• Overview, Irritation Alert!

in the blind spot

~ Philosophy in the Dystopian Context

in the blind spot

Category Archives: Narrative

The Third Grace is Culture, the Second is Innocence

03 Thursday May 2012

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Blind spots in thinking, Freedom, Narrative, Subjectivity

≈ Leave a comment

The situation of any person is far more complicated than location in a material environment (being-there), although placement in a material environment is elemental. Every person is also situated within a human environment and the human environment is always in an historical drift. It is useful to pick out ‘cultural’ and ‘political’ aspects of that human environment, but political aspects are just particular features of the cultural situation. Considering both the human and material features of the environment, what any individual encounters outwardly is material determinism and cultural and political control. That is the context in which the question “How can freedom be possible?” has to be answered.

The Social Life of Intelligence

In general, any person seeks to maximize the experience of intelligence or personality through creating mutual reflections or resonances with other intelligent entities. Although questioning is peculiarly individual, we all have questioning, voice, and existence-in-time in common as intelligent entities. Culture is poorly understood, but builds from this: imitation communicates intelligence; rocks and bushes do not imitate. Imitation is a declaration of intelligence, an odd sort of self-declaration: “I can re-create from myself all that is external. As intelligence, I contain everything.” It is the beginning of the human social-nature. Imitation has such power just because rocks and bushes do not imitate. Imitation is an intelligent act, a communication of deliberative intelligence. That is the whole basis of culture. Conversation is an intelligence game, acts of clear repetition, but each with a relevant novelty thrown in as a personal contribution and as an invitation for a further collective movement. Music may focus the natural rhythms of the body, but it takes them into a game of abstract expectation and surprise, a conversation of pure intelligence. The experience of intelligence is a subjective value, that is, we keep wanting more.

In addition to forms of subjectivity such as curiosity, appetites, and expressive impulses, there is that force of mutual attachment which is neither gravitational, electro-magnetic, nor nuclear, but a force peculiar to intelligences. The force of mutual attachment has different aspects, including an orientation toward sources of attention, kisses, help, food, and the reflection of intelligence. We experience our nature best, in some ways, in resonance with other time-conscious entities, and so we come to absorb ourselves in relationships with and imitations of other people. An enlargement of the sense of intelligence is accomplished by imitating socially modeled activities: the way we live in our group, and that situates the imitating person as the medium needed by cultural forms to propagate through yet another generation. Mutual stimulation is natural to time-conscious entities, but the resulting attachments take forms which are imitated unconsciously, and take on an importance which is more enduring and more apparent than individuals.

The natural environment is almost completely mediated for humans by a social and cultural environment. We are social and cultural sponges who soak up, without being especially conscious of doing it, the forms of life, postures, gestures, language games, feuds, fads, fashions, and traditions acted out around us. People are not normally conscious of the degree to which our behaviour and thinking are determined by social and cultural influences. We can feel like individuals even when engaging in imitative culturally normative behaviour such as dressing/acting like a man or like a woman. The originality of adults is buried under decades of social conditioning. Although nature has some absolute givens and limitations for any organism, there is a great deal of the human environment which is merely customary and variable through political, commercial, and other human forces.

Although we might be born free, we have no choice about social participation. We need a caring social group to ferry us across infancy and childhood. That caring group itself needs others for mutual support in dealing with the indifferent environment. Both the immediate group and the larger one assign us objective categories such as boy or girl, good looking or not, strong or sickly, good or bad reader, good or bad athlete, good or bad singer, good or bad. Quite early these groups assign us tentative economic roles such as tinker, taylor, soldier, sailor, clergyman, teacher, driver, cook, cleaner. Those roles and categories have fixed characteristics. They have the face of objectivity and eternal validity as varieties of human nature. So individuals are objectified by social participation.

The Great Interconnectedness

Social interconnectedness is essential for humans, and in many ways the greatness of humanity resides in the web of our conscious interconnectedness as a collective creation. As isolated energies we are dramatically more restricted to a locality, less powerful, less expressed, less happy, and in many ways less free. We look at the world out of interconnectedness. The feat of visiting the moon was accomplished by a human interconnectedness, and not by a few individuals. The foundation of that interconnectedness is language. Learning a first language, accomplished in infancy, sets up habits of conversation, conversational skill, pleasure, and readiness to converse which enable a lifetime of personal connections and bring a vast collective sophistication to the individual. Culture generally is both product and mechanism of interconnectedness.

The interconnectedness of consciousness across multitudes of individuals is different from culture, and separately important. Every individual’s orientation toward news, gossip, stories, textbook presentations, or popular culture, in the family or village, at work, in the nation or the world, is part of the great interconnectedness. That orientation connects each single intelligence to all others with attention on the same range of information, as well as to the persons and themes about whom the stories and presentations report. It also connects each individual to the arc of information that has gone before and which is expected to go on being renewed and enlarged, and so watched routinely, refreshed routinely.

Isolated lives participate in producing the great interconnectedness of intelligences. For that, intelligence needs deliberation but also cooperative attachments with other lives. An individual’s knowledge is enabled to go beyond strictly personal acquaintance to include what an untold number of others have discovered, thought, doubted, and imagined, the projection of possibilities and probabilities, and it enables the integration of an unlimited number of points of view on the world and the prospects of a life. Individuals receive many gifts from the social interconnectedness that surrounds and nurtures us through infancy. In return, families, religions, communities, and states make claims on the energies, talents, ways of thinking, and emotional allegiance of individuals. In addition, there are disorders of the grand structures within the interconnectedness of people, and there are injuries from too great a submission of individual energy to the web of interconnection.

The Ego-Avatar Constructed for Social Attachment

There are very few times or activities which do not involve social supervision. Childhood and formal education are almost entirely training in dependence on a supervised system of incentives and rewards. Any work for pay is supervised. Any act for spiritual salvation is supervised. Any society with a focus on religion or on work for pay is a supervising cultural matrix. Supervision normally involves an incentive and reward system, even if the reward is only praise or approval from an authority figure such as a teacher.

Organizations and informal groups exert influence on any individual in sight, sound, and touch of them in a number of ways. 1) There are norms, customs, feuds and fashions, ways of standing, walking, talking, playing, getting food, dressing, topics of conversation, menus of attitudes to express in conversations, menus of moves in the current conversation game. 2) Collectives have organized structures of productive work or effort into which individuals can fit and earn a place as well as vital rewards. 3) A big group ‘personality’ is a safe and powerful collective intelligence to meld with. The myriad social micro-patterns relate us to macro-entities: playing a category such as man or woman, for example, is training for belonging within the economic and political arrangements of a nation, city, family, or religion. Customs and norms are imitated more or less unconsciously, for intelligent invisibility within the herd-system, but when ignored they are enforced. We choose ‘the way we live in our group’ rather than exile into a wilderness of isolation and uncertainty.

