By bringing into dialogue studies of personal transformation from individual and collective/structural perspectives and from various traditions, this symposium aims to offer a more holistic and nuanced understanding of this complex phenomenon, and to encourage reflection on the epistemological issues that undergird the fundamental human question: What does it mean for a person to change?

Concept Note

Phrases such as “to change one’s mind” or to have a “change of heart” often describe small and ordinary events in a person’s life, reflective of the dynamic interaction between the instability of our external environment and the inconstancy of our inner selves. I might want a certain job today and change my mind tomorrow; initially feel cold toward someone but gradually warm to them. However, a person’s experience of personal change can also be much more radical and definitive than these mundane phrases and examples tend to convey. The concept of metanoia describes this spectacular phenomenon in which a person’s entire ethos (i.e. their habitual way of being) is transformed: that which they were is cast off and discarded, and they begin again as a new self. Of course, whether metanoia corresponds to a momentary event or a gradual process, whether people are actually capable of genuine metanoic change, whether it is desirable, and how it might be achieved are all questions which have animated writers since ancient times.

Pierre Hadot (1968) held that “the idea of conversion represents one of the constitutive notions of Western consciousness and conscience. In effect, one can represent the whole history of the West as a ceaseless effort at renewal by perfecting the techniques of conversion, which is to say the techniques intended to transform human reality.” The evolving meaning of metanoia tracks the gradual development of this central notion over the centuries. Literally meaning “after-thought”, classical Greek rhetoricians spoke of metanoia to describe a persuasive figure of speech in which the speaker takes back an earlier statement and replaces it with a new one to reinforce their point. In doing so, the speaker performs a change of heart, but the change occurs in their words rather than in their forum internum – but if effective, it may effect a change within the listener. The advent of Christianity brought a new emphasis on individual interiority, the ethical imperative for personal conversion, and the central idea of rebirth through a change of ethos. Under the Christian influence, metanoia came to signify an act of substitution of “the old sinful being with a new personal identity—an ethos that is defined by a penitent relation to the self” (Ellwanger, 2020). How is such a thing possible? That is of course Nicodemus’s question in John’s Gospel when Jesus tells him that a person must be “born again”. And it is a question which continues to animate us today, whether or not we phrase it in overtly Christian terms.

Thus, the impetus behind this inaugural symposium of the Centre for Metanoia Studies. By bringing into dialogue studies of personal transformation from individual and collective/structural perspectives and from various traditions, this meeting aims to offer a more holistic and nuanced understanding of this complex phenomenon, and to encourage reflection on the epistemological issues that undergird the fundamental human question: What does it mean for a person to change?

The question of personal transformation can be approached from many angles: theoretical (what is personal change?), historical (what events have precipitated transformations of the self? how profound and lasting are such apparent transformations?), methodological (how can we measure such change?) and applied (how does a person change and how can people be supported in transformations which are deemed beneficial? how do institutional settings and practices such as prisons, psychotherapy, and pastoral spiritual direction encourage and orient certain kinds of change in persons). Of course, all of these questions, and perhaps most pressingly  the latter, also elicit normative interrogations (whose vision of the good are served by transformational projects? what is the relationship between change and virtue? which moral presuppositions do we mobilise when distinguishing between desirable and undesirable instances of change? why is the question of change important and to whom?). We want to look at this issue at both individual/agency and social/structural levels. We also wish to examine examples of virtuous and vicious change, as well as the normative presuppositions that underpin these distinctions.

The process of radical personal transformation can be observed in a variety of contexts, such as religious and political conversion, ideological change, criminal desistance and radicalization. These processes involve complex interactions between internal psychological and spiritual factors and external social and environmental factors. For example, work on cognitive and emotional transformation and the construction of meaning (Garcet, 2021) shows how individuals adopt radical beliefs or become involved in extremist movements, often motivated by personal uncertainties and perceived injustices (Doosje et al., 2013). Transformative experiences can profoundly alter an individual’s knowledge, values and perspectives (Arvan, 2020, Brieley, 2023). Research into personal transformation and metanoia also raises questions about the notion of a “true self” that might be discovered through deliberate spiritual practice (Nouwen, 1991) or through the stages of individuation (Jung, 1951) or self-actualization (Rogers, 1961, Maslow, 1962). Others have questioned the conditions under which personal identification can be said to persist through change (Locke, 1690, Parfitt, 1984).

