country to be a closed system: it leads only to tragedy. And the suggestion we hear that globalization will cause everything to tend towards uniformity and standardization is again impossible and counter-productive.
So how do we create new systems based on new values? While it is important that this issue be considered at macro- level that covers politics, economics, and so on, I myself prefer to work from the standpoint of people's everyday lives. My approach comes from my background in biology, but nevertheless I believe it is the changes that spring from daily life that are the most significant and valid.
More specifically, this is a two-pronged approach, involving a study of biohistory, and the concept of 'life-stage communities'. Biohistory is an investigation of how each living thing on the planet, as a DNA-based system deriving from the same ancestors, came to its present existence, and how these life forms are related to each other. It then examines how the human species fits into this web of the history and interrelations of life forms. (Biohistory also implies overcoming the problems associated with modern science, but this is not dealt with here.) To find a better way of living for the 21st century we must start with the recognition that the human race is part of a system of life forms that goes back 400 million years, and understand how vital it is we make use of the vast resources of wisdom that have accrued through this long history. The implications of evolution listed earlier: process, diversity, quality, holism, and irrationality are all aspects of life systems that we understand from the study of biohistory. This knowledge alone forms the basis of our values for the 21st century, and at the same time can be utilized in scientific and technological research.
A life-stage community is one that allows a full and rewarding life for every individual at each of life's passing stages: infancy, childhood, school years, adolescence, adulthood and old age. Such a community would not treat children simply as the next generation of adults, or adults, or regard the elderly as having completed their useful life in society. A fundamental feature of health care, for example, would be having doctors who look after each patient throughout his or her life, transferring the patient to a specialist's care for particular treatment if it becomes necessary. Doctors would thus be focused on people rather than illnesses, and health care would mean treating an illness as a single episode in the context of the patient's whole life.
What biohistory and the concept of life-stage communities share is that they are based on the idea of passing time. Areas of activity that have seen a mass of problems build up through the 20th century, such as agriculture and education, need to incorporate this idea that time passes and circumstances change. Our values and social system are rooted in concepts expressed in the word 'life', that include the phenomenon of life, an individual's life-span, and the way we live. This doesn't seek to negate the achievements of the 20th century, but instead to make full sue of its accumulated wisdom, and while doing so to allow the maximum expression of the diverse cultures, ethnicities and backgrounds that exist on the planet. Not only that: we must build a society that promotes the diversity of individuals within it. Biohistory teaches us that one of the qualities of life on the planet is 'continuity that springs from the dynamism inherent in inconsistency'. We have perhaps been far too anxious to resolve inconsistencies, and instead have been confronted with even more. Deriving energy from inconsistency-this is surely the sort of strength by which we should live in the 21st century.
I have talked about switching our values and systems as we move from the 20th to the 21st century, but this is, in fact, a major switch in the history of human wisdom. (Table)
Human wisdom started, in all probability, from the basics of 'life'. This was an age of mythology, in which human beings lived earnest lives as one of life's species, integrated into the natural world. Through their bodies and minds, people became aware of the totality of life forms, and learned their inter-relations, and information was transmitted in the form of stories. Next came wisdom based on reason. In ancient Greece, not only was diversity, or natural history, appreciated, but an interest in universality, or natural philosophy, developed. Reason throws more light on the existence of gods: gods that were integrated with humankind in the natural world. But when we move on into the Christian world, the ideas of 'god', 'humankind' and 'nature' were separated from one another. Natural philosophy became a powerful concept and eventually led to what we now know as science. Through science and technology, which turned 'progress', as I said, into an ideal, we started deluding ourselves that humankind had supplanted 'god' and overcome the power of nature. And now we are caught up in an artificial world created by science and technology, all the while neglecting the importance of 'life'.
So we look towards the 21st century as an age in which the concept of life will again be valued. This is what I believe and, as I said before, is something we must accomplish. How ever, looking at it over a longer time frame, it seems as though it is something that will inevitably happen. It is the essence of our humanity to regard 'life' as fundamental. This is merely a temporary phase during which it has been compartmentalized, and we will surely return to fundamentals. But to effect the switch to prioritizing 'life' over reason we cannot remain observers watching from the outside (exo), but must immerse ourselves in the task (endo). That way, while making full use of all the knowledge we have due to the disciplines of reason and science, we can put together the wisdom that will produce a world of new mythology. This is my vision of how wisdom will be integrated in the 21st century.
This concept of wisdom touches on our daily lives in the life- stage community I mentioned earlier. Thus we bring in the issue of bridging the gap between wisdom and our modern way of life that has long troubled 20th century science.