There is a social construct, the ego-avatar, which is different from the subjective person. The ego is a display of tags of status and dignity, or lack of them, a schema to display a gravitas score, to display placement on a culturally defined scale of worth, the trophies of social competitions. This has much in common with Freud’s “superego”, a mental internalization of public authority figures or role models, which then act as a restraint on merely personal impulses. In the alpha dominated world of big brittle egos in pageants of competition, egoistic aggrandizement is a social and historical creation. Intelligence creates and builds ego-avatars but is not limited to avatars or to any particular avatar.

The force of mutual attachment is rewarding enough to challenge all other impulses and rewards, but cultural formations also manage to take on a force of their own by inspiring loyalty and personal identification in many people. From that emerges a custom of social control and enforcement based on intentional injury to people who do not conform. Basic inter-personal attachments shape an individual’s voice to what being-together with others will permit. It is easy to assume that a personal relationship is entirely the product of the participants, but not all bearings are direct from the pre-cultural self. The self also pretends, learns roles and avatars, and imitates. If anyone is bringing learned behaviour such as language to the ways in which being together is practiced, they are incorporating social pageantry and value assignments. We live in an environment of cultural value assignments, narratives, explanations, and rhetorical defenses of social collectives and the function-roles that structure them.

No individual has much control over the evolutionary momentum of big cultural entities such as states, cities, religions, industries, or institutions such as armies and war, universities and literacy. A lifetime is barely enough to get a sense of what they are. We behold them for a heartbeat, a blink. In that way they are similar to biological evolution. Our lives are expressed in bodies which are at some moment in an arc of species mutation already in progress for millions of years. We live the gifts and limitations of our moment in that long arc of mutation. The dead ‘momentum’ of social forms soon separates us from awareness of the originality of our personal intelligence.

It makes a crucial difference that innocent, pre-cultural, individual impulses are of the nature of curiosity and creative impulses to mark the world. The social nature of people brings with it a default cultural hegemony and a resulting alienation of innocent creativity. However, individual rationality in actual behaviour or practice does not require the social and cultural constraint, nor any occult congruence between knowledge, nature, and language. Nothing prevents even innocent individuals from appreciating the needs of others. In fact people do that easily and so are enabled to establish human attachments and learn spoken language in the first place. (Please see posting 11, November 10, 2011, Nature: Ground and Sky.)

People have a natural, innate, or innocent gift for spontaneously creating social attachments. Acquisition of spoken language is part of that talent. It is a robust gift and a very early accomplishment for ordinary people. Social attachments are not unnatural in any way and do not require leadership, supervision, religious revelations, visions of heaven or hell, gods or demons, codes of law, threats of insult, injury, or death, or any other special intervention or extraordinary circumstances. There is no social contract and no need for one because social attachment is a casual accomplishment for ordinary people. Social attachments are based on deliberate acts of imitation as expressions of intelligence. Although imitative culture is not unnatural, it is not preordained or “hard-wired” either. Culture is largely accident and spur of the moment invention, ad hoc, and provisional. It is software, updating continuously in patches. The ways of life, language games, and ways-of-being practiced in any group have a strong force of attraction as models to be imitated as a way of attaching with a clear and distinct manifestation of intelligence. Since ‘objective reality’ is approached from within some such cultural narrative, it is edited, selected, and interpreted to serve that narrative. Experience is profoundly conditioned or qualified by cultural influences in ways which are easy to misidentify. Social attachments embed individuals in sets of imitative activities which constitute cultures. Adults generally are sufficiently embedded to be almost entirely determined by cultural influences. The menu of life narratives and scripts made available by a particular culture has a determining influence on how an individual understands and relates to his or her environment.

Beyond Groupthink: Innocence

All this being said, we do not need to experience intelligence only in collectives. Self as innocent questioning, voice, and existence-in-time is already self-subsisting intelligence. We are blocked from that experience by our early involvement in collective intelligence. The sweet kick we get from bouncing off the voices of other time-conscious entities, is compromised by the bitterness of having intelligence confined, blocked, and forced to repeat endlessly its least powerful functions. A stronger experience of intelligence is available in deliberative self-possession, in reclaimed innocence. The normal absorption of individual intelligence within cultural forms makes sense of a project to reclaim innocence, to recognize pre-cultural intelligence and to re-think personal orientation to include that recognition.

(Note: The three graces are: nature, subjective intelligence, and culture.)

Copyright © 2012 Sandy MacDonald. The moral right of the author is asserted.

Gender Culture in the Political Situation

27 Friday Apr 2012

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Class War, Gender culture, Hierarchy, Leadership, Narrative, Political Power

≈ Leave a comment

The international financial collapse of 2008 completely revealed the contemporary high culture of leadership. The undeniably world-class leaders of the biggest financial corporations in world history, along with the political leaders of the most powerful nations in world history, could think of nothing better than to use any means at hand to get back to the way things were before, as quickly as possible, all the while denying all responsibility for any problems. Creative reform for accountability and transparency was ridiculed as impractical.

As such a fresh and vivid example illustrates, what keeps the whole social system working, including the economic functions, is mainly imitating what was done previously, habits repeated unthinkingly, traditions, sometimes encouraged by appeals to popular misconceptions such as “we’re all in this together”, “people reap what they sow”, “our political representatives have our best interests at heart”, or “there is a meritocracy of the most competent people in control”. However, even more important than habit, tradition, and popular misconceptions, is the interconnectedness of intrinsically rewarding human attachments learned within the female-managed nexus of first-language acquisition, child nurture, play, unconditional love, practical support and care, sharing, and mutuality. Please see below, blog posting 9, October 25, 2011, Political Considerations for some elaboration of nurture culture. Those are the binding forces of social systems, a framework within which ordinary individuals work at building interesting and sustainable lives, and in doing so keep production and support systems working. Recognition of these foundations of societies is the root system of left-wing political thinking and the reason it can be described generally as “bottom-up” politics.

It is remarkable then, that the extraordinary cultural emphasis on leadership reveals a worldview in which it is a superstructure of leaders who hold the social and economic system together. In the discourse of management/ professional ideology, it is leadership which brings a community together and makes it function, and in doing so sustains and benefits everybody to the degree possible given the specific powers and impediments that individuals bring with them. The leader is presented as bringing people into effective accord by displaying superior energy and dedication, hard work and a work ethic, optimism, self-confidence, self-knowledge, communication and visioning skill, prudent judgment, strategic plans, in sum a tower of strengths upon which others can fix their gaze and be inspired together. This ideology of leadership is the taproot of right-wing political thinking, and the reason it counts as “top-down” politics. That this is an especially alpha-male cultural product reveals that the key to differences between leftist and rightist policies is not class war based on wealth inequality but instead it is gender culture.

There is a deeper layer to the culture of leadership. There is an assumption that leadership is so essential and effective that it brings into being a sort of singularity, a version of the idea of divine power, a power of sovereignty. In the case of sovereignty, the divine entity is “the nation”, “the people”, a social collective united into a “more-than-the-sum-of-its-parts” creature, superhuman and even supernatural, meriting privileges, powers, and licenses that no individual can claim on his or her own, such as sending people to death in war, or deliberately exposing them to dangerous living and working conditions generally. Sovereignty is an extraordinary abstract power imagined to reside in a supra-individual social entity, and it is often invoked to create a warm glow of uncritical belonging in residents of a geographical area, sometimes with a uniformity of culture, language, and ethnicity, but more often not. (In appealing to the warm glow of interconnectedness, leaders are stealing credit for the nexus of first language acquisition, which is really created by people who nurture children.) For achieving the magisterial feat of leadership, the stars of the system take credit for creating legitimate power over life and death, and entitlement to act beyond law and morality to whatever extend they may wish.

