Honoured brethren,
Of all the things which seem constant is change. Change can otherwise be the most apt phenomenon to describe reality and human experience. We experience change in maturity, our intellect, and emotions and even in physique. Apart from physical realities, we also have non-physical institutions which day by day embark on change. Since life is based on reality, reality based on experience and experience is what shapes our decisions and actions, then, man is involved continually in a changing reality. This is so because we have varied experiences. He changes many times but remains the same person. He is thus exemplary of an unchanging permanence. This is but an aspect of a cloudy paradox which many have not come to terms with about change. Change has merited the monopoly of permanence because it is believed that because it is ever changing, then, it is constant in its circle. I however, may deviate from this traditional belief about change. Change has too many unchanging sides. This is the inherent paradox of change. Change thus is paradoxical. This is the very background upon which I make a departure on the analysis of change, to analyze with synoptic details some of the faces of change.
Robin Le Poidevin has Change defined as the variation of properties (whether of things or of regions of space) over time. But this definition is incomplete in a number of respects. The reference to properties and time raises two important questions. The first concerns whether we need to specify further the kinds of properties which are involved in change. If we define change in an object as temporal variation of its properties we are faced with the problem that some properties of an object may alter without there being a consequent change in the object itself. The second question concerns the passage of time: does temporal variation constitute change only in virtue of some feature of time itself, namely the fact (or putative fact) that time passes?
In talking of real change therefore a consideration of time and properties is very important. Unless, there is a passage of time to which the properties of a thing X at point Y no longer remains the same at point Z, then we cannot talk of real change. There is indeed a very elastic debate for the reality of real change or not. The British idealist, McTaggart whose proposition for change is one which should not be based on alteration of truth-value of different proposition but alteration of truth-value of the same proposition. For example, the seminary resumes every October 2nd. This is a proposition. If the seminary continually resumes on this same day over time, then this does not change, only time changes. This is the real change. Real change therefore is a conception within time. I shall return to this background in my analysis of time.
Suffices to mention about change is the idea of properties. Change very often is conceived equally in the variation in properties. The properties that are in variation that warrants us to talk about change can be grouped into two: intrinsic and extrinsic properties. The intrinsic changes are those that have to do with the very being of a thing or person and it is what the thing or being is contingent on, whereas extrinsic changes are mere regulative changes like a person being fat and later grows sleek. This kind of change is only dependent on the fact that there is a person before we talk of him being fat or sleek. The change in size is dependent on the person. Change or what can be referred to as real change is the variation of intrinsic properties in time lag and space. This last parameter ‘space’ is equally important too in understanding change. All the above analyses are the philosophical understanding of change. This however is not the same way change is understood in pedestrian conception and vocabulary which very often is within its parlance change is heavily talked about. Worthy of note is that change comes either imposed or self-opted. It is imposed by circumstance, necessity or nature or one freely opts for real change based on conviction.
Against an honest background of our analyses so far, the question that poses a great difficulty hitherto will be addressed, does change itself not change? Change taken metaphorically embarks on growth which we call change. But this is not real change as the very constituents, or essentialities of its nature, what this paper has addressed as intrinsic properties are unchanging. It is precisely on this platform I hold a philosophical position that change is unchanging and as such cannot claim a monopoly to permanence. Change here so far as a metaphysical reality has an intrinsic constituent whose features are unchanging. The dogmatic cliché that the only permanent thing is change thus is no more that a humorous play upon word.
Albeit change is one thing that happens every time, real change is one thing many people would rarely want to embark on even when the movement is progressive. Take for instance death. A person who dies has experienced real change. It is only when a person dies he can usually go to heaven and be with God. If you ask whether an individual likes such an experience, rightly so he will answer in the affirmative but quite bogging is that nobody wants to die. There is thus a natural phobia for change. My probe is within the ambit: what is the cause of this? The answer is however not far fetched.
Man like lower animals is afraid to leap. This is one instinct that has not been elaborately popularized, the instinct of inner fear. One exercises fear to leap because, we do not have the real experience of where we are going into. At the moment, we attempt a leap; our rationality turns on skepticism even on the juiciest explanation on where we are attempting to leap into is a safe haven. Fear! Take for instance; Heaven. We are told is good and juicy and we cannot go there unless we die. If you ask a pocket of people if they want to go to heaven, there is an impulsive answer in the affirmative. But talk of death; our rationality turns on fear unconsciously. We thus probe, how am I sure, heaven is the better than earth. No one will not give up where he is for a better offer when he is convinced and believes in the new and greener offer.
Another reason for reluctance to change is adaptative difficulties. One may be so used to a place or style that changing is difficult merely on the merit of problem of starting all over again. The think of what they are likely to loss and so on. At the death of a person, we hear mourners often say, ‘we know you are in heaven but we shall miss your company’ or ‘we know you will miss us as we are missing you’. These are inklings of adaptative difficulties. The problem of change or fear of change is one factor that keeps limiting progress. Progress of individuals, progress of institutions, etc
Life is heavily contingent on faith. Look at virtually everything we do. Marriage, religion, politics, socialization, etc is based on faith. Where change opens up for progress, faith is its handmaid or foundation for realizing this end. For real change to occur, the individual or thing who wants to embark on it should prepare for it, must understand its prospective undertakings as well as its implications. When one has done these, sincerity demands a leap of faith. This is what brings progress. One can prepare for real change via positiva and via negative. There are certain preparations for change which is in itself is a choice for real change. Such processes culminate in the new change. Preparation thus is very important for the fruits of real change. If our penchant for sincerity can be incensed, then we need to deepen our faith, which leads to choices in real change. Faith talked about here is not exclusively a religious phenomenon but also conceived in his social understanding.
As a consequence, the million-dollar question is, does everything undergo change? Does God change? Does morality change? Does good change? These questions have been inadvertently addressed in preceding lines of this work. Real change we came to appreciate in this work take effect in time, space and must be about some intrinsic properties having variation from what they used to be. Once these things cannot be conceived in these perspectives then we cannot talk about real change in them. These particulars: God, morality, good, etc in themselves are some sorts of finality or to use a loose categorization, are ends. God cannot be conceived in space just as we have about change itself. Change thus we can say don’t occur in God. This is the background of the theology of an Unchanging God: He is the same yesterday, today and forever. This is perenniality in change. Change by this latter usage is thus in its loose sense. While God undergoes variation in extrinsic features its intrinsic constituent remains the same. This is God; an unchanging monolith. This is equally true of the Church, morality, and other primary particulars like good and so on.
In this concluding section, I wish to address what the end of change is. The end of change is growth and progress. All change is geared toward a growth or progress. It should be borne in mind that there is sometimes something called stunted growth. Stunted growth is that which is not a movement in retardation. Any growth that is retarded is a movement toward a yet-to-be-actualized end. The ultimate end of change is thus for change. Any movement or change which is not in this line is only a process toward that. Progress is ultimate for proper self-actualization, a movement to the essence, the thingness of a thing; that for which it can be called good.
Since change is aimed at progress and self-actualization then one must take a step in sincerity to embark on change more in the bid at reaching self-actualization. This change must be a movement backed by sincere conviction and empowered by faith. Change should be a forward movement and one thing a paradigm we must very often use in bringing the best out of events, things and persons. We must begin a probe, a radical probe on making change for progress in ever aspects of our living.
My humble submission is that change is the gestation of progress. Change is thus to spice for a richer human experience.
I remain,
IKHIANOSIME, Frankl
No comments:
Post a Comment