Planning the Neocosmopolitan Habitat

Reflecting on cosmopolitanism is a philosophical activity before it is a political, social or—as far as we are concerned—urban planning action. It requires a deep reflection on the meaning of being connected to a place and also to the whole world, of being individuals and also related to a planetary community and to the consequences of our inhabitation of the Earth (and the Cosmos). Nature, like us humans, is not made up of things in and of themselves, but of an entanglement of relationships and events, of evolutionary processes that take place in time and space. And even our cities do not escape this universal law: everything is correlation, flow, openness, vibration. In short, cosmopolitanism calls us to answer a cognitive challenge rather than a practical one. The current scenario at a global scale is characterised by a health, economic, social, and cultural crisis in which the rethinking of the mobility of people and the reduction of interactions is answered by the materialisation of borders, barriers, and confinements. Humanity is in a cognitive crisis that concerns the relationship it has with itself, with others, and with reality. We live in an increasingly complex world: one in which everything is connected, but also one within which dramatic disruptions are produced. Often, however, a paradigm of simplification dominates, which illusorily separates humanity from nature, locks us up within national borders, fragments knowledge, and stiffens identities. The spread of this model increases regressive tendencies and the risk of future catastrophes. Changing the paradigm in order to live the new complexity is the challenge of the twenty-first century. Accepting this challenge means rethinking fundamental human activities from the position of a new urban thinking. In a fearful society that withdraws into the confines of “small homelands”, the concept of the open society itself—as discussed by Karl Popper—is challenged by new protectionisms and sovereignties