 Good morning. My, my, a lot of you woke up. It's a pleasure to be here with you as we collectively explore the rich theme of this conference I need to see. House lights? That would be better. Thank you. So we're here to explore together this rich theme, transforming habits of thought. I had a very good teaching moment in the elevator yesterday about this theme. So it's good. We should continue to use it. It's an important theme because it's central to the question of social transformation. For in so many ways, our minds are involved in constructing the world we find ourselves in. Our perceptions and the concepts we hold determine the social reality we see and create. The very patterns of our thought, our suppositions, frameworks of understanding, and the questions we are moved to ask or not ask influence how we interact with and shape this reality. So our conceptions of who we are as human beings, the interactions and discourses that inform our thinking, and our experiences in applying ideas and ideals all serve to define the parameters of social existence. In this respect, Baha'u'llah provides clear direction as to where our thoughts and the actions flowing from these thoughts should be focused. Do not busy yourselves in your own concerns. Let your thoughts be fixed upon that which will rehabilitate the fortunes of mankind and sanctify the hearts and souls of men. It is this challenging mandate of the Baha'i teachings that I wish to examine with you this morning, particularly how a spiritual understanding of human identity and purpose gives rise to social processes and policies essential for humanity's collective progress. As we now look at human society, its characteristics of complexity and interconnectedness and immediacy are unprecedented. As the sheer intensity and velocity of change challenges our assumptions about the nature and structure of the reality we find ourselves in, we're confronted with a set of vital questions. These include, what is the source of our identity? Where precisely should our attachments and loyalties lie? If our identity or identity so impel us, how and with whom should we come together? What is the nature of the bonds that bring us together? And how does such self understanding give rise to the formation of individual and societal goals? Some easy questions that we're going to take a look at. A principal idea that I want to explore with you is that the organization and direction of human affairs is inextricably connected to the future evolution of our identity. For it is from our identity that intention, action, and social development flow. Identity determines how we see ourselves and conceive our position in the world, how others see us or classify us, and how we choose to engage with those around us. Knowing who we are, the sociologist Philip Selznick observes, helps us to appreciate the reach as well as the limits of our attachments. Such attachments play a central role in shaping our authentic selves and in determining our attitudes toward those within and outside the circle of our social relationships. Acting on the commitments implied by these attachments serves to amplify the powers of individuals in affecting societal well-being. So notions of personal and collective identity can exert considerable influence over the norms and practices of a rapidly integrating global community. As we have many associational linkages, identity comes in a variety of forms. At times we identify ourselves by our family, ethnicity, nationality, religion, mother tongue, race, gender, class, culture, or profession. At other times our locale, the enterprises and institutions we work for, our loyalty to sports teams, affinity for certain types of music and cuisine, attachment to particular causes, and educational affiliations provide definitional aspects to who we are. Now by virtue of the high school and the university I went to, I am both an angel and a beaver. I love locks and bagels which has something to do with my last name, but perhaps most importantly for those of you who know me, one of my primary identities is my allegiance to my professional football team that has orange and blue as its colors. I took my daughter last weekend to one of the scrimmages and I said this is our tribe. And interestingly it is in the realm of sports where you see actually the entire cross section of a population, across race, ethnicity, age that comes together, rarely in any other setting in our society does this occur. So obviously there are other allegiances which would probably give you a better notion of who I am and perhaps being of a high would tell you more about what motivates me and grounds me. So the sources of identification which animate and inspire us are immensely diverse. In short there are multiple demands of loyalty placed upon us and consequently our identities as Nobo Laureate Amartya Sen has noted are inescapably plural. But which identity or identities are most important? Can divergent identities be reconciled and do these identities enhance or limit our understanding of and engagement with the world? Each of us on a daily basis both consciously and unconsciously draws upon, expresses, and mediates between our multiple senses of identity. And as our sphere of social interaction expands we tend to subsume portions of how we define ourselves and seek to integrate into a wider domain of human experience. This often requires us to scrutinize and even resist particular interpretations of allegiance that may have a claim on us. We therefore tend to prioritize which identities matter most to us. As the theorist, Iris Mary Ann Young stresses, individuals are agents. We constitute our own identities. Each person's identity is unique. A person's identity is not some sum of her gender, racial, class, and national affinities. She is only her identity, which she herself has made by the way that she deals with and acts in relation to others. The matrix of our associations surely influences how we understand and interpret the world but