Presentation on theme: "4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD Level 7: UNIVERSALISM (CONT.) Societal Maturity CONTENTS OF SOCIETAL MATURITY TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR LESSON."— Presentation transcript:
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD Level 7: UNIVERSALISM (CONT.) Societal Maturity CONTENTS OF SOCIETAL MATURITY TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR LESSON 6. SOCIETAL MATURITY 1.BEING ONE WITH THE UNIVERSE 2.UNIVERSALISM AND COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CULTURES 3.PERSPECTIVES ON TIME, HISTORY, AND THE RISE AND FALL OF NATIONS 4.STRUCTURALISM AND A MULTI-DISCIPLINARY APPROACH TO CULTURE 5.STRUCTURES AND SYSTEMS WITHIN A CULTURE AS THE PRIMARY CAUSAL AGENTS 6.ANALYZING THE STRUCTURES AND SYSTEMS WITHIN YOUR ORGANIZATIONS 7.SOCIAL ACTIVISM IN A MODERN GLOBAL WORLD 8.EXAMPLES OF POLARIZING, PROBLEMATICAL ISSUES FACING THE MODERN WORLD 9.CASUISTRY 10.PERSPECTIVES CAN MAKE YOU QUESTION YOUR CULTURALLY DETERMINED BELIEF SYSTEMS 11.RELATIVISM AND THE DEMOCRATIC IDEAL 12.THE DANGERS OF SOLUTIONS COMING FROM LIMITED ARENAS 13.THE NECESSITY FOR SOLUTIONS DERIVED FROM A LARGE ARENA IN A DEMOCRATIC STATE
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD Level 7: UNIVERSALISM (CONT.) Societal Maturity EXERCISES RELATED TO SOCIETAL MATURITY When you finish this presentation, you will be asked to write and discuss the following items: 1.Identify aspects of your culture that you feel have been and are counterproductive for your growth in personal maturity toward Universalism and personal welfare? 2.Considering your own life and the structures encompassing and influencing your life, what changes in those structures would you make to create the conditions that would promote your personal growth? 3.Consider your own life within its topology: the places you inhabit and go to; the organizations you belong to or visit; the relations you have with family; the relations agencies have with you; and the roles you are assigned, occupy, and take in each of thes What about this topology is not favorable to your welfare? What changes in this topology would you make that would promote your personal growth? 4.Now, consider the youths in your institution. What could it have been in the youths’ culture, the structures encompassing the youths’ lives, and the typical topology of the youths’ lives that have routed them into incarceration? 5.In the light of these perspectives on the life topology of these youths, the conditions of life of these youths outside of the institution, and particularly the structures within the institution, what changes would you like to see and what could you change to promote the growth in maturity and character of these youths? 6.What are your reasons for suggesting these particular changes?
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD Level 7: UNIVERSALISM (CONT.) Societal Maturity 1. BEING ONE WITH THE UNIVERSE 1.Ability to see oneself as a part that is inextricably bound up in the whole, to see that whole as an integration of both positive and negative forces, and to see the whole as a near infinite composition of parts or persons to be regarded as equally as valuable as oneself. 2.Capacity to feel kinship with all humanity and all cultures 3.Ability to see any act by any person, including oneself, in terms of its formative global, historical context
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD Level 7: UNIVERSALISM (CONT.) Societal Maturity 2. UNIVERSALISM AND COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CULTURES 1.Tendency to equally and objectively analyze one’s own and other cultures and zeitgeists. 2.Tendency to try to grasp the essence of any culture through the use of comparative analysis of cultures, their histories, and possible futures. 3.Comprehension of the necessity of the free and full civil expression of opposition within and between cultures, social groups, and individuals in order to progress toward more viable syntheses. 4.Ability to conceive of nations, cultures, and organizations in terms of their structures and interacting levels of structures. 5.Ability to conceive of the fact that the nature and function of time in individuals, groups, and cultures is a product of their social evolution and place and role within larger the networks of the whole of humanity.
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD Level 7: UNIVERSALISM (CONT.) Societal Maturity 3. PERSPECTIVES ON TIME, HISTORY, AND THE RISE AND FALL OF CULTURES 1.Ability to understand that categories of time are a function of the stage of evolution of a society 2.Ability to adapt one’s perspectives on time to the social context and social problem being addressed. 3.Ability to conceive of the fact that nations and organizations have innovative developments that had contributed to success during earlier stages or cycles of history that can ossify and/or become obsolete and destructive in current contexts 4.Understanding that in the post industrial world there are super- ordinate structures embracing all commercial, social, and political organizations and institutions that have the capacity to rapidly transform entire cultures, their general weltanschauung, their conventions, and the fate of their natural and technological resources without the opportunity for first hand participation or testing and without the opportunity to grasp the significance of their impact and that these influences of super-ordinate structures are beyond access to the consciousness of the affected citizens, globally, regardless of their nation. The structure of the modern media in a prime example of this emergent novelty affecting all contemporary civilizations and contemporary consciousness.