People talk about “rising above” or “getting beyond” the political division between the left wing and the right wing, but beneath that division are profound conflicts which are standard features of human communities. Due to the revolutionary writings of Karl Marx (1818-83) and Friedrich Engels (1820-95) there is elaborate ideology basing the left-wing orientation in the working class of industrial societies. Left-wing political activists do their best to represent the interests of people who must earn a living by working for wages. However, placing exclusive emphasis on the worker – capitalist relationship is a vast oversimplification, and has been used to cast leftist ideals into disrepute as merely the politics of envy.

Plural Conflicts

Certainly there is an opposition between those families who can live from ownership and those who must live from working for wages. Working for wages is a life-warping burden. However, a far more pervasive and longstanding conflict is between an especially masculine trophy culture and an especially feminine culture of child nurture. There is also a structural conflict between generations, between people old enough to be approaching the last stages of life in opposition to those in the first stages of life. Young people generally are still carrying memories of the female managed culture of nurture, and without having been bent out of shape by irresistible incentives and rewards, have little but an innate sense of justice to guide them.

Appeals to “family values” sound like bottom-up politics, but in fact refer to family values as perceived by the alpha-male focused patriarchal family. The female managed first-language-nurture culture tends to ignore family separations and instead creates informal collectives pragmatically with any willing mothers in the vicinity. It is the culture of predatory masculinity which insists on using family groups as rigid stand-alone cells, reminiscent of the alpha-male harem social organization of gorillas, for example. Again, gender culture illuminates the political alternatives.

Groundwork of Political Dualism

The domestic nexus of first-language acquisition is in some ways a conservative force since stability is necessary for nurturing children. However, it doesn’t value wars, gambling, or radical inequality, the worst plagues on humanity, which are treasured by the alpha-structure. In addition, the domestic nexus always had a competitive alpha-structure to struggle against. The agenda of that trophy-winning superstructure has always been to use the commonality of people to fight wars, cook, clean, work plantations, mines, and assembly lines; and to have them part with their wages to borrow money, land, or a roof. Problems with that result from the retrograde culture of norms and values cultivated by the alpha-structure. The gender culture of novelty seeking masculinity could be progressive, but is exactly the opposite because of historical courses of development.

Alpha Trophy Ideology

The most glamourous culture of masculinity has its source in the ancient life of nomadic animal herders, a variety of cowboy. Ever since human communities began to abandon the nomadic life of gathering and hunting and created surpluses of vital resources, wonders of physical culture, and records of wisdom, their outlying surroundings of still nomadic peoples were drawn in to loot. An important part of the attraction of looting is to avoid having to live by daily work. A whole system of masculine pride was founded on living by other people’s work. It was the high point of accomplishment to murder rival males, destroy what property could not be used and take the rest, including women. Looting is inseparable from mass murder, rape, and enslavement, and those are still attractions of war. Empire building is nothing more than sustained looting. A remnant of the romance and pride of looting exists in the glorification of trophies won in competitive sport, and fortunes won from financial speculation.

Nomadic tribes that devised ways of surviving by animal herding often turned that parasitic technique onto communities of human farmers and city-dwellers. The cowboys became aristocrat estate owners. Social control by aristocracies, warrior-estate families, derives from that innovation. It was capitalism within the context of a rural agrarian production system. Settled aristocracies had the same values as the nomadic herders from whom they descended, values limited to maintaining a life of manly fun, competitive pride, pleasure, power, and risk-braving-adventure, not much different from capitalist elites. We see in ‘crime families’ of the mafia the identical cultural pattern still being re-created. Some families conceive extraordinary ambition and devote their energies to achieving ever more control of resources by whatever means they can get away with. In pre-modern times ambitious families controlled private armies to enforce their possession of lands. Armed violence was their source and refuge. Their focus was protecting and expanding their private property by organized and cultured violence. Their culture was built around organizing subordinated persons into gangs to carry out looting and destruction of other peoples property as well as assaults, murders, and enslavements for the purpose of exercising possession. Other humans were often simply a feature of geography to these families, to be used or removed as needed. Such military families named themselves aristocratic and noble. The use of the term “crime family” here is a means of balancing the usual academic tendency, derived from an art-history “golly-wow” approach, to admire and project positive value on whatever was dominant and powerful, the glorification of winning and wealth as such. That approach is not objective or value-neutral, and merely accepts without question that victors are privileged voices in the telling of history.

Crime Families

The narrative at the core of crime family culture is that the senior members of the family are natural and legitimate authorities and supervisors, and that no authority is superior except possibly supernatural power. All other authorities are merely rivals and threats to the family’s power. Your family is “us” and everyone else is “them”. The vast resources of the family are there to reward and assist those who dedicate themselves loyally to protection and advancement of the family as envisioned and declared by the patriarch. The prizes are high status and influence in the family hierarchy, conspicuous and intimidating wealth, gestures of subordination from everyone, power over others, and immunity from criticism.

Crime families or warrior-estate families were serious organizations who based collective ambition for wealth and power on a core of blood relations aided by carefully selected servants of various ranks and functions. These organizations recognized no outside supervisory authority. They were powers and a law unto themselves, competing with other families of a similar kind for the greatest possible control of people and resources. In ancient Rome the patrician family patriarch was the sovereign law within the bounds of his estates, with power of life and death over his family, servants, slaves, and tenants. The only help or protection possible for any individual was from one family or another. Royal families of Medieval Europe were later examples of this type of cultured family. Their willingness to make war is an illustration of the normalization of violent assault in their culture, and much of the war and business they practiced was conducted covertly by spies, assassins, and agents provocateur. These were the families for whom Machiavelli’s The Prince was written. Another modern version is the capitalist or investor family, hoarding important capital wealth. The hoard is the central value, and the need to protect the hoard inclines such families to distrust whatever they do not control. The origin and continuing main support of the political right-wing is that crime family.

Two Groups

In the anarchy after the Romans abandoned the western regions of their empire, two groups wanted control of resources on a vast scale, including control of populations. The first was the collection of warrior-estate families, and the other was the organization of Christianity. Both were alpha-male culture pods, still carrying the alpha-glorifying cult of looting. Since the personnel of the Church were nominally celibate males without children, the upper offices of the hierarchy were recruited from warrior-estate families, and so the two cultures had a lot in common. Radical inequality was the focus of the former and collective belonging was the focus of the latter. Crime families and religious cults will always be the winners from anarchy, and both will be leader-centric, animated by the alpha-male legacy of looting culture, rallying people to devote their efforts for the ultimate benefit of the looters.

