The International Federation of Catholic Universities (IFCU) will be holding its Third International Conference of Psychology in Lille, France, on November, 3, 4 and 5 2010. A gathering of representatives from many universities around the world, this conference is organized by the IFCU Psychology Group. Its task is to promote research, theory and practice and focuses on the challenges facing today’s societies.

The conference theme shows what is at stake in such international collaboration, asking what, in university life, can or should be done about diversity. Through this theme, we’re asking the question about the value of psychology in its theory, its practice, and also in the various situations it may meet. Yet, is in these differences, which will inevitably be revealed during the conference, that psychology will stick to its main principle: it is only through questioning that knowledge can increase.

In the world today where borders have become more cultural than geographical, diversity has become a key issue in contemporary psychology. Diversity describes the situations and the questions we have to face, but also the ways in which we approach them, with regard to the theories behind our psychological practice, but also to the social systems in which we have apply these theories.

It is therefore difficult for us to speak of "unity" in psychology. However, this is what we naturally seek as we train new psychologists by imparting knowledge to them in a comprehensive university system. It is obviously one of the principal duties of psychology to acknowledge the gap between any claim to a universally valid system of knowledge, as is taught in our universities, and the diversity the newly trained psychologist will find once the knowledge has to be applied – whether in clinical practice, in research or in training, as the subject of psychological endeavour obliges us to constantly call our theories and practice into question. Whatever the subject, or the person, or the group, or even the institution we are dealing with, no psychological approach is possible unless it is in a state of constant evolution.

And yet, in addition to any efforts to present out mission to the general public and which inevitably leads to less rigorous accuracy of expression, we see today a certain number of facts, both individual and collective, which make the presence of psychologists both essential and urgent. We may think of the family, or even more broadly of any of those social relationships which regularly turn sour in our contemporary world, which tends to equate the word "value" exclusively with financial worth. But we may also evoke the area of health, where the psychologists’ mission provides the useful reminder that behind every sickness or disease is a sick person. Finally, we may think of, and the list is by no means complete, the area of education where it has become more and more difficult for the student to imagine and plan for his or her future.

These issues become more and more complex if we take into consideration the inevitable attempts to use psychological knowledge for purely pragmatic ends, supporting the current fashionable ideology which, whatver the social system concerned, is always ready to exploit it for political reasons, ignoring the diversity which should legitimately be taken into consideration in its application. For this reason, it is important today for us to questions the values underlying both the practice of psychology and the way it is taught, in whatever field or specialisation.

As university lecturers and researchers from all over the world, the Convention provides us with an opportunity to discuss the following essential issues :

• What limits should be placed on and what range of ideas permitted between the universal system of knowledge taught in our universities and the diversity which the application of this knowledge requires in practice in our work ?
• What is the main value which we, as psychologists, should be defending today ?
• Can this value simply be taught in a university class ?

If it is undoubtedly true that psychological education today is mainly a question of transmitting knowledge, we should ask ourselves if this is really sufficient, as it contradicts our principles of diversity in the application of this knowledge. A certain "extra" or "added value" should certainly find its way into our training, even if we are not sure how this can be defined in an objective manner or as the content of a class.

This "added value", and we agree that it will not be easy, may even now find a place in the meetings made possible by this convention. The diversity we speak of becomes a reality in the many and varied experiences and reflections of each participant in such areas as the family, health or education. We can certainly point out that which, in these areas, has already been lost with regard to values, and we shall certainly be right to do so. However, the question must also be asked as to the role of psychologists in today’s society, whether they be clinical practicioners, researchers or instructors, and what they are able to contribute, because of their speciality, to the maintenance and defence of human values.

In this way, all our discussions will be based on ethics which, as the word itself implies, are what remains in a changing world and in the midst of diversity…