cannot fully account for how we think, act, or what values we hold. That a particular identity represents a wellspring of meaning to an individual, need not diminish the significance of other attachments, or eclipse our moral intuition, or our use of reason. Affirming affinity with a specific group as a component of one's personal identity should not limit how one views one's place in society or the possibilities of how one might live. While it is undoubtedly simplistic to reduce human identity to specific contextual categories, such as nationality or culture, such categories do provide a strong narrative contribution to an individual's sense of being. Social, cultural, and other narratives directly impact who we are. They provide context and structure for our lives, allowing us to link what we wish to become to a wider human inheritance, thereby providing a basis for meaningful collective life. Various identities serve as vehicles of unity, bringing coherence and direction to the disparate experiences of individuals. But modernity has transformed identity in such a way that we must view ourselves as being not only in a condition of dependence, or independence, but also interdependence. Our connections to others now transcend traditional bounds of culture, nation, and community. The unprecedented nature of these connections is radically reshaping human organization and the scale and impact of human exchange. Globalization, though, has been with us a long time. The movement of peoples, goods, and ideas is an inherent feature of human history and development. Virtually every culture is linked to others by a myriad of ties. Folks were all mixed up, were all together. There is nothing that is separate. Clearly, the perceptions that human beings have of each other matter. In a world convulsed by contention and conflict, conceptions of identity that feed the forces of prejudice and mistrust must be closely examined. Assertions that certain populations can be neatly partitioned into oppositional categories of affiliation deserve particular scrutiny. A tenable global ethics the philosopher Kwame Apia observes has to temper our respect for difference with the respect for the freedom of actual human beings to make their own choices. Existing mores, practices, and institutions can inform, validate, and even ennoble the human condition, but cannot or should not foreclose new moral or social directions for individuals and communities. Indeed, collective learning and adjustment are defining characteristics of social evolution. Because our perceptions and experiences change, our understanding of reality necessarily undergoes change, so too, then, do our identities change. The prevalent stance that identity is solely about difference is untenable. Perceiving identity through the relativistic lens of separation or cultural preservation ignores compelling evidence of our common humanity, and can only aggravate the forces of discord now so pervasive in the world. The only alternative to this path of fragmentation and disunity is to nurture affective relationships across lines of ethnicity, creed, territory, and color. Relationships that can serve as the basis of a new social framework of universal solidarity and mutual respect. A one-dimensional understanding of human beings must be rejected. As Amartya Sen underscores, the hope of harmony in the contemporary world lies to a great extent in a clearer understanding of the pluralities of human identity, and in the appreciation that they cut across each other and work against a sharp separation along one single hardened line of impenetrable division. The resolution of the problems now engulfing the planet demands a more expansive sense of human identity. As articulated by Baha'u'llah more than a century ago, the earth is but one country and mankind its citizens. The crucial need of the present hour, then, is to determine the conceptual and practical steps that will lay the foundations of an equitable and harmonious global order. Effectively addressing the crises now disrupting human affairs will require new models of social transformation that recognize the deep interrelationship between the material, ethical, and transcendent dimensions of life. It is evident that such models can emerge only from a fundamental change in consciousness about who we are, how we regard others who enter our ambit no matter how near or distant, and how we collectively design the structures and processes of social life, whether local or global. From a Baha'i perspective, a universal identity is a vital precursor to action that is universal in its effects. To the emergence of a world community, the consciousness of world citizenship, the founding of a world civilization and culture in the words of Shoghi Effendi. In emphasizing our global identity, Baha'u'llah presents a conception of life that insists upon a redefinition of all human relationships. Between individuals, between human society and the natural world, between the individual and the community, and between individual citizens and their governing institutions. In the Baha'i view, social origin, position, or rank are of no account in the sight of God. As Baha'u'llah avares, man's glory lieth in his knowledge, his upright conduct, his praiseworthy character, his wisdom, and not his nationality or rank. The watchword of the Baha'i community is unity in diversity. More than creating a culture of tolerance, the notion of unity in diversity entails vanquishing corrosive divisions along lines of race, class, gender, nationality, and belief, and erecting a dynamic and cooperative social ethos that reflects the oneness of human nature. From this vantage point, our multiple senses of identity are not in tension with our common humanity, but are facets of that common humanity. The ideology of difference, so ubiquitous in contemporary discourse, militates against the possibility of social progress. It provides no basis whereby communities defined by specific backgrounds, customs, or creeds can