Warrior-estate families formed a league that combined brutal rivalry with the cultivation of inter-marriages and mutual support. In the middle ages the families who would eventually make a reality of sovereign power were working out their techniques. They were social fetuses which would grow into modern government. The focus of the collective based on this narrative is capital concentration and control, private property and a security apparatus for protecting the privately concentrated capital. Behind it all was still the culture of alpha-type males proceeding with continual war against all other alpha-type males, principally for the fun of it. Their families carried the culture of war and there was no limit to their cruelty in pursuit of supremacy. The general practice in medieval warfare was for armies to break into small units to carry out a widespread looting and burning of villages and crops in a deliberate creation of famine and disease. Sovereignty was focused on private property and securing its ownership by force.

The other cultural entity with aspirations toward total ownership of populations was the Christian Church, based most powerfully at Rome. The main focus of that theocratic engine of sovereignty was control of individual religious belief and obedience to dictates of the Church. Organizational unity over vast expanses, in addition to a grip on fundamental and universal fears, enabled the Church to attempt a theocracy in Medieval Europe. However, the Church was not strong enough to exercise sovereignty on its own. It required alliances with particular crime families and generally with the collective of crime families, the class of aristocrats. That combination developed, especially during the crusades, a military-Christian culture known as Chivalry, which provided great advantages to both groups. Patriarchs of religious ceremonies were from time immemorial more bookish than the captains of horses and chariots. In Medieval Europe the clergy still carried the developing culture of book knowledge. Their literary and mental skills were indispensable, keeping records of costs, products, properties, distributions, and consumption. That uneasy alliance between religious and military cultures in the exercise of sovereignty is very ancient.

Historical Arc of Crime Families

The historical arc of crime families began with control of productive land by brute force, terrorism, and extortion. The power exercised by crime families went through a process of sanctification in the post-Roman history of Europe. Even before the full elaboration of chivalry, the Roman Church had a policy of placing bishops in the households of crime families to organize and advise, and enforce recruitment to the Church of everyone under the family’s power. That supernatural association had a legitimizing effect for the chosen families. The bond between Roman Christianity and power-families became deeply fused by the Crusades. The looting aristocracy of Europe created a new brutality in holy wars against the Islamic middle-east. That brutality was brought back to Europe fused with an outward enamel of religious ritual and pageantry.

This is not fable but history. The power vacuum, created by first bloating and then abandoning the Roman empire in western Europe, was filled by two groups: confederacies of crime families and the organization of Christianity, headquartered at Rome. In the course of the crusades those groups formed a partnership under the title Chivalry, superimposing symbols and pageants of divinity on the mechanisms and practices of lethal brutality, thus hatching the military-spiritual engine of sovereignty, gradually downloading the mechanisms of power to increasingly independent regional dynasties. Hierarchies of crime families and Christianity wanted populations to be devoted entirely to the systems which generated wealth, power, and a sense of superiority concentrated in the hierarchies. Crime families needed people to work the land and the mines, and the Church needed sinners to threaten and punish into begging for divine intervention, tweaking their odds by donating from the little they had. Each had their pageantry of superiority. Because the medieval alpha structure wanted populations to be totally devoted to serving the wealth and grandeur of the alpha-structure they did not want the commonality of individuals to be inwardly self-possessed through the creativity of their own subjectivity. Such a condition would distract from devotion to the very outward work of the hierarchies and possibly hatch rival organizations of effort and discourse, diverting energy, grandeur, and celebrity from the established order.

Such is the value nexus that established the culture of sovereign power and social control which we still take for granted as government. The two medieval groups supplying incumbents in power were replaced, in the course of the nineteenth century, by captains of business, finance, and industry as the economic organization of wealth came to base itself on energy from combustible minerals instead of on muscle-force from animals. The new captains remodeled sovereign culture slightly into the modern military-spiritual-industrial state. Captains of industry are much the same as their medieval counterparts, maintaining and elaborating systems of pageantry depicting their special importance and superiority. However, industrial captains could not claim divine appointment, and so had to arrange some fig-leaves of legitimacy through gestures of being accountable to the governed and being constrained by law. The ideology of sovereign control remained much as it was in medieval times. The notion of institutional hierarchy as the primary organizing principle of life is still a staple of market-society, and originates by direct lines of imitation from the ancient crime family.

The alpha-structure devises an economic and political agenda so that wars can still be fought, transferrable wealth funneled upward and concentrated, the gambling addiction of the finance industry celebrated, and the privileges and pleasures of unlimited wealth can be undisturbed. It accepts that the commonality of people are more usable, compliant, obedient, and manageable when kept in a vulnerable psychological state and guided within certain boundaries of experience. The alpha-structure craves economic and political control and the fruits of control, and psychological manipulation is simply an essential aspect of that control. Employment is structured as a systematic psychological confinement. The reality-distorting demands of the alpha-stratum superstructure (detailed in blog posting 10, Tuesday, November 8, 2011, Employment as a Force-Field of Distorted Reality) suppresses self-possession as a psychological and cultural commonplace. It isn’t that the alpha-structure knows anything about the creative freedom of subjective intelligence. It does not intend its strategic agenda specifically to deny that experience. Subjective intelligence is the blind spot of the alpha-stratum. The alpha-stratum acts as it does because it is immersed in the age-old culture of masculine pride and the value alpha-male trophy culture assigns to public displays of adulation. The history of leadership is in the refinement of a caricature of masculinity, pageantry of divine immunity proved by bravado displays of risk-defying, daredevil feats and victories, acting out sufficient contempt for personal danger to call up gasps and cheers of adoration from the crowd.

Between the assassination of JFK in 1963 and the resignation of Richard Nixon in 1974, there were beginnings of what promised to be real cultural change. However, whenever there was a life-style experiment which began to broaden the orientation grid of the commonality of people, such as the French Revolution of 1789 or the Baby-Boom Revolt of 1963-74, there has been a mighty backlash mounted to roll back the advances, so that wars can still be fought and transferrable wealth concentrated upward. There is nothing authentically transcendent in that masterly style-of-life. It has nothing to teach the commonality. It just needs to interfere in order to cling to its own sense of specialness. That alpha-structure sense of superiority is the only thing threatened by general self-possession. A luxurious and opulent style-of-life for a few is certainly not the problem. The problem is that the stratum which celebrates wealth addiction imposes an agenda of strategic control and interference with the discourse of the commonality of people.

By contrast, the history of nurture culture is in the chain of generations joining linguistic communities and getting on with life. To break the death-grip of war and refined forms of looting, to remove the disincentives and barriers to basic self-awareness, a way has to be found to limit the legacy of looting culture and greatly enlarge the influence of the nurture culture practiced by women. It will be necessary to devise a civil society and government based on nurture instead of on looting.

Copyright © 2012 Sandy MacDonald. The moral right of the author is asserted.

Reality as a Construct for Concealing Class War

01 Wednesday Feb 2012

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Blind spots in thinking, Class War, Narrative, Political Power, University

≈ Leave a comment

Europe was a Backwater

By the time the network of European universities began, with the opening of the University of Bologna in 1088 A.D., the store of human knowledge was already old. The invention of writing had been accomplished 4000 years earlier in cities of Sumer, in the southern region of the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Although individual life is brief, the culture of literacy permits access to a stack of experience that extends back to that beginning. At that time and for long to come Europe was a primitive backwater on a remote and isolated peninsula. It accomplished little on its own but benefited greatly from the gradual spread of advances from Asia.

