• Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
You are here:
4. THE ANTHROPOLOGY OF SOCIAL EVOLUTION PDF Print E-mail
Climate Change

4.Cubo RGBThe evolution of society corresponds to that of the individual. Today, we are still experiencing what we could call the stage of the ritual society. We have remained in this phase since the period of anthropogenesis. Human society is still going through its prehistory and is the prisoner of a mechanistic and ritual approach to its constitution, trapped in the name without a meaning. Our life was ritual in the primitive phase, and it is ritual now in the third, or even the fourth, Industrial Revolution.

Our society is based on tools, technology, management, economy, symbols or fetishes – it is indirectifying. The forms of grouping, such as political parties, football teams, and organisations, have the same characteristics. Characteristics of the ritualisation of the individual are the structure of the subconscious, the use of mechanical associations by the cerebral consciousness, the rudimentary apprehension of psychological time, and the hypostasisation of the consciousness in the senses within the form of the space of the environment.

The collectivisation of men does not occur either in connection with their functional identity, or as to their Existential Uniqueness, but according to predicative adjectives which refer to forms. The collectivisation of man seems to be subject more to rules which characterise an organisation. And since organisation is repressive, it is foremost in generating the desire for psychological release as a counterbalance to this repression. At this stage, life is all about counterbalance and not affirmation. In this way, a surplus value results from the functions of man, as a substitute for transcendence.

The regulation of selfishness and competition

Dialectic involves the twins to thesis and antithesis (counterbalancing). It is a synthesis or transcendence. But in practice, we have a substitution for synthesis or transcendence, because the life of man is not to be identified in this, and in this way, man is absent.

Let us give an example: on the one hand, there is selfishness as a thesis. Its collectivity, however, is its counterbalancing in the form of competitive survival. Competition, however, just like selfishness, needs regulation if they are to co-exist functionally - if they do not lead directly to a catastrophic explosion. What is needed, that is, is something that we are not, because we are not ourselves either as individuals or as a totality, and this is political surplus value. At this point, an error on the part of the visionaries of amelioration emerges, in that they confine their efforts exclusively to the abrogation of the competitive system.

The principles of the model of the mechanistic society

The principles included in the model of the ritual society are:

(a) The principle of fantasy acceptance in a collective manner - that is, mechanical acceptance. Self-definition of the leadership and the institutions.

(b) The principle of specialisation, of differentiated privileges or roles which encourage the system of differences, which leads to multifaceted inequality and competition, to interests invested in the perpetuation of the ritual. In other words, specialisation has to do with the adjustment of the organisation to the means and the material with which it works. Every member is isolated in this phase from the conception of the totality of the means of the organisation.

Collective fantasy acceptance has rendered the aim beyond our reach. The mechanistic nature of fantasy acceptance does not investigate the aim.

The system of differences completely breaks down the cohesion of those involved, and it is replaced by the mechanistic system.

This model can even apply to the organisation of concepts, and not only of people. Usually the system is competitive and market-orientated. The next step secures this systematisation, and renders it capable of survival and reproduction. As we see, this model is from the outset anti-holistic. This is, in any event, also the form of organisation of any human drive. The breakdown of the effective participation of the members is replaced by formal ritual and mechanical cohesion, familiar to everyone from the 'chain-gangs' of automated and formalised labour in which human communication is minimised. Such is also the case with bureaucracy.

Specialisation is organised by ritual and the same system requires the acceptance of its claim to authority. The system requires that we should think of it as self-evident, natural, and taken for granted and that it should incorporate our intellectual inertia. As long as this occurs, every development - and even the concept of it - will be short-circuited in our consciousness and a surplus value will be produced in favour of the old.

In the ritualism of collective fantasy acceptance and of the system of privileges and differences the factor of a rooted divisiveness and of parcelling out is firmly established.

Thus we arrive at the last point, where the foundations are laid for a divisive isolation, a hypostasisation of the structural units, which may be concepts, behaviours, people, nations, and so on.

In the last stage, the isolation of the model or the ritual the objective, through the same subjects from the model of the group. There are travesties of collectivity, travesties of freedom, off-centre mechanisms and behaviours, etc.

The principles of the model of the group

In summary, the model of the group includes:

(a) The Principle of the Evolving and Non-Divisive Identity of the individual and of the whole. We regard Identity as something similar to the unitary elements in set theory in maths. Here the individual does not become an agent of the incorporation of fantasy acceptances.

(b) The Principle of Complementarity and Open Participatory Synthesis. Let us here call to mind Gödel's Completeness Theorem, because it is associated here with the transcendence of the units in the quest for Completeness.

(c) The Principle of Functional Integrity and of Multidimensional Unity as a principle for ensuring that the participants are not subjected to divisive isolation or an imposed nexus.

(d) The Principle of Unity in Differentiation and of Pluralism in Unity. Here, what is being attempted is the experiential and functional enrichment of Unity or Evolution, since the latter never comes from the destruction of the inner integrity of soul of individuals. Collectivity leads to Freedom through Unity. Unfortunately, however, such is the state of affairs prevailing today that we could become witnesses of the collectivisation of anti-collectivity.

Models of organisation and theory of groups

The models of organisation and grouping on the planet are put into practice in all developing structures. The evolving stages of life and consciousness create the kingdoms of nature, an ecosystem which also contains within it structures of transcendence, evolutions and potential changes of consciousness. For the time being, the dominant model - because of anthropocentrism and human violence - is the model of organisation. Alternative thinkers seek after the holistic and symbiotic model - which means less competition in all the species.

Let us turn to the human kingdom. There we have many competitive divisions, nations, tribes, religions, classes, genders, ages, etc. All these divisions are predominantly competitive and, consequently, organised – not collectivised.

The undertaking of the next step in evolution must start out from the totality; it must start out with the totality of humanity and extend to direct human relations and as far as the inner life of man. All these collectivisations must achieve realisation. We should recall that Set theory deals with the problems of equations of major forces. It is a fact that in the social, ecological, and psychological sphere, there are conditions more difficult to investigate than those involved in the mathematical set theory, Topology, and Hilbert's spaces.

Conclusion

Human society is still going through its prehistory and is the prisoner of a mechanistic and ritual approach to its constitution, trapped in the name without a meaning.

The model of the ritual society is guided by:

1. the principle of the mechanical acceptance of the authority of the system;

2. the principle of privileges and differences.

The model of the group is guided by:

1. The Principle of the Evolving and Non-Divisive Identity of the individual and of the whole;

2. The Principle of Complementarity and Open Participatory Synthesis;

3. The Principle of Functional Integrity and of Multidimensional Unity;

4. The Principle of Unity in Differentiation and of Pluralism in Unity.

The undertaking of the next step in evolution must start out from the totality; it must start out with the totality of humanity and extend to direct human relations and as far as the inner life of man.

Ioannis Zisis, writer


The above text is part of the essay
ENVIRONMENTAL THEORY AS A BASIS FOR A HOLISTIC, SYNTHESIS, AND PLANETIC SCIENCE deals with the need for there to be New Sciences, with different characteristics. The alienation of knowledge from the life of the scientist, the expropriation of its use in society because of the alienation of people and economic and political vested interests, as well as the deficit in knowledge on matters concerning the modern world impose upon us the formulation of the proposal for the development of those New Sciences which will bridge the gap between the alienation of technologies and the psychic depth of life and the human Being.


The essay will be published in stages. We believe that by the present series of publications we are contributing to the dialogue on a quest for a sustainable civilisation, looking to the future.

 

 

Photo from Wikimedia

 

 
Creative Commons License
You are free: to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work.  
Under the following conditions:
>>>