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD Level 7: UNIVERSALISM (CONT.) Societal Maturity 4. STRUCTURALISM AND A MULTI-DISCIPLINARY APPROACH TO CULTURE 1.Ability to take an open-minded stance toward essential differences of all disciplines, appreciation of the contribution of all disciplines, and begin a movement toward seeing what the cross-fertilization of disciplines and integration of disciplines into a theoretically cohesive whole might bring. 2.Ability to value and attempt to understand and, if possible, use the methods of study, investigation, analysis, measurement, assessment, evaluation, and the content being studied, as well as the general orientation of many disciplines from pure science to applied, from philosophical to artistic, and orientation to the past, present, or future to see what they may be able to contribute to understanding, evaluating, and regaining control over the super- ordinate structures, the ordinary structures, and the new zeitgeist. 3.The ability to think in terms of levels and types of causation for effects and issues that have traditionally been presented with mono-causal explanations and single remedies and that while the latter seem plausible in the light of the authority making the claim and the power of the media presenting these simplistic paradigms and their seeming success in the short run, that these superficial, yet appealing, promotions may be extremely harmful when looked at from a multi-dimensional and longer term perspective
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD Level 7: UNIVERSALISM (CONT.) Societal Maturity 5. STRUCTURES AND SYSTEMS WITHIN A CULTURE AS THE PRIMARY CAUSAL AGENTS 1.Ability to understand that organizational structures entail and configure systems and that the elements of systems can dynamically interact and different categories of systems can dynamically interact 2.Ability to analyze the dynamic mutual influence between action patterns of systems within structures of organizations and between organizations that have the causal properties that produce productive or destructive effects or resolution of problems 3. Ability to take perspectives from the top of organizations and structures and strata of society and also take perspectives from positions at the bottom in order to try to comprehend the effects of current configurations and proposed future configurations. 4.Understanding that it is the structures and systems of a society rather than the evil will of its citizens that leads to corruption and harm 5.Understanding that these structures and systems of the basic Institutions of a society are the sources emotional security and other important feelings and inner states and processes in the individuals composing a population
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD Level 7: UNIVERSALISM (CONT.) Societal Maturity 6. ANALYZING THE STRUCTURES AND SYSTEMS WITHIN YOUR ORGANIZATIONS Realization that the following are systems within structures that are the primary determinative of the problematic issues addressed by a society and only by looking at the broader perspective of structures and systems encompassing such issues can they be satisfactorily resolved: 1.Vertical systems: Mission; tables of Organization; management systems 2.Horizontal systems: Layout of buildings’ offices; arrangement of departments 3.Communication systems: Communication functions; what; to whom; how 4.Economic systems: Funding sources; budgetary and allocation systems 5.Performance systems: Tasks; Job descriptions; accountability; measures 6.Longitudinal systems: Flow of products and/or persons through the system 7.Social systems: Who relates to whom in the formal and informal relations and what roles do they play in each; how do they influence the organization 8.Extra-organization systems: What external agencies, institutions, and organizations interact with and have an impact on the organization 9.Gestalt of the whole: how should the organization be characterized and what aspects of which systems account for this characterization 10.Systems for the restructuring of organizations and their structures and systems: what organization evaluation, development, and training programs are operative
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD Level 7: UNIVERSALISM (CONT.) Societal Maturity 7. SOCIAL ACTIVISM IN A MODERN GLOBAL WORLD 1.As a member of the whole, embracing the positive and negative as the self, one is able to commit oneself to the mission of facilitating the resolution of opposites into higher, more universally wholesome syntheses 2.Understanding that it is the restructuring of the topology of the lives of persons that leads to enduring, positive change 3.Being able to rationally consider the optimal strategies for or approaches to social action, given each person’s personal and material resources, their life situation, and their unique position in the world, so as to choose the course of maximum effectiveness. 4.Understanding that the modern, intelligent, universalistic human must develop entirely new ways to understand, evaluate, and regain control over the age of information, its re- formation of the content and processes of mind, and its dissociation from our ability to test this content or evaluate its effects on human existence 5.The ability to think scenarios of ‘What if?’ and ‘Why not?’ as well as “Why?” with respect to the great issues facing individuals and the modern world.
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD Level 7: UNIVERSALISM (CONT.) Societal Maturity 8. Examples of Polarizing, Problematical Issues Facing the Modern World Profit Vs Exploitation Social Darwinianism Vs Social Responsibility Environmental Stewardship Vs Pillage and Neglect Success Vs Uprightness Separatism Vs Universalism Outcome Vs Process Law Vs Love Authority Vs Democracy Coercion Vs Care and Cultivation Control Vs Guidance Rules Vs Judgment Punishment Vs Correction Superstition Vs Science Spin and Hype Vs Honest-Objective Media Conformity Vs Individuality Discrimination Vs Tolerance and Acceptance Ostracism Vs Inclusiveness and Understanding Individualism Vs Community Regimented Institutions Vs Facilitating Maturation Infantalizing Institutions Vs Empowering Self Indulgent Society Vs Self Sacrifice for Whole Narcissistic Society Vs Reserved Egoistic Society Vs Altruistic Manipulative Vs Mutual Facilitation Chauvinism Vs Globalism Rivalry Vs Mutuality Self Centered Vs Universalistic
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD THE QUESTION OF MORAL ABSOLUTISM VERSUS MORAL RELATIVISM 9. CASUISTRY What if I could construct a mirror made of truth and goodness and hold it in such a manner that it reflected my soul, my unvarnished inner self, as well as my observable behavior? What would I see? How would it make me feel? What if the mirror functioned like a prism and separated out qualities of my self? What if the mirror instantly reflected my attempts to re-color and could undo those re-coloring attempts so that the reflection was unwavering, exact, and brutally honest? I wonder, how would I feel in the presence of that mirror? What if I questioned the source of the composition of my mirror? How would I know if it was ‘the’ true instance of truth and goodness? Suppose I truly felt that my mirror of truth and goodness was correct and correctly reflected my soul. ‘I’ suppose, first of all, that I would not see much that needed to be changed. Second, ‘I’ suppose that, if I did see something in the prism-like mirror that was not consistent with the truth and goodness image, I would not be successful, even if highly motivated to do so, in doing much in the way of changing the ‘bad’ so that I was more ‘good’. If I did make a change, it would not last long. In the presence of the mirror that would not let me recolor anything or aspect of me that was negative, more sooner than later I would simply stop looking at that mirror. And, finally, if I did look steadily and did make enduring changes, how would I know that my mirror of truth and goodness was not simply constructed out of my own myopic assumptions about truth and goodness rather than something that was delivered to me by an external source that was somehow guaranteed to provide me with objective knowledge of good and evil? When confronted with the mirror, regardless of whether it reflects universal, eternal, objective truth and goodness, my attempt to recolor what I see of me is an exercise in casuistry. When confronted, from any other source, with my deviation from what I deeply but secretly feel to be a corrective fact or point of view and attempt to use verbal trickery to maintain my position and evade the truth of the confrontation, that is an exercise in casuistry. In schools of debate, many of the techniques of debate are techniques of casuistry. Casuistry is the opposite of logic and scienc Take a syllogism like “All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.” The relationships between the terms are clear when you use a Venn Diagram. But, suppose you had a syllogism that said, “All humans are mortal. Hindus are humans. Therefore, Hindus are mortal.” Since Hindus believe in form of immortality, namely reincarnation, I suspect they would find a way to tamper with the middle term: ‘mortal’. The way they tamper with the word ‘mortal’ is casuistry. Casuistry preserves something that you believe but that does not conform to logic, to being publicly observable, or the public, repeatable tests of scienc Casuistry obeys your need for psychological comfort. Teenagers and defense and prosecuting attorneys are adept at casuistry while judges require that statements conform to logic, to being publicly observable, or to the public, repeatable tests of science.
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD 10. Perspectives Can Make You Question Your Culturally Determined Belief Systems What are the dimensions of the arena of my mind? Does the arena of my mind extend to immediate life circumstances, my own generation, age, era, millennium, back to the dawn of humans, the origin of life? Does the arena of my mind extend to tomorrow, to next year, to the next age or era or millennium or to the extinguishing of our sun and planet? Or, does the arena of my mind extend to what I am looking at this instant, feeling this instant, thinking this instant? Does it extend to deeper knowledge of my self and my life history and the multitude of internal factors and processes that are operating in my self, my mind? Does the arena of my mind extend to an awareness and understanding of my immediate circumstances and the immediate forces influencing the content and direction of my mind? Does it extend to an awareness and understanding of my family influences, to the influence of my subculture on me and the influence of other subcultures on the people inhabiting them? Do I know what it is like to be another person in another time and place? Given that one of these ‘others’ could engage in the mirror experiment, can I imagine that those others might be totally convinced that the variation of truth and goodness in their mirror is objectively and absolutely correct even though it dramatically differs from mine?
