If poiesis is to create and philos to love, then we have found a word that describes the love of creation or creative love.[1. See the definition of philopoiesis here. ] Thus, a philopoiet is a lover of creating. Whereas creation can be related to social theories and modes of production, the addition of the prefix philo- transforms the word poiesis into a new philosophical stance.
This position adopts the concept of creative love from the work of the philosopher and scientist Charles S. Peirce. He was most noted for the development of the notions of semiotics and pragmaticism. Peirce argues that there are three forms of evolution:
evolution by fortuitous variation, evolution by mechanical necessity, and evolution by creative love.”[2. Peirce, Charles S. “Evolutionary Love.” In Philosophical Writings of Peirce, 364. New York: Dover Publications, 1955. ]
I have focused in the latter because creative love is a form of philopoiesis if we consider the term philo- to be agapistic, that is, related to unconditional love, as Peirce does in his concept of creative love. How can we convert a philos to an agape? I argue that all kinds of love contain an implicate agape. However, not everyone expresses these forms of love with an unfolded or revealed agape. For example, a philial love might not be agapistic at a first glance, but it could be, if one unfolds or unconceals its agape. Thus, a sister may feel an unconditional love toward another sister without this agape losing its philial nature. [3. I have developed this concept of unfolded agape at greater detail in a thesis that will eventually be posted online at http://beingpoetry.com ]
Therefore, a philopoiet is a poet, a poiet, that loves creation and creation loves back, in such a way that their work reflects truth by unfolding an implicate (unfolded or unconcealed) agape in all things, the creative love underlying existence.
Posted in: Main Concepts