There is a long historical process of European communities benefiting from more advanced cultures in the east. The first city societies were formed in very ancient Mesopotamia. The temple cities there based their agricultural calendar on careful observation of stars and planets. Agricultural calendar administration was one of the centralized functions of scribal schools. Records were accumulated and calculations developed to predict the arrival of the annual river-flood, which was crucial for the timing of planting and other agricultural functions. There was a sacred and ritualistic character to agriculture. The idea of observing and recording natural phenomenon and thinking about them with the goal of reaching a deeper understanding seems to have been important in that civilization. Development of astrology reveals a practice of careful observation of natural phenomena and systematic recording of observations. They developed mathematics and writing. Great cultural energies had thus been concentrated to sweep like tornadoes through subsequent societies. Cultural sophistication and literacy attracted attention. Mesopotamian wisdom swept outward from its cities of origin and inspired imitation near and far, in the Indus Valley, in Egypt, Crete, The Hittite realm, and in Greece.

We recognize the brilliance of the intellectual life of ancient Greece, at the eastern edge of Europe, but the proximity of the more ancient civilizations of Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Minoan Crete was indispensable for Greek development. Europe was a remote peninsula. On its eastern edge, near but not too near the influence of high civilizations from an earlier epoch, Greece engaged in a wonderful episode of creation and thought, and enthusiastic waves of Greek colonists sailed off to form new cities east across the Aegean, north to the shores of the Black Sea, west across the Adriatic to southern Italy and Sicily, and then at a string of sites along the north coast of the Mediterranean as far west as Spain. Eventually this upstart outpost of culture, naturally oriented toward the cultural radiation from the east, conquered the heartland of civilization within the territories of the Persian Empire and Egypt by the agency of Alexander the Great (356-323 B.C.) of Macedon.

Rome: The Rise and Fall

Farther west into the wilderness of Europe another cultural outpost was emerging at Rome, home of the Latin language. Eventually this new upstart, naturally oriented toward the east, conquered Greece and the rest of the Mediterranean coastal region. Roman conquests surrounded the Mediterranean and spread tentatively north and west. Further west of Rome the cultural sophistication was still relatively primitive. The Romans colonized intensively north to the Danube then west from the Rhine to the Atlantic and even onto the island of Britain to a northern boundary marked by Hadrian’s Wall. (Hadrian was Roman Emperor from 117 to 138 A.D..) That Roman movement to the western limits of the European peninsula caught the attention of nomadic peoples beyond the borders. Much of Germany remained beyond the direct influence of the ancient Mediterranean culture and economy, and eventually served as a base from which migrations of peoples swept into the western territories of Rome’s empire and overwhelmed the economic and cultural systems there. Under the stress of large scale migrations of Goths, Franks, Vandals, Alans, Angles, Saxons, and other tribal peoples to settle among and control the now Latinized population, that western region, including Italy and the city of Rome itself, had to be abandoned to the invaders. Most of the abandoned territory was still sparsely settled, without cities of importance beyond the immediate locality, and those few and far between in the primordial wilderness of forest and bog. The capital of the empire moved east to Byzantium, later called Constantinople, to a region still under the influence of Greek culture, but now severed from ancient Greece by both a Roman-identified ruling class and the dominance of Christianity.

Although the Roman empire in the west was erased by what has been called an external proletariat, there were also internal class conflicts in classical societies. For example, the hundred-year struggle between patricians and plebeians in ancient Rome achieved a brittle truce arrangement by around 300 B.C. by means of the addition of some political representation for plebeians. The class struggles of ancient Greece, in Athens and Sparta for example, are also well documented. Ancient societies incorporated a dependence on slavery into their economic functioning, and that remained even after the broad adoption of Christianity.

The society of the fallen west was not far above subsistence agriculture as developed originally in the bronze age, but there was some access to special resources which accelerated economic and cultural development. “Romance” languages in France, Spain, and Italy demonstrate that a great deal of Roman culture survived on the level of local folk-culture. “Vulgar” Latin is the foundation of all those languages. There was also the surviving eastern chunk of the Roman empire, the most populated and culturally accomplished part, now the empire of Byzantium. The society of the fallen west had close encounters with that culture during the Crusades. Ancient Mediterranean civilization continued there, although changed by official conversion to Christianity, and truncated more and more by losses of eastern territories. There was soon a new Islamic Empire which included the cities and much of the culture of ancient Persia and Mesopotamia, and by 711 it also occupied the entire south coast of the Mediterranean and the European Iberian peninsula almost to the Pyrenees mountains. That was to be a crucial resource for the backward west. On the local ground of western Europe there were remnants of the works of architecture and engineering accomplished by the Romans, and there was the late-Roman religion of Christianity which maintained an officialdom which was devoted to literacy in Latin. Related to that elite of literacy were institutions which preserved libraries of selected literature from antiquity. From those resources there was large-scale cultural regeneration.

European Christendom as an organized community was forged in the aftermath of the violent breakdown of Roman imperial institutions, and mass influxes of peoples from beyond the reach of the classical city-centered culture of ancient Greece and Rome. Medieval societies in Europe were conscious of living in a civilization reduced in wealth, power, and sophistication from the greatness of the Roman Empire. They were aware of living in a fallen world in another sense also, derived from Christianity, a human world in exile from the Garden of Eden. As the latest and greatest road builders had been Roman imperialists, it was still the case that all roads lead to Rome, and that gave the Bishop of Rome crucial advantages in communications and in exercising influence. Rome was still Europe’s head office both in cultural memory and in physical infrastructure. Medieval Europe was always in the process of being made into a Roman Church theocracy. The process was never entirely successful against centrifugal forces such as local forms of religion and independent minded war-lords, but the Church of Rome had substantial success in exercising hegemony.

Focus One: Christendom as a Reality Construct

Ever since human communities began to abandon the nomadic life of gathering and hunting and accumulated surpluses of vital resources, wonders of physical culture, and records of wisdom, their outlying surroundings of conservative nomadic peoples were drawn in to loot. Certain nomadic tribes devised ways of surviving by animal herding and husbanding and turned those techniques of parasitism onto communities of human farmers. Social control by landowning aristocracies, by military-estate families, derives from that innovation. An important part of the attraction of looting is to avoid having to live by daily work. A whole system of masculine pride was bound up in the ideal of living by looting other people’s work. It was the high point of accomplishment to murder rival males, destroy what property could not be used and take possession of the rest, including women. Looting is inseparable from mass murder, rape, and enslavement, and these are important attractions of war to the present day. A remnant of the romance and pride of looting exists still in the glorification of trophies won in competitive sport and fortunes won from financial speculation. It has been a slow and fragile process for human societies to conceive accomplishments more impressive than looting. Empire building is nothing more than sustained looting.

Collective identity, personal identity, means of livelihood, and the distribution of autonomy, all have to be understood in the context of stark inequality between a class of people able to live from ownership and a class of people who have to live by working. Every individual’s class identification is culturally assigned on the basis of his or her means of making a living.