bridge their divergent perspectives and resolve social tensions. The value of variety and difference cannot be minimized, but neither can the necessity for coexistence, order, and mutual effort. To foster a global identity, to affirm that we are members of one human family, is a deceptively simple, but powerful idea. While traditional loyalties and identities must be appreciated, they are inadequate for addressing the predicament of modernity. And consequently, as Shoghi Effendi indicates, a higher loyalty, one that speaks to the common destiny of all the Earth's inhabitants, is necessary. In this sense, self-determination, whether at the personal or group level, must now be understood as participation in the construction of a broader collectivity. Participation of this kind, by a diverse array of cultures and peoples, offers the promise of enriching the entire fabric of civilized life. An inherent aspect of such a universal identity is recognition of the spiritual reality that animates our inner selves. To be sure, a global identity grounded in awareness of our common humanists marks a great step forward from where humanity has been. But a strictly secular or material formulation of global identity is unlikely to provide a sufficient motivational basis for overcoming historic prejudices and engendering universal moral action. Establishing a global milieu of peace, prosperity, and justice is in the final analysis a matter of the heart. It involves a change in basic attitudes and values that can only come from recognizing the normative and spiritual nature of the challenges before us. This is especially so, because if you travel around the world, what do you find? You find that the majority of human beings do not view themselves simply as material beings, concerned with material needs and circumstances, but rather view themselves as beings endowed with spiritual sensibility and an innate dignity. The recognition then of our common spiritual nature is what ultimately informs personal and shared social meaning and informs our social arrangements. It provides the basis for empathetic relationships and cooperation as well as principled action. For in kindled souls, spiritually inspired behavior flows not from externally imposed duties and rights, but from the spontaneous love that each member of the community has for one another. From perceiving that we are all sheltered under the same divine reality comes both humility and the means for true social cohesion. So our different senses of identity consequently become fully realized through the development of our spiritual identity. Each of these senses of identity provide a means for achieving our basic existential purpose. The discovery and refinement of the spiritual capacities latent within us. Through the concrete expression of such capacities, compassion, trustworthiness, fairness, courage, forbearance, and willingness to sacrifice for the common wheel, we define a path of spiritual growth. This is the path of transcendence, a way of being and doing in which individual identity is tied to something greater than the self. It may be obvious, but sometimes it needs to be said. Human beings are social beings. The self cannot evolve outside of human relationships. Indeed, the self develops principally through endeavors that are participatory in nature. Virtues such as generosity, loyalty, mercy, and civility cannot be manifested in isolation from others. The Baha'i teachings affirm that the principal agent of moral choice is the autonomous person, but this autonomy is exercised within a broader social context, as well as an all-encompassing spiritual reality that informs the nature of that social context. The Baha'i teachings thus offer a social conception of human identity, in which the inner aspirations of the self are aligned with the goals of a just and creative polity. So in this way, the Baha'i community is able to balance individual prerogative and individual development with the needs of the whole, thus reconciling the right with the good. Realizing a common understanding of human purpose and action, especially in a complex world of pluralistic identities and rapidly shifting cultural and moral boundaries, depends on the recognition and expression of a spiritual conception of life. For the emergence of progressive modes of living requires both an internal and external reordering, a reordering of human preferences, priorities, and modes of social organization. By redefining identity in terms of the totality of human experience, the Baha'i teachings anticipate the moral reconstruction of all human practices. When an evolving global society draws upon the spiritual mainspring of human identity and purpose, truly constructive avenues of social change can be pursued. Among the results of the manifestation of spiritual forces, Abdul Baha'i confirms, will be that the human world will adapt itself to a new social form, and human equality will be universally established. It is still regrettably the case that the identity of certain individuals and groups result from a shared experience of oppression, from being the victims of systematic discrimination or injustice. In addressing this dimension of human identity, Baha'u'llah speaks forcefully and repeatedly about the rights and dignity of all human beings, and the indispensability of creating mechanisms of social justice. But he also explains that spiritual oppression is the most serious of all. What oppression is more grievous than that a soul seeking the truth should not know where to go for it, and from whom to seek it. From this standpoint, it is in the displacement of a transcendent understanding of life by an ascendant materialism that we find the source of disaffection, enemy, and uncertainty that so pervades modern existence. All forms of oppression ultimately find their genesis in the denial of our essential spiritual identity. As Baha'u'llah earnestly counsels us, deny not my servant should he ask anything from thee, for his face is my face. Be