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD 11. Relativism and the Democratic Ideal When, in the course of evolution, did objective good and evil enter? Is one person the sole possessor of the formulation of objective good and evil? Suppose that you or I believe that we are that person who possesses knowledge of objective good and evil and yet we find that someone else has a similar belief in themselves but that their version of objective good and evil is dramatically different from ours in such an way that that someone else feels the two versions of objective good and evil can not coexist. Suppose we feel or think that the consequences that result from that someone else holding their belief are, to us, truly horrible and that they feel the same about us and our belief. Is it not possible to think that either or both of these absolutists would feel they had to destroy the other? Does it not seem that perhaps, ironically, the very notion of absolutism, versus relativism, could be a cause of the very violence we wish to avoid? Is it not one of the foundational principles of democracy that, to avoid this dilemma, the government is relativistic and allows for the solution to problems involving conflicting values to be the universal vote, yet preserving the ‘Bill of Rights’. In the philosophies of Thomas Hobbs [believer in rule by power and intimidation and in absolutism] and Friedrich Nietzsche [proponent of the ideal of Superman might makes right ] are opposites, yet they both disregard egalitarianism and democratic ideals. Are these two opposites not a formula for the eternal perpetuation of violence? In our democracy, such conflicting values are provided a public forum for debat In my opinion, all sides in the debate should be heard and are inherently valuable, no matter how idiotic they may seem to m All points of view represent some important part of the ‘body’ politic. They each supply a piece to the ultimate solution to the problem. Some opinions may be discarded out of hand by the majority, while others result in intense, drawn out, debate The debate raises information and perspectives that each of the opposing parties need to hear and respond to. Together they eventually arrive at a more well-rounded solution than either side would have arrived at alone. Democracies eventually decide with a vote. Quakers do not decide until each participant has aired all of their differences and reservations and all come to a consensus. The latter two positions seem to be least-harm, workable methods for dealing with conflicting values. It is a relativistic model in which many of its participants may feel they have a corner on the knowledge of objective good and evil even though their views strongly conflict with one another.
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD 12. The Dangers of Solutions Coming From Limited Arenas When a solution to a problem of major proportions and far reaching consequences is based on a limited perspective or, to use my metaphor, limited arena, the result, at least in the long run, should be an eventual spate of small problems that evolve into another problem of major proportions and far reaching consequences. A limited arena may be one that ignores perspectives on degrees of distance into the past and/or future. A limited arena could be one that ignores perspectives on degrees of depth into the individual persons. A limited perspective may be one that ignores perspectives on levels of social or organizational influences, from immediate situations, through neighborhoods and subcultures, through levels in organizations and agencies, through cities, states, and the nation, and to the global network of nations. A limited arena may be one that has few and narrow sources of information. People generally are not aware of the nature or extent of their own mental arenas. No human knows what they do not know. An important tautology! Were one to become aware of such limitations in one’s self, it might make them prone to question themselves, be quite cautious and heuristic in their opinions, eager to test their opinions in a public and repeatable way, and make them more likely to be open-minded to the vast worlds of knowledge that they ‘may’ not yet know.
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD 13. The Necessity for Solutions Derived from a Large Arena in a Democratic State Should one be capable of and willing to entertain the dimensions of very large arenas, encompassing the vast range of perspectives and even those that differ from their own [unless they are in absolute control as in a totalitarian state], they must settle for promulgating their views as clearly as they can to as many different types of persons as possible and let their views enter the arena to compete with others in the democratic process. I suspect that the more such persons take this approach, the more the solutions will be beneficial to the largest number of people for the longest period of time People in such a changed ‘structure’ might actually find themselves becoming better people from the point of view of what is reflected in their mirror of truth and goodness, as well as from the point of view of those associated with them. A person who practices this kind of open-mindedness and opens themselves to a large, multi-dimensional arena is bound to have the experience of new perspectives and information crashing through and shaking up their schema of the world so that they have to make revisions in their schema. This is called accommodation versus assimilation of ideas [Piaget]. This I believe to be intellectual courage. This is my opinion and perspective. This urges upon me the necessity to grow in Societal Maturity.
4/29/2015 Copyright 9-2002 Edwin L Young, PhD Level 7: UNIVERSALISM (CONT.) Societal Maturity Exercises Related To Societal Maturity 1.Identify aspects of your culture that you feel have been and are counterproductive for your growth in personal maturity toward Universalism and personal welfare? 2.Considering your own life and the structures encompassing and influencing your life, what changes in those structures would you make to create the conditions that would promote your personal growth? 3.Consider your own life within its topology: the places you inhabit and go to; the relations you have with family and extended family; the organizations you belong to or visit; the relations agencies have with you and their impact; and the roles you are assigned, occupy, and/or take in each of thes What about this topology is not favorable to your welfare? What changes in this topology would you make, if you could, that would promote your personal growth? 4.Now, consider the youths in your institution. What could it have been in the youths’ culture, the structures encompassing the youths’ lives, and the typical topology of the youths’ lives that have routed them into incarceration? 5.In the light of these perspectives on the life topology of these youths, the conditions of life of these youths outside of the institution, and particularly the structures within the institution, what changes would you like to see and what could you change to promote the growth in maturity and character of these youths? 6.What are your reasons for suggesting these particular changes?