There are philosophers such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau who expressed nostalgia for an imagined pre-modern closeness to nature, but the religious and literary record shows since ancient times a pervasive sense of nature as a place of exile for humans where we are marooned but which we transcend in a deep hidden reality. That narrative was at the core of Christendom, which thought of itself as a universal City of God which unified all local ethnic, political, and linguistic cultures within a spiritualized continuation of the Roman empire. In the rural/ agrarian middle ages of Europe, the Church of Rome mediated between the estate-owning military ‘aristocracy’ and a working peasant class by enforcing a spiritual collective focused on the Church’s narrative of transcendence, its magical sacraments and relics, its priestly hierarchy, its art and architecture. It was difficult for anyone in that society to think beyond the Church’s narrative of transcendence which trivialized the actuality of brutal social inequality by emphasizing justice in an afterlife-world. That was the ‘reality construct’ of Christendom, and it still maintains considerable influence. The personnel of the Church functioned as the literate mediating class, schooled in the fine points of the narrative, the middle class in that sense, of Medieval Christendom.

Blows to the Credibility of the Christian Construct

Justinian I was Byzantine emperor from 527 to 565 A.D., and his role in providing curriculum materials for future western universities was momentous. Justinian commissioned a systematic compilation and codification of Roman emperor-made laws beginning from the time of Hadrian. It was published in twelve books by 529 A.D., and later supplemented with collections of ‘common law’ legal decisions, commentaries, legal theory and training materials, to form an organized legal canon in Latin, the Justinian Legal Code. An edition of that canon was discovered in Italy late in the eleventh century and inspired founding the first university, the University of Bologna. The University of Bologna was opened in 1088, three years after Muslim Toledo was captured by a European Christian commander, Alfonso VI. The libraries of Toledo contained Arabic translations of philosophical and scientific texts from ancient Greece which were unknown in Christendom, but which would soon shake literate culture there, as those texts were translated into Latin and incorporated into materials for university study.

Medieval Christendom was supposed to be a singular collective transcendency within the Roman Church. However, the Church was directed and managed by people who normally came from ‘aristocratic’ military-estate families and also partnered with the wealthiest and fiercest of those families in the project of social control. Captains of the Church also claimed the privileges of aristocracy, and so were thoroughly corrupted by bias in their claims to legitimacy as social unifiers. That perfidy of the Church inspired a spiral of revolt from around the time of Wycliffe and the English Peasants’ Revolt of 1381.

There was a gradual breakdown of the credibility of the Christian reality construct under the weight of Church failures (the great plague) and development of knowledge of the wider world, with its richness of alternative lives and interesting secular vistas and opportunities. Secularism developed as a generally increased complexity of knowledge and access to the broader world. Philosophical ideas, technological innovations, and physical conditions such as disease and climate change also contributed. The failure of the reality construct of Christendom sent the Euro-American system of cultural connectedness drifting toward modernity in which the singular book-of-the-Church was replaced by a literature ranging over a broad landscape of thought. The story of the world became an alternative mental organization to replace the Christian story.

Christendom could not isolate itself from the rest of the world or from natural processes beyond its understanding, and it could not prevent a breakdown of the rural-agrarian economy due to the spread of money, population expansion, the cultural stimulation of cities, and increased knowledge of the superior accomplishments of eastern civilizations. Consequences of the Crusades, for example, included European discovery of the superior intellectual culture of the Islamic east. Contacts with the empire of the Mongols in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries brought awareness of the commercial and material superiority of China. Those unanticipated events had natural, cultural, and psychological consequences that gradually reshaped the medieval social order. In particular, two sub-cultures went wildly beyond the control of medieval sovereign elites for several centuries. The two sub-cultures in question are literacy and commercial entrepreneurship, both inspired by the cultural superiority of the middle east and the far east. The Black Death plague of the mid-fourteenth century (spread from central Asia) undermined the Church’s claim to be the good shepherd protecting the human flock by mediating between sinners and a violent God. There was ongoing loss of faith in the supernatural protection of the Church.

The Worldly Coup

What burst through and succeeded Christendom was a patchwork of more localized jurisdictions and ethnic-nations with some crucial fundamentals in common, most prominently the rule of monarchies emerging from within the military aristocracy. The theocratic authority of the Church of Rome encountered competition from those rural-military private property hoarders. In the roughly 250 years between 1534, when Henry VIII officially replaced the Roman Church hierarchy as supreme power in England, and 1789, when George Washington took the oath of office as the first president of the U.S.A., and the French rose in revolution, we see the rise and fall of regional aristocracy, sometimes in the form of nation-state monarchies. That style of sovereign supervision developed alongside Protestantism without being identical to it. Niccolo Machiavelli (1467-1527) advocated a rejection of the Church as senior universal supervisor, and supported claims by more local and secular power-holders to legitimacy as social supervisors on their own turf. There were efforts to stabilize a new reality construct based on “the divine right of kings”, which demonstrates how the idea of divine prophets still served as a template of sovereignty, even when those claiming sovereignty mainly carried and expressed the ancient culture of looting by organized violence. The legal and financial reach of official organization around monarchies provided some legitimacy to monarchy’s claim to mediate between the working class and the military-estate overlords.

Nationalism had not been an important feature of life within the Roman empire or in Christendom, which was a kind of spiritualizing of the empire, Augustine’s City of God. Of course people generally feel a loyalty to family and clan or tribe, but nation states are cobbled together in the game of military-estate families. There is no fundamental ethnic unity to the nation “France” or “England” or “The U.S.A.” for example. Inspiring devotion to such arbitrary abstractions requires heroic myth making. Some national myths turned out to be as attractive as religions. Even where secular engines of social supervision remained local or regional, the papacy and Church hierarchy lost influence and control to aristocracy between 1534 and the French Revolution of 1789.

The aristocratic seizure of power from the Church had consequences for the organization of society and the communal experience of most people. The Church remained a powerful force of social control, demoted to junior partner. The rise in importance of secular jurisdictions meant that secular authorities had to be given more reverence than previously. There emerged that other layer of community identity between each person’s strict locality and the vastness of Christendom. It required development of a new system of popular emotional devotion, this time to a semi-secular-state. Otherwise the rural-agrarian form of society remained much the same as during High Christendom, even though the economic and cultural forces mentioned earlier were quietly building. There was a lag in training people to fanatical patriotism/ loyalty with the emotional attachment characteristic of religious devotion. Some countries carried it off more grandly than others.

The great sea-voyages by which European Christendom discovered planet-Earth-as-a-whole were quests for commodities of trade and for routes over which commodities and luxury goods could be moved better for commercial purposes. The Islamic Ottoman empire took possession of Constantinople by armed force in 1453, which made overland European trade with the far east dangerous and uncertain. The event was experienced by Christendom as encirclement of its eastern and southern flanks by a hostile threat, and as such a major spur for expansion from the western rim. European nations on the Atlantic coast were now advantaged by opportunities offered by ocean-crossing ships, where previously the Mediterranean coastal regions had been advantaged both culturally and commercially. With this first wave of globalization, capital accumulation expanded beyond real estate into luxury goods trade and finance on a transformative scale. Also important in the European discovery of America in 1492 was the mythic presence of America as a “blank slate”, a new beginning, a place of opportunity for the disadvantaged. That changed the myth or cluster of ideals animating Western culture, partly by further distracting popular interest from the narratives of aristocracy and religion.

