Atomism and Dehumanization

Because for the Atomist concept of the Psyche, all relations are external, it lacks grounds for distinguishing inhuman from human objects of experience, i. e. each is fundamentally a phenomenon in the world of such an entity.  Sympathy is no ground of that distinction--its occurrence is contingent, and, like any other painful feeling, functions as an impulse to modify the environs in some respect, in this case by eliminating some manifestations of woe by one of the objects therein.  In contrast, according to the Organicist concept of the Psyche, Humanness is part of the structure of the subject pole of experience, so, the treatment of another human as no different than an inanimate object is the result of abstracting from both their subjectivity and one's own humanity.  In other words, the dehumanization of others originates in the dehumanization of oneself.  The critiques of Hume, Capitalism, and Heidegger, by Kant, Socialists, and Levinas, respectively, each target, in varying ways, the objectification of others entailed by an Atomist concept of the Psyche.

Psyche and Reason

Three types of concept of the individual human Psyche are: 1. Essentially unrelated to an external environment; 2. Essentially related to the natural world; and 3. Essentially related to the human world.  Correspondingly, there are three types of Reason: Theoretical, Instrumental, and Social.  Accordingly, Kant's Rationalist response to Hume's subordination of Reason to the Passions can be understood as being based on the assertion that Psyche #3 can control #2, and, thus, that Social Reason can control the drives that Instrumental Reason serves as their means.  However, complicating this response is his ambition to systematize Theoretical Reason and Social Reason, with Pure Practical Reason the result of combining them.  In the process, the essential Social function gets obscured, and Kant opens Pure Practical Reason to Schopenhauer's charge that it is no different than Instrumental Reason.

Egoism and I

As Smith recognizes, the existence of Sympathy presents a strong challenge to Psychological Egoism.  But, the more incisive, and instructive, critique targets the concept of I on which the theory is built. For, whether 'I' is a bundle of perceptions, a mode of Nature, or an illusion, as Hume, Spinoza, and Schopenhauer, respectively, propose, the locus of Egoism is problematic.  Indeed, in the cases of the latter two, the vital drive that one experiences is only apparently merely one's own, just as the sex impulses, like the organs in which they are localized, is fundamentally a manifestation of the reproductive processes of the species, not some merely selfish seeking of pleasure.  The instability of the I in these cases suggests that the I is no mere given Atom, but is derived from a more comprehensive entity, e. g. a Species, and, likewise, that Atomist Psychology is derived from Organicist Psychology.

Egoism and Objectivity

By recognizing the existence of Sympathy, Smith implicitly rejects the Psychological Egoism of, notably, Hobbes, according to which some self-regarding goal is the only motive of behavior of an entity.  Instead, he advocates Moral Egoism, according to which one ought to act in one's own interest, overriding any concern for others. Now, his defense of that position is unstable--in some places, he argues that such behavior is a means to general Wealth, but, in others, perhaps recognizing that such a goal is non-Egoistic, argues, conversely, that any general Good is in one's own interest.  His floundering is a symptom of a more fundamental, inherent, flaw in Moral Egoism.  For, the assertion that one ought to do anything entails an appeal to some objective standard or authority.  But, to validate something, such as Self-Interest, by an appeal to a principle that transcends it, is to subordinate it to the latter, in which case something other than Egoism is the Moral doctrine being advocated.  Of course, asserting, as some Randians seem to do, that Egoism is itself the objective authority in question, is circular, and is equivalent to a reduction of Egoism to a fact, i. e. to Psychological Egoism.  So, neither variety of Egoism is tenable, regardless of how prominent it is in political rhetoric.

Individualism and Segregation

Atomism is more commonly known as Individualism.  Like Atoms, individual persons are discrete from one another.  Furthermore, they are equally individuals.  In other words, Individualism entails Separation and Equality, i. e. Segregation.   Now, it does not necessarily follow that Individualism is racist.  But, that it can easily be put to racist use illustrates the respect in which it is antithetical to a principle that entails Integration, notably the We of the Preamble to the Constitution.

Nationalism and Atomism

Through most of the era, the Nations of Modern Political Philosophy are Atomist constructions--associations of individual persons, often via contracts, implicit or explicit.  The first significant divergence from that Atomism are the Holist concepts of Rousseau's General Will, and the We of the Preamble to the U. S. Constitution, each signifying a Whole greater than the sum of its Parts. Still, these Nations remain at least partly Atomist.  For, while internally Holist, their relation to other Nations remains that of an Association of Atoms.  In contrast, given