On a collective scale, radical transformations encompass phenomena such as the Christian transformation of Europe (Holland, 2019), the Cultural Revolution in China (Kyo, 2017, Fishman 2011) or the Nazi Cultural Revolution (Chapoutot, 2017). These revolutionary movements show how radical social transformations can redefine cultural norms and practices, permanently affecting social structures and collective attitudes (Drury & Reicher, 2000; Unger, 1998). These moments of rupture are often associated with the idea of “the birth of the new man” in the socialist (Marx & Engels, 1845, Trotsky, 1924, Mao, 1957) and fascist (Gentile, 1916, Rosenberg, 1930) traditions, describing either a transformative change in living people, or a seismic generational shift in norms and attitudes. At the same time, some revisionist historians have challenged the identification of revolutions with radical change, stressing instead the dynamics of social inertia and continuity over time (Furet, 1978, Doyle, 1980).

Understanding the very notion of transformative personal change poses a number of methodological and epistemological challenges as well. Can radical transformations be objectively measured? Quantitative and qualitative methods each have their advantages and limitations. Can each discipline learn from the others for a more complete understanding of these phenomena? Research into socially dysfunctional behaviour (e.g. Settoul, 2022) can enrich research into functional transformations (see, for example, the work of Johnson and Sung Json Jang). How can we question the very notion of rupture in academic discourse: can it be demystified or, on the contrary, confirmed under certain conditions? What role do static theories of personality play in understanding the dynamics of change? These questions will enable us to explore the interconnections between the different scales of the study of transformative change and develop more integrated and effective approaches.

We are conscious that the theme of our inaugural symposium is large and that we are inviting a diverse group of participants to engage with fundamental questions which have stimulated curious minds, fostered debates, and oriented practices for millennia. Few guardrails have been erected around our proceedings. This is not accidental. Indeed, it is precisely our intention that the new Centre for Metanoia Studies should be animated by a spirit of intellectual openness, ambitious enquiry, and solicitous engagement with the needs of our contemporaries. The fruits of our exchanges during this symposium will inform the course we set for our Centre over the next ten years. By supporting innovate research, hosting thought-provoking meetings, disseminating ideas through media old and new, organising educational programmes, and engaging with the world of practice, the Centre for Metanoia Studies will be an open laboratory for the study of personal transformation

Programme

9h30 : Welcome

10h00 : Introduction

• Sacha Raoult
• Alexis De La Ferriere

10h30-12h00 : Session 1, Narratives of transformation

• Kate Cooper, Tolle legge: Conversion and storytelling in St Augustine
• Céline Perol, Métanoïa et conversions spirituelles : les expériences des saints et saintes médiévales.
• Charles Mercier, Le voyage, une expérience transformatrice pour les jeunes adultes ? Étude des effets du programme InterFaith Tour (2013-2020)

12h00-13h30 : Session 2, Transformations of the self and the state

• Pieter Francois, Religious tolerance and conversion: towards a global historical study of governmental restrictions and social pressures
• Johann Chapoutot, Réformer la vie : une altermodernité allemande
• Rana Moughanie, Entre l’exil et l’asile : le parcours transformationnel de la migration

13h30-14h30 : Lunch

14h30-16h00 : Session 3, The phenomenology of personal transformation

• Nacèra Kainou, Poursuivre la vraisemblance : Le processus créatif à l’épreuve de la métanoïa
• Joshua Forstenzer, Grief, Memory, and Moral Transformation
• Carino Hodder (OP), Transformation through Spiritual Accompaniment: Synodality in the Catholic Church and its Potential

16h00-17h00 : Session 4, Transformation and radicality

• Elyamine Settoul, Jihadisme et mouvances d'ultra droite: les enseignements d'un regard comparatif
• Gautier Simon, Saisir les processus de transformation (radicale) de soi par l'analogie religieuse de la conversion écologique

17h15-17h30 : Coffee break

17h30-18h30 : Session 5, Transformation and education

• Guilherme Arduini, TBC
• Douglas Yacek, Should Education Be Transformative?

19h00 : Dinner

Participants

• Guilherme Arduini, Instituto Federal de Sao Paulo
• Alexis Artaud de La Ferriere, University of London
• Johann Chapoutot, Sorbonne Université
• Kate Cooper, University of London
• Vincent Forray, SciencesPo Paris
• Joshua Forstenzer, University of Sheffield
• Pieter Francois, University of Oxford
• Kevin Gary, Hillsdale College
• Carino Hodder, Dominican Sisters of St Joseph
• Nacèra Kainou, Scultor
• Rana Moughanie, Jurist
• Charles Mercier, Université de Bordeaux
• Sacha Raoult, Aix Marseille Université
• Elyamine Settoul, IRSEM
• Gautier Simon, Université de Bordeaux
• Céline Perol, Université de Clermont-Ferrand