That old maxim of the philosopher John Locke has never seemed more contemporary: “Things in this world are constantly slipping away, and nothing stays the same way for long”.

As people, we are experiencing ever more rapid change in all areas of life. New technology is providing us with unimaginable opportunities in communication and information. In the economic sphere things have been constantly changing in recent times.

Globalisation is the word that best sums up today’s state of affairs. There is no doubt that globalisation is the predominant feature of this post-national era.

Nowadays we live in a global village. Relationships between people and countries are becoming ever closer. What happens in one corner of the world has repercussions for another corner of the world. We have inescapably been “transformed” into citizens of the world, with our interdependence, reliance on each other and complex relationships. That is what globalisation is all about.

Economic activity in particular has been subject to globalisation. The economy has become entirely international. Whether it’s consumer goods, how we communicate or financial fluctuations, globalisation has touched virtually every aspect. But the process of globalisation is not purely an economic one. ‘Universalisation’ also has a part to play at the political and judicial levels.

Two positions have surfaced in the face of this occurrence: some consider it to be detrimental, while others see it as beneficial. For some, it is an entirely positive phenomenon, as global economies will benefit the wellbeing of all mankind. Those who have a negative view of globalisation deplore in particular its economic consequences; they say that it widens differences and exacerbates poverty (famine on the African continent, the destruction of the environment, increasing conflict...).

Neither position convinces Michael Reder, the German author of the book “Globalisation and Philosophy” (Herder, Barcelona, 2012). Using specific examples, the Munich-based professor attempts to fit the pieces together. Globalisation is ambivalent. That is to say, it is a risk and an opportunity at the same time. There is no place for extreme points of view – globalisation should not be demonised, and it should not be deified either. Globalisation does have some good points: it promotes the feeling that we are all citizens of the world. The new status quo of interdependence has helped to spread a cosmopolitan awareness. One cannot say that all aspects of globalisation are bad.

Out there there are nations, ethnic groups and cultures following their own separate paths. And then there are all of us – as individuals or groups of people – a mix of global humanity. Different civilisations (Western, Islamic, Chinese...) on the one hand, and one single human civilisation on the other, one that is flourishing in its infinite diversity.

And we will have to learn to live together. The West and Islam in particular, as the gap between them has widened in recent years. In this dangerous and uncertain world in which we live, we are all the same, yet each of us is different.