then abashed before me. Clearly, our search for self-definition and recognition is intimately tied up with the struggle for social justice. Establishing patterns of reciprocal recognition, of genuine respect and concern for the other, is an expression of our true identity as spiritual actors. Social integration and harmony is critically dependent on such mutual recognition. As the theorist Axel Hanef suggests, only to the degree to which we actively care about the development of the potentialities of others can our shared goals be realized. And this requires cultivation of what Hanef terms communicative freedom, or what we might describe as participatory equality. The opportunity for all members of society to meaningfully interact and contribute to public discourse, and thereby to the building of a definite vision of the common good. So in a very real sense, the formation and evolution of our identities occurs through dialogue and association with others. Human life, the philosopher Charles Taylor notes, has a fundamentally dialogical character. It is through interchange that individuals and the communities they compose are able to give definition to their identities and their long-term goals. Human beings are creating, learning, communicating beings. And therefore, participatory mechanisms that allow this communicative nature to be fully expressed must characterize all institutional practices and social arrangements. And this is where the Abdu'l-Baha'i Revelation really comes into play. Constructive dialogue or what Baha'u'llah describes as consultation is at the very heart of social order. He indicates that consultation is the bestower of understanding, and that in all things it is necessary to consult. For no welfare and no well-being can be attained except through consultation. Abdu'l-Baha'i states, the principle of consultation is the one of the most fundamental elements of the divine edifice. Even in their ordinary affairs, the individual members of society should consult. But he adds, true consultation is spiritual conference in the attitude and atmosphere of love. If individuals and communities are to become the principal actors in promoting their physical, spiritual, and social well-being, they must develop the capacity to consult and act in a harmonious manner. Further, advancing towards conditions of greater justice must involve a process of collective reasoning that assesses the actual states of persons and communities, especially their ability to realize opportunities for choice and action. Consultation, therefore, and this is critically important, can lead to the creation of new social meanings and innovative social forms that reflect what is reasonable and fair for communities to achieve. But any such process of collective deliberation and decision-making the Baha'i writings insist must be devoid of adversarial posturing, as well as being dispassionate and fully participatory in spirit. It is through discourse, which is inclusive and unifying, that the religious impulse finds expression in the modern age. Obviously, there can never be an absolutely objective or static understanding of what constitutes concepts such as social equity, human security, power, the common good, democracy, or community. There is an evolutionary aspect to social development, a dynamic process of learning, dialogue, and praxis in which social challenges and solutions are constantly redefined and reassessed. There are always multiple understandings of particular social questions, and these diverse perspectives each typically contain some measure of validity. By building a broader framework of analysis that encompasses not only material and technical variables, but the normative and spiritual dimensions of various social issues, new insights can emerge that enrich dialogues previously locked into narrow conceptual boundaries. A unifying sense of identity can obviously play an important role in facilitating and sustaining such a consultative path. In many ways, the struggle to understand our identity is tied up with the question of meaning in modern life. Increasingly, calls are being made for rooting, meaning, and identity in community, but when the community itself is religiously, morally, and culturally pluralistic in character, it is challenging for diverse voices to find common ground. It is here where the behind concepts of unity and diversity and non-adversarial dialogue and decision-making can offer a potent alternative vision of social advancement. Engaging in a cooperative search for truth will no doubt lead to the discovery and implementation of shared perspectives and values. Such open moral dialogue within and among diverse communities can lead to a process of action, reflection, and refinement resulting in genuine social learning and progress. And perhaps one of the best examples we have of this is the evolving international human rights discourse as a significant instance of cross-cultural moral exchange. Meaning emerges from an independent search for truth and a chosen freedom grounded in social experience and social participation. A participation that leads to the enlargement of the self. What is significant about participation is that it creates new identities and new solidarities. In Baha'i communities around the globe, patterns of fellowship, knowledge building, and collaboration among diverse peoples are giving rise to a new human culture. Baha'is have found that encouraging new modalities of association, participation, and dialogue is key to promoting social development and effective local governance that is democratic in spirit and method. Hence Baha'u'llah's statement that fellowship and sincere association are conducive to the maintenance of order in the world and to the regeneration of nations. But let's get back to the general and current reality which is somewhat depressing. As we are all painfully aware, social discourse around the world is all too often characterized by disunity, contention, manipulation, and power seeking. So how