Is a predictive science of psychology and society possible and, if so, who will apply that science and for what purposes? Surely it should be applied not by one part of society to the rest of society but by the whole of society to itself but how would that be possible? Maximum participatory democracy, to begin with. Maybe we will have to resolve social conflicts in order to be able to address social conflicts? A circular argument. Maybe such a science is impossible because science has to be objective whereas psychology and society combine the objective with the subjective? We cannot solve the problem because we are the problem. We get in our own way. You cannot make a bed while you are lying on it.
I think that the basic problem is as follows. Both as a species and as individuals, we were active organisms long before we became reflective subjects. By the time we are able to reflect on life, our lives already contain both the consequences of past actions and a deeply rooted disposition to continue acting in the same way even though this has been problematic. In Eastern philosophy, this is the problem of karma. "Karma" means "action" and actions matter because they never occur in a vacuum but always have consequences.
In the absence of a scientific approach, we have to make do with existing traditions of political philosophy (which confirm existing conflicts) and of work on the self (where the alternatives are many). In social conflicts, we should at least be clear which side we are on and why. Don't say, "I'm not political," then repeat political cliches! I think that Zen meditation addresses the protean enemy and the "old, animal horror" identified in works by Poul Anderson but the sky is the limit as far as this discussion goes.
28 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I am glad you show commendable caution, and don't blindly assume Utopia is likely. I would go further, a predictive science of society is not possible at all. Also, even assuming such a thing is possible, humans being what they are, it's a dead certainty some faction or political party would try to use it for their own ends and benefit. Lastly, all humans are imperfect and FALLEN, so Karma does not go far enough.
Also, maximum participatory democracy above the level of a small New England town meeting is a fantasy I cant believe in.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
I do not believe in the Fall. We have risen from animality.
Paul.
Paul: I don't believe in falls or rises.
We're the product of an evolutionary history; and the evidence suggests that we haven't changed much since behaviorally modern humans emerged around 80K years ago.
There have been great -cultural- changes, but those operate within the boundaries of the possible established by our evolution.
And we're still animals. Conscious and behaviorally flexible animals, but mammals none the less.
Our nature is neither 'good' nor 'bad'; it just -is-.
We incorporate what we transcend like a sphere incorporates circles. There is a qualitative difference between human consciousness and any other animal consciousness. That makes us capable of those vast cultural shifts and advances. Think what the rule of law does for us. Someone kills me and my daughter or son in law does not have to kill him. He is arrested and charged with murder. In this country, Alfie Rouse was hanged for burning to death an anonymous tramp. Now we have gone beyond the death penalty. In the US, someone as wealthy and arrogant as Trump has to appear in court. We still have a long way to go, of course.
Paul: law is 'socialized' vengeance. If it fails to avenge, people withdraw their support and it collapses. This has happened many times.
There is no 'transcendence'. No breaking on through to the other side; there is no other side.
Maybe. But I think that our rational, linguistic self-consciousness includes but goes beyond animal sensations and perceptions.
Near a fire, an inanimate object or a plant IS hot, an organism with a rudimentary sensory nervous system FEELS hot, an animal with a more complex brain PERCEIVES an external source of heat and a human being formulates the proposition, "That is hot," and thinks about the concept of heat. That is an upward progression.
Kaor, Paul!
And I still disagree with you and Stirling about the Fall, but that is a matter of divine revelation, which cannot be settled by mere philosophical arguments.
Stirling and I do agree more about human beings and distrust for Utopian hopes. And I agree with him, and not you, about what law is. If the State, any State, fails to keep crime and disorder in check, it runs the risk of losing its legitimacy and collapsing.
As the left in the left in the US becomes steadily more corrupt and insane, we are seeing exactly that! Many people are OUTRAGED by the corrupt sweetheart deal "Josip" and his puppet masters engineered for his criminal son. To say nothing of recent revelations implicating "Josip" himself in his son's criminal activities.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Sure. A state has to keep order.
We hear more about Trump over here.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And too many in the States, mostly left wing Democrats, don't want to preserve order. The fools!
The more these squalid revelations about "Josip" and his sleazy family keep slowly oozing out, the more trivial Trump's own offenses look!
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But we all saw and heard Trump inciting an attempted coup in which people were killed. He praises the attack on the Capitol and wants to pardon the "patriots" who organized it.
He was recorded asking a Governor to "find" votes.
A jury decided that he sexually assaulted a woman and afterward slandered her. His response to this verdict was to slander her again and she is bringing another case about that.
He still lies that he really won in 2020 and with no evidence. All the legal challenges to the election result failed.
Paul.
I have lower expectations for politics and politicians than either of you.
As Max Weber accurately put it, "Violence is always the -ultimately- decisive means of political action.
People tend to forget this in stable times and places -- rather as people forget the foundations of their house. Then the earthquake arrives...
Kaor, Paul and Mr. Stirling!
Paul: I still disagree, because a real coup needs at least the attempted use of FORCE for seizing or illegally retaining power. Trump's weak legal arguments or strained misinterpretations of the laws don't meet that standard.
Btw, "Josip" also has a murky sexual history, including at least one accusation of rape.
Mr. Stirling: And I agree with you, ALL states ultimately depend on the use of force to survive. We see Anderson stating that over and over in his works.