Until about 1453 with the fall of Constantinople, the momentum in culture, population, and wealth remained on the ground of ancient Roman and Greek civilizations, the north coast of the central and eastern Mediterranean. After the discovery of America in 1492 there was a major geographical shift in the cultural energy of European society. With discovery of the New World, energy and initiative went west, and for the next 500 years the European countries with most Atlantic coastal exposure became centers of economic and cultural investment and expansion, and the engines of European wealth. The great Old-Regime monarchical states of France, Spain, Portugal, and Britain blossomed from that energy. Emergence of nation-states is cited as a defining development of the Old Regime, but “unification” of Germany, Italy, and most other modern states occurred much later. “The rise of nation-states” is code for a new set of reality constructs in which national monarchs claimed to mediate between workers and the ownership/ exploiting class, with God’s blessing and support.

Johann Gutenberg of Mainz, Germany, introduced the printing press into Western culture around 1442. Gutenberg’s first printed book appeared in 1457. The printing press enabled the slow blossoming of a culture of written conversation outside churches and universities and independent of them, the ‘Republic of Letters’. In spite of the fact that Germany was peripheral to both the classical and the Atlantic seacoast engines of wealth, Germany has had enormous influence on European culture since Gutenberg. For example, credit for beginning a modern post-theological philosophy is usually given to Rene Descartes (1596-1650), but Descartes and the rest of modern philosophy is understood better as footnotes to the the work of Martin Luther (1483-1546). Germany was the centre of the protestant reformation which sent waves of influence through the entire European social and cultural system and changed forever its character and direction of development. The reformation rejection of Roman authority flourished in the region of Europe which had kept beyond Roman authority, and Roman roads, in ancient times. Germany suffered horribly for Protestantism. The Thirty Years War (1618-48) brought armies from all over Europe to loot, destroy, and do battle on German ground. That war caused more loss of life in Germany than the Great Plague of the fourteenth century. Recovery took more than a century.

Literacy’s Spiral of Revolt

The history of John Wycliffe (1328-84) and his Oxford university disciples, the Lollards, illustrates tensions playing out between monarchy/ aristocracy and universities. Oxford fell into disrepute after the English Peasants’ Revolt of 1381 because Oxford Lollards were blamed for helping to inspire the revolt. Wycliffe’s mission of universal literacy was the future, however. In a sense it was the university bursting out from campuses and conquering the world.

Although two events of the “spiral of revolt” are known as The English Peasants’ Revolt of 1381 and the German Peasants’ Revolt of 1524-25, they did not occur in a cultural vacuum. Each was inspired by a Christian intellectual innovator, first Wycliffe, then Martin Luther, both campaigning for universal vernacular literacy. In Medieval society intellectual culture was mainly concentrated within institutions of religion, but Wycliffe and Luther put a novel emphasis on individual innocence as opposed to trained and educated sophistication. Such religious controversies were translated into social movements which included armed revolts by groups made up mainly of peasants. No doubt those revolts expressed long-seething rage in peasant experience against the supervisors of their society, aristocracy and the Church hierarchy.

Two more noteworthy events in that spiral of revolt were the uprising of Bohemian Hussites 1400-25, and the English Lollard uprising headed by Sir John Oldcastle in 1414. John Huss (1369-1415) was a Czech theologian who came under the influence of the writings of John Wycliffe and inspired a large following. In 1420 Pope Martin V proclaimed a Crusade against the Hussites. Their heroic survival against the destructive might of the Church made a deep impression on many including Martin Luther. Incidentally, it was in the self-defense launched by Hussites against the crusading looters blessed by the Church that, for the first time in western history, gunpowder was used to win battles against large armies centered around armored and mounted knights. The military innovator who devised the winning tactics was Ian Zizka (1359-1424).

Wycliffe’s English Lollards inspired Huss’s Bohemians in and around Prague, who remained a cultural presence involved in the inspiration of Martin Luther and his movement’s dramatic pietistic turning inward for justification by faith alone assisted and supported by personal literacy. The religious schism in Germany championed individualism and proletarian literacy. Luther’s stand against the Church is associated with the German Peasants’ Revolt. A campaign for universal literacy was the foundation of this spiral of revolt which ultimately culminated in the American Revolution of 1776 and the French Revolution of 1789.

Within the culture of advanced literacy, renaissance re-discovery of Hellenistic philosophy, notably in Cicero’s writings, inspired both the spread of Greek-style humanism and the “republic of letters” outside cultural institutions. The availability, and spread through broad literacy, of humanist individualism began a new cultural force resisting both top-down collectives and radical inequality. Seventeenth century rationalism asserted a geometry-based affinity between individual powers of rationality and a lawful nature. There was a snowballing appeal of knowledge over theology.

The Big Change

Until the industrial revolution, the main working sector of society was still communities of peasants, with everything invested in gardens. The many revolts of peasants can be understood if they found that other classes of society contributed nothing to them but only exploited and looted them, which seems an accurate assessment. Since the revolutions of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, a new claim to society’s rewards has arisen from commercial investors, entrepreneurs, and captains of organization. Not only has marketplace planning and adventuring entered the contest, but it displaced land-based aristocracy as the over-dog in the control of labour. That new ruling class developed in the same set of social transformations which shrank the agricultural peasantry and expanded enormously the numbers of urban commercial and manufacturing workers. That set of transformations involved a further loss of the reality construct of European Christendom, also the partial failure of attempts to replace that construct with “the divine right of kings”, and finally the rise of a new reality construct which might be called Euro-American Modernity.

Focus Two: Modern Reality as a Social Construct

In urban/ industrial modernity, although the Church was replaced by a combination of science ideology and institutions of secular states, it is an international literate class of professional engineers, lawyers, accountants, entrepreneurs, and organization administrators which mediates between owners of accumulated capital and proletarian labour. That professional “middle class” functions by providing the capitalist class novel opportunities to derive income from mere ownership, and the proletariat with a variety of opportunities to exchange work for wages. This balancing of class interests is the social construction of modern reality, ‘modernity’. The social construction is the repeated, continually re-imitated activities in which people fit into processes of production and consumption, conversations, and crowds. The professional class made the urban market a practical alternative to traditional rural life in the grip of God and Nature. Knowledge-building literacy, in arrangements with accumulated money, broke through the cocoon of timeless natural cycles, but the literacy-based vision, from the eighteenth century Enlightenment, of the rule of rationality degenerated into modernity from the dominance of money culture.