then can the arena of human interchange known as the public sphere be reconceived and reconstructed? The notion of the public sphere is a complex concept in social theory. For our purposes, it can be understood as the many social spaces of discourse and deliberation where the diverse voices of society identify mutual interests, reach common judgments, and influence action in light of those judgments. It can be described more simply as the realm of social life in which public opinion is formed. In this sense, the public sphere is where society attempts to articulate ideas and goals related to the common good. The public sphere gives expression to the values and aspirations of individuals and families, the private sphere, and thereby affects the assumptions and policies of public institutions. Not surprisingly, many thinkers have assailed the patterns of social exclusion and inequality and dominant public spheres which have accentuated social divisions and led to the fragmentation of public dialogue. Other thinkers contend that the discourse in the public sphere is impoverished and indeed distorted by the avoidance and exclusion of religious and spiritual perspectives. The constrained vocabulary and categories of secular discourse fail to adequately convey the full implications of our normative convictions, premises, and commitments. Drawing upon the insights and resources of religious belief systems can admittedly complicate public dialogue, but can also serve to vitalize in deep and public deliberation. Any plausible vision of social betterment must give reference to those universal spiritual postulates that animate and guide human initiative. To ignore the very self-understanding that individuals and communities have regarding their essential identity and purpose is untenable and non-empirical. It severely limits the horizons of human flourishing available to us. We need a critical theory of society, but not one in which the interpretive schema is primarily materialistic and character. So public discourse must seek to be more open to alternative possibilities of framing social challenges and more morally engaged, even with the likely outcome of disagreement, because it is only in this way that social understanding can evolve. Truly productive or conscientious discursive engagement depends on fidelity to what actually grounds human belief in action. Ultimately, it is only through reconceiving identity, reflecting about our obligations to the multiple communities to which we are bound that substantive and creative social directions will unfold. In short, if we reflect about our obligations to the many communities to which we find ourselves embedded in, if we reflect about our obligations to our family, to our inner selves, and ultimately to God, this gives further definition to who we are and what our aim should be. What is important about this is that the recognition and exercise of such duties provides the very framework for actualizing human rights. Bahá'u'lláh speaks of both rights and duties, but there's a complementary relationship between the two. So to not reconceive identity in this way, to not think about our fundamental obligations to others and ultimately to God, is to fail to draw upon the very roots of human motivation that can ensure transformation of individual and collective behavior. This observation is underscored, for example, by some very interesting work, recent work, exploring how moral revolutions, such as the end of Atlantic slavery and the abandonment of Chinese footbinding, came about because of changed public perceptions about notions of human dignity and honor. For Bahá'u'lláh, it is a recognition of our identity as noble human agents that equities and distortions in the public sphere will eventually be overcome. With belief in the fundamental oneness of human relationships, Bahá'u'lláh's work to transcend the tendency of fragmented discourses in which some groups seek ascendancy over others. And instead, Bahá'u'lláh strives to expand the consciousness and capacity of communities to address their complex needs and aspirations. In this approach, the idea of power in the public sphere is radically reconceptualized from being a means of achieving advantage or domination to being an instrument of conciliation, service, truth, and unity. Bahá'u'lláh's seek to be agents of social transformation. The issue at stake is the type of transformation needed and how to bring it about. They're all sorts of transformation that are possible. But for Bahá'u'lláh's, both means and ends are important. The goal of a just and unified society cannot be attained through unjust and divisive means. We reject everything associated with the prevailing culture of abysserialism and base material motivation, but this does not imply that the Bahá'u'lláh community is disengaged from vital matters of the day. The grassroots or core activities now being pursued by Bahá'u'lláh's in all parts of the world are inherently vehicles of personal and communal change that inevitably lead to meaningful social endeavor and participation in public discourse. In many places, they already have. Social action is the fruit of spiritual awakening and knowledge generation. Implicit in any type of social action is a process of understanding and defining issues, roles, values and relationships. A process that is a key aspect of the new culture that is taking root in the Bahá'u'lláh community. In particular, our framing of issues, whether internal or external, is grounded in spiritual perception and spiritual principle. We are seeing that the empowerment of individuals and groups flows from spiritual awareness, expressed in tangible forms of service. In short, we are building patterns of social learning and fellowship in which meaning, understanding and action are conjoined. We are building community in a variety of ways and at different levels. Participation in the prevalent discourses of society is an area in which individuals, groups and institutions of the faith work within their respective spheres of influence to affect positive change in prevailing patterns of thought, communication and practice. In a letter to a National Spiritual Assembly, the Universal House of Justice explains that what is important is for Bahá'u'lláhs to be present in the many social spaces in which thinking and policies evolve on any one of a number of issues, on governance, the environment, climate change, the equality of men and women, human rights to mention a few, so that they can, as occasions permit, offer generously, unconditionally and without most humility, the teachings of the faith and their experience in applying them as a contribution to the betterment of society. The Bahá'u'lláh contributions to public discourse are as much about the mode of interactions that we have with others as about the ideas we share. While Bahá'u'lláhs are confident in bringing insights from Bahá'u'lláh's teachings to the public sphere and in sharing our modest experience, and this is very important, our experience is modest, in applying these teachings to the challenges of daily life, we also recognize that what we directly learn from the revelation is complemented by what we learn from the broader effects of the revelation, from the advances in knowledge across all areas of human undertaking. And so our participation in the discourses of society can be viewed as a process of mutual learning with partners, one that entails a posture of collaboration, sincerity, humility, openness, and flexibility. Our goal is not to present answers or persuade others to accept a Bahá'u'lláh position, but rather to enrich the conceptual terrain associated with a given discourse. Previous experience all around the world, from the local to the international level, has shown that the most effective Bahá'u'lláh contributions to major discourses have entailed reconciling various viewpoints, raising questions that stimulate new avenues of inquiry, and offering ways of creatively reframing issues. Every public discourse has a potential policy dimension. In a broad sense, public policy is about the nexus between individual interest and the public interest. It is about collective intention, purpose, and effort, about societies and communities developing strategies for realizing common ideals and goals, defining and addressing problems, managing key social relationships, and formulating structures and processes that channel individual capacity and harness collective resources. Public policy is by its very nature a subject of considerable interest of Bahá'u'lláhs, but also a realm of activity where Bahá'u'lláh institutions and individual Bahá'u'lláhs have carefully modulated the extent of their involvement. And this is for good reason. Public policy of whatever form is often suffused with political calculation, factionalism, or partisan political ideology. And this is something obviously that Bahá'u'lláhs avoid because of the clearly enunciated principle of non-participation in political matters. A principle that safeguards the integrity and unity of the Bahá'u'lláh community. But folks, things are changing. The House of Justice indicates that involvement in social discourse and action will at times require the Bahá'u'lláhs that Bahá'u'lláhs become associated with the development of public policy. In this regard, the term policy, like the term politics, has a broad meaning. While refraining from discussions of policies pertaining to political relations between nations or partisan political affairs within a country, Bahá'u'lláhs will no doubt contribute to the formulation and implementation of policies that address certain social concerns. It can be said that Bahá'u'lláhs engage in discourse on public affairs at the level of principle. But depending on circumstance, this can be a delicate balancing act, and consequently requires institutional guidance to sort out challenges associated with particular policy dialogues. Any social issue can be viewed through a partisan lens or perspective. Even basic terminology, as we're seeing now in American society, previously understood in neutral ways, can suddenly take on specific partisan meanings, and this likely would be terminology that Bahá'u'lláhs would not use in certain contexts. It is important, then, to recognize the evolutionary nature of the principle of non-involvement and political affairs. There has been a gradual shift in the nature and intensity of the interactions between Bahá'u'lláh institutions, particularly national spirit assemblies and governments. The situation of the Bahá'u'lláhs in Iran obviously has been one major catalyst in bringing about this shift. As the Bahá'u'lláh community expands and as its principles and methods for addressing the many ills of today's world receives wider attention, it will no doubt be called upon to help develop solutions to different challenges. It's direct engagement with government decision makers, non-governmental organizations, and leaders of thought from the cluster level to the international level will only intensify. The House of Justice alludes to the evolving conditions facing the Bahá'u'lláh community. With the passage of time, practices in the political realm will definitely undergo the profound changes anticipated in the Bahá'u'lláh writings. As a consequence, what we understand now of the policy of non-involvement in politics will also undergo a change. Policy is intimately bound up with politics and we should be comfortable with that. Broadly speaking, politics is concerned with the art of governance and the organization of human affairs. Policy analysis and policymaking can be understood as the systematic expression of political will and exchange. Policy is all about ideas and how ideas are explored, debated, and actualized in political communities. As one policy scholar has observed, what communities decide about when they make policy is meaning, not matter. The development of shared meanings about social reality simultaneously provides the conceptual and volitional basis for collective action. The manner in which issues are defined and possible solutions assessed is socially and politically constructed. Policymaking then can be understood as an ongoing process of dialogue in which categories of thought and action are assessed from diverse perspectives and in light of concrete experience. In this constant process of interchange, underlying disagreements about common ideals and goals are reformulated or resolved, hopefully. So if public policy is defined as a process which involves the assessment, the evaluation, and ultimately the adjustment of conditions affecting the general welfare of society, then there is no conflict with the Bahá'í teachings. The central objective of any public policy is to bring about systemic transformation. And in many cases, this means behavioral transformation, including changing the nature of relationships between various social actors, the way society treats its most vulnerable members, the way it uses natural or financial resources, the underlying assumptions it makes concerning the value of various avenues of human endeavor, or the manner in which society plans to meet the needs of future generations. So we have a basic convergence, as both the Bahá'í revelation and public policy are concerned with social transformation. As Bahá'u'lláh says, every matter related to state affairs which he raised for discussion falls under the shadow of one of the words sent down from the heaven of his glorious and exalted utterance. Clearly a spirit of inquiry and knowledge generation must guide the Bahá'í community's efforts to contribute to policy discourse. Promoting a process of inquiry and learning among relevant policy actors can lead to more comprehensive understandings of social problems, while simultaneously building bridges of cooperation among these actors. And in limited ways, this has certainly been the experience of the Bahá'í international community and various national assemblies in relation to certain discourses. Policy questions inevitably involve ambiguities or uncertainties which can only be addressed by expanding or altering existing viewpoints. Collaborative efforts to generate new knowledge can work to change dispositions or viewpoints and point to possible policy solutions. In any given social or political context, it is necessary to understand the various frames of reference that inform and shape the different perspectives of key policy actors. At the most basic level, policy decision-makers draw on particular views of human nature or human identity, appropriate social relationships, how problems are caused and should be solved, what problems fall into the private or public domains, what constitutes social betterment or what types of social improvement are even possible in light of human nature and when cooperative or government action is required. Ideology, values, religious worldviews, social history, various social and physical indicators, ostensible empirical information from other societies all contribute to the interpretive lenses through which potential policy paths are formulated, decided and evaluated. So as Baha'is we need to be systematic whether we're in our cluster or whether we're working at a regional or national, international level, we need to be systematic in mapping out how particular policy issues are understood and framed across the entire spectrum of policy stakeholders, whether civil society or industry, government, academia or the general public. Once efforts are taken in this direction, it becomes possible to discern how Baha'i principles and concepts can help define the essential issues underlying major policy questions and how we might begin to identify practical measures in light of those principles. So I want to give you a couple of examples. The very language that sometimes is used in policy discourse can severely limit policy framing and programmatic action. The very nature of the collective discussion or discourse that occurs is improperly framed and so leads to solutions which really are not adequate. So let's take the problem of corruption. In the main, the policy challenge of addressing corruption in public life has been reduced to procedural improvements and efforts at promoting public transparency concerning the use of funds for social projects. But an educational component addressing the question of moral leadership or moral development is rarely mentioned in corruption policy discourse. A Baha'i approach to corruption would no doubt be very different. Baha'is would not even describe the issue or goal, probably as anti-corruption policy, but rather as fostering moral development as a precursor to moral governance. The emphasis would not be on procedural and regulatory approaches, but on how to awaken the moral consciousness of individuals and how to harness the voluntary and cooperative forces of communities. And this actually was in a statement that the Baha'i National Community gave at corruption conference a few years ago. Another example is the concepts of capacity building and participation which are used in international development recourse with the great regularity. But these notions of capacity building and participation reflect very narrow and materialistic notions of individual and collective empowerment. In the various statements that have been put out by the Baha'i International Community over the years, the issue of terminology has been addressed in some ways by attempting to offer a more expansive understanding of poverty as encompassing social, ethical, and spiritual resources, as well as material resources. And even defining the overall objective of development policy as an honorable, comprehensive prosperity rather than poverty alleviation. As we all know, the sometimes contentious nature of policymaking often yields less than optimal solutions and precludes innovation. Baha'u'llah's exhortation to follow the path of moderation is particularly relevant. Solutions to problems should be truly balanced, equitable, proportionate. This is what moderation means. Moderation though does not mean compromise. It does not mean sacrificing basic principles in order to achieve consensus. Consensus is very important, but we shouldn't compromise what we basically believe in. Often what happens in the policy dialogue and in the policy domain is that we arrive at second best solutions which are inadequate. So it's quite important that mutuality of purpose among policy stakeholders and an exceptional standard of fairness and a commitment to moderation in its true meaning is the goal. Finally, a major contribution that Baha'u'llah's can make in the policy arena is to demonstrate how the complementary systems of science and religion, what we will term as knowledge systems, can together raise the capacity of individuals and communities to advance well-being. The set of capacities necessary for building up the social, cultural, economic, technical and moral fabric of society depends upon both the resources of mind and spirit. By themselves, rational or scientific methodologies will not tell us which concepts or norms best advance a specific social objective or competence. For this reason, the knowledge we bring to bear in our discourses must be multi-dimensional, encompassing not only techniques, methodologies, concepts, theories and models, but also values, ideals, qualities, attributes, intuition and spiritual perception. Drawing on both science and religion allows us to satisfy these diverse knowledge requirements and to identify new moral standards and avenues of learning and addressing emerging contexts of social dilemma. It also helps us avoid reductionistic approaches and to see how various social problems are interrelated. This is not about religiosity of any particular kind, but rather understanding how rational and spiritual capacities can substantively interact in fashioning our social world. It is about accessing sources of knowledge that provide insight into the primary motivational forces of human experience and how those forces can be mobilized to advance the processes of civilization. Our premise that religion is a system of knowledge is certainly challenging, but moves public discussions about religion away from vague notions of spirituality, misplaced conceptions of salvation or dogmatic doctrine and instead brings focus to how the powers of the human spirit in conjunction with the methods of science can be channeled in original and productive ways. Conceiving religion in this manner can serve to underscore the validity of spiritual perspectives and aspirations in shaping the social order. And our experience actually for the past 10 years with the science, religion and development discourse promoted by the Institute for Studies and Global Prosperity has shown precisely this, we're able to have a very rich and deep conversation about religion when it's framed in this way. So coming to an end, it's very clear that reconstructing the public sphere is no easy task. Achieving a unity that liberates, that is creative, that is characterized by its embrace and harmonization of diversity is the work of generations. Ultimately, of course, it is the power of example. And specifically, the development of concrete models of unity and equity that will extend the bounds of intersubjective affirmation regarding the relevance of a spiritual conception of life. If we're doing the things that we hope to be doing and creating examples of unity on the ground, then people will notice. For those who doubt or reject that an objective spiritual dimension informs our social reality, we can only offer these words of exhortation from a prisoner. Should one fail to attain unto the recognition of him who is the eternal truth, let him at least conduct himself with reason and justice. The Baha'i concept of an adhering human diversity leading to higher forms of unity suggests that we can and must move beyond a liberal construction of pluralism that is unable to provide an overarching vision of human development. But rather than engaging in a quixotic quest to overcome the many evils at work in society or right the countless wrongs afflicting a desperate age, Baha'is are devoting their energy to building the world anew. As we have seen, recognizing the essential spiritual character of our identity is a defining feature of this project. Further at this moment in our social evolution, the appropriate locus for action is the globe in its entirety where all members of the human family are joined together in a common enterprise of promoting justice and social integration. Baha'u'llah provides us with a potent new moral grammar that allows us to appreciate and nurture human diversity while expanding our horizons beyond the parochial to a solidarity encompassing the boundaries of the planet itself. He offers a vision of a comprehensive good that recognizes and values the particular while promoting an integrating framework of global learning and cooperation. His summons to unity articulates an entirely new ethics and way of life, one that flows from a spiritual understanding of human history, purpose, and development. This spiritually based conception of life goes beyond notions of mutual advantage and prudence associated with the idea of the social contract. While the principle of self-interested rational exchange implied by the social contract indisputably represents an advance over coercion as a basis for social existence, there surely exists a step beyond rational exchange. Baha'u'llah instead offers a covenant of universal fellowship, a spiritually empowered ethic of deep and abiding commitment as the basis of collective life. As a result of this covenant of oneness, in the deprivation and suffering of others, we see ourselves. Such a frame of reference opens the door to critical reflection and true social renewal. In the words of Abdul Baha'u'llah, let all be set free from the multiple identities that were born of passion and desire and in the oneness of their love for God, find a new way of life.