And I thought I had low expectations of politicians! I do think some groupings of politicians are better than others--such as conservatives and moderate libertarians.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
By an attempted coup in which people were killed, I meant the attack on the Capitol.
Paul.
BTW, a jury found that Trump had sexually assaulted a woman. That is serious. You cannot possibly think that is somehow counterbalanced by a rape accusation against Biden. Remember I am not defending Biden.
Kaor, Paul!
We disagree, that farcical demonstration cum riot was nowhere near being a coup. Even the Prigozhin affair in Russia was more like a real coup, involving as it did the use of actual MILITARY forces.
The Trump trial you referred to was a civil, not criminal trial, and allows a lower standard of evidence for adverse judgments. The jurors themselves did not agree the evidence presented met the standards for rape.
I agree sexual assault is serious, but my point about "Josip" is that as time passes more DIRT keeps oozing out about him, despite the desperate attempts of the Democrats and their media lackeys to deny, ignore, minimize, or cover up his squalid/criminal activities.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But that farcical demonstration in which people were killed was instigated by Trump. Its purpose was to overturn the election result and he calls it a glorious day.
Of course it was a civil trial but it found that he committed assault, then defamation, and his response to this verdict was to defame her again. You cannot possibly keep making excuses for that man. That the jury did not agree that the assault was a rape does not change the fact that it was an assault.
No doubt Biden is also bad but what has that to do with Trump?
Paul.
One of the drawbacks of democracy(*), particularly large democracies, is that to reach the highest ranks you have to (usually) be utterly preoccupied with gaining and keeping power.
And people for whom power is an all-consuming lust tend to be... ah... rather questionable in other respects too.
This is one of the advantages of monarchy: being born to power, heirs don't necessarily have to -want- power or be obsessed with it.
(*) or any competitive, meritocratic system of political organization.
Re: "a predictive science of psychology and society"
In "Psychohistorical Crisis" by Donald Kingsbury, the story addresses some problems inherent in the idea of psychohistory. It is set in Asimov's galaxy with the serial numbers filed off, during the 2nd empire run by pyschohistorians. The psychohistorians run into some of those inherent problems.
Note: KIngsbury also shows some interesting variation in the societies in various parts of the Galaxy, more so than Asimov did.
Kaor, Paul and Jim!
But, Trump is no longer President, and I don't want him to be President again. He has too much baggage and is probably the only Republican that corrupt bungler "Josip" could beat!
Stirling's comments above were very illuminating, explaining why in a competitive political system like that of the US, ambitious persons who want to reach the top are so often so flawed. As both Trump and "Josip" are demonstrating!
Jim: I long ago became DISSATISFIED with Asimov's FOUNDATION stories. One reason being how colorless were the places, societies, and people we see in them.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But there are several actions that Trump needs to be prosecuted about.
Paul.
Paul: the question there is 'are these things which would result in prosecution if it weren't for his political prominence'?
Answer: probably not.
Rich, powerful people get away with a lot, as Trump did before he went into politics.
Once in politics, they get away with a lot too -- except when their enemies find it useful to dig.
As for the 'everyone's equal before the law' thing, that's a legitimizing myth.
In other words, if anyone really -believes- that's a description of how things work, I have this bridge in Brooklyn they can buy... going really cheap...
Well, I think that the sexual assault and the attempts to overthrow an election result are pretty serious.
Kaor, Paul and Mr. Stirling!
Paul: Well, I think "Josip's" sordid sexual antics, corruption, and illegal/unconstitutional actions to also be pretty serious. To say nothing of what his son has been up to! (Snorts!)
Mr. Stirling: While I agree equality before the law is merely a legitimizing myth which can only be sometimes approached, it's a necessary myth. For its own safety and survival any state and society needs to make sure the rich and powerful SOMETIMES pay at least lip service to certain norms of behavior. Otherwise, how much longer can the US survive as a reasonably tolerable entity? Or any other nation?
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But I really cannot understand why, if Trump is criticized, you then criticize Biden. What has this to do with Trump? I am not defending Biden. But I have said this before.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I'll let Trump and his lawyers wrestle with his legal problems.
What disgusts me about "Josip" and left wing Democrats is their sickening hypocrisy and unabashed violation of all inconvenient laws and norms of behavior. Everything from defending or covering up his own illegal acts, misuse of classified documents, apparently taking bribes from hostile regimes, and facilitating that disgusting sweetheart deal for his son, etc.
You plainly don't understand, what is UNFORTUNATELY driving many Americans to still support Trump is the biased, one sided, two tiered system of "justice" we have: people like Trump will get the shaft while "Josip" and other Democrats get treated as gently as possible.
MY view is that many Democrats want Trump to be again the Republican nominee next year, because he's probably the only GOP candidate "Josip" could beat. That senescent bungler has been such a catastrophe that almost any GOP nominee not named Trump could beat him.
If Trump really cared about the US he would drop out of the Presidential race and let a normal Republican, unburdened by his baggage, take the lead!
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Again, I am not defending Biden.
Trump has "legal problems"? That is an understatement.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
So does "Josip"! I've seen rumblings about his Attorney General, Merrick Garland, being impeached by the GOP controlled House.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But I am not defending Biden. Why does every statement about Trump have to be countered by one about Biden? Can we agree they're both bad?
Paul.
Post a Comment