Be a Scribe

Literacy is the key to middle class effectiveness. The core is knowledge trades built around advanced literacy skills and specialized education, functions that can be characterized in a general way as scribal. Professions are knowledge-trades, and knowledge is always hierarchical, organized around elite possession of arcane expertise. The middle class submits to lengthy training so not to live by body-labour. It lives by knowledge or investments and marketplace ventures, by knowledge of the marketplace. The middle class likes objective markers of accomplishment and self-definition. They become their economic function to build an appearance of stability and respectability. Having invested so much in a particular self-declaration, the nature and degree of personal substance gets stuck in socially defined and socially pre-constructed forms. Conspicuous distinction from less accomplished people, from “the crowd”, is crucial to the reward system.

Knowledge is always hierarchical. All-important knowledge supposedly justifies and requires, for its preservation and eventual fulfillment, a whole structure of social control, hierarchical supervision and obedience, and loyalty or commitment to belonging in the collective. Knowledge is, among other things, a tool for justifying the existence of oligarchy as preserver of knowledge. The delusion that this arrangement perpetuates is that fulfillment in life is achieved from service to the oligarchic supervisory and educational system, from receiving its rewards for service. All persons incumbent as social/ cultural authorities are required to endorse and enforce the myths of an oligarchy based on the unquestionable value of knowledge.

Capital as a money-spinner has been stable since the industrial revolution. Industries change, but market-commerce has continued to grow in fits and starts. A case could be made for the claim that large scale investors and market entrepreneurs have some control of modern cultural drift. Regimented organization of modern life by clock and organization chart, by market incentive and reward, is apparently the soul of modernity. Systems of human effort function like machines, ruled by abstractions, in an apparent triumph of the various counter-revolutionary efforts launched to limit the effects of the French Revolution. Victorian control and cold formalism were among those efforts and were applied to the control of factory workers, so they would be disabled from further revolt.

In modernity the professional middle class is the source of manic optimism from a conviction that the other two classes can be mediated into mutual engagement satisfying everybody economically, and so concealing the ugliness of class injustice which discredits nearly all societies. However, the modern economic machine satisfies superficially without approaching real equality, and the manic optimism is not shared by either the treasure hoarding class or the working proletariat, because each knows that an enemy lurks within the gates. In accomplishing much success in the mediating effort, the professional class is the creative heart of modernity but is biased by dependence on the pleasures of a style of life requiring high-volume consumption, the unsustainable benefit accruing from radical inequality. Although professional families depend on a strong “work ethic” for livelihood, there is an overriding identification with the ownership class, similar to the aristocratic identification of the masters of the Medieval Church.

Copyright © 2012 Sandy MacDonald. The moral right of the author is asserted.

 

Is There a Narrative Here?

28 Wednesday Sep 2011

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Narrative, University

≈ Leave a comment

There is a narrative here that is not yet very distinct. It has something to do with a sense that the personal use of thinking will sometimes be at odds with what is taught us. Most of the guidance we get about using such intelligence as we have comes from educational institutions, and in the contemporary world those institutions are largely market driven.

Students are Market Commodities

The labour market is a competition. Universities understand and proclaim their mission as enabling students to perfect themselves as high-end labour market commodities. In addition to specific preparation for law, medicine, management, or engineering, for example, employers assume that university graduates have proven themselves capable, that they have been tested in general mental abilities, and also improved by university courses. Grads are assumed to have a high level of general knowledge, and interest and skill at continuing to learn. There is an expectation that grads can mentally organize and evaluate new experiences and information that might appear random and incomplete. The mental discipline of university programming is supposed to test and enhance critical thinking abilities, that is, abilities to assess claims and persuasive presentations for precision, plausibility, and logical validity, to sense relevance relations, to analyze and extrapolate. Awareness of basic investigation techniques is also assumed. Research skills go beyond laboratory experiments, and include awareness of sources of information and how to locate and use them, how to use a library, for example, to take possession of relevant material already published. The practicalities and logic of investigation should be in the skill-set of any university grad. There may even be an expectation that grads are able to get absorbed in work projects, that they are used to getting things done, and are not too self-absorbed to persevere through the hard parts, mistakes, disappointments, and failures. All this enables these people to add important value to their employer and their national economy.

The Well Rounded Gentleman

From their earliest existence, and up to, say, World War II (1939-45), universities were intended as hatcheries of clergy, lawyers, medical practitioners, and (Latin) grammar teachers. Within that mission, the ideal product of university was some version of ‘the well rounded gentleman’. Such a man was acquainted with classical literature, knew Latin (the seven Liberal Arts) and at least a second contemporary touring language. He had the ability to participate in vigorous sporting competitions and to dance and converse with ladies at formal parties. He was acquainted with a broad literary canon which, beyond Christian scripture, included refined poetry, heroic dramas, some Aristotle, the history of Rome, certain military campaigns, and the stories of important generals. He was prepared to be a soldier by practice in using weapons and transport vehicles, by athletic training, and respect for social hierarchy. His preparedness for military life included a sense of practicalities both in basic engineering principles and in ways of persuading others to join a team and follow orders, leadership skills. His presentation and communication skills included the ability to form effective sentences and short written messages, as well as clear public speeches. He valued team loyalty but respected all instances of competitive spirit, strategic cleverness, strength, and skilled performance.

Along with producing such professional scribes, it was, for a long time and until quite recently, part of the culture of university life to cultivate ‘a life of the mind’, the vita contemplativa. Perhaps that focus was most developed at the top and the bottom of the traditional university hierarchy, in the Faculty of Theology and the Faculty of Liberal Arts and Philosophy, but to some extent it pervaded university culture because of the very idea of a university. For the earliest centuries of university operation graduates would engage professionally and socially with aristocratic families and depend on them for patronage, since that was the social segment which could afford the routine services of lawyers, medical doctors, and teachers of children. Theologians entered Church hierarchies and engaged with the aristocracy as partners in social supervision and control. Qualities admired in aristocratic culture were distinctly masculine, military, and formally social, distinctly different from qualities cultivated by monkish scholarship, which was the previous high culture of literacy. University education was conceived to bring those two “high cultures” into a mutually beneficial partnership, to inject some vita contemplativa into the lives of men of action, men of affairs. Graduates should be manly but not thuggish, capable of refinement in thought and behaviour without being otherworldly or indecisive, capable of taking charge but also of deferring to higher authority. Maybe the university idea was an attempt to improve on the dominant aristocratic ideal, namely chivalry, a blending of military and Christian devotional cultures. The new life of the mind had more inspiration from the pagan literature of ancient Greece and Rome.

Do We Have a Narrative Here?

The personal use of thinking might require rejecting aristocratic values along with the quantification of value in terms of money.

Copyright © 2011 Sandy MacDonald. The moral right of the author is asserted.

 

Newer posts →

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • December 2025
  • October 2025
  • August 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • December 2024
  • August 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • November 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • September 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011

Categories

  • Blind spots in thinking
  • Class War
  • Culture
  • disinterestedness
  • Embodiment
  • Equality
  • Freedom
  • Gender culture
  • Hierarchy
  • Leadership
  • Narrative
  • Nature
  • Political Power
  • Strategic thinking
  • Subjectivity
  • Transcendence
  • Uncategorized
  • University
  • Why thinking?

Meta

  • Create account
  • Log in

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • in the blind spot
    • Join 84 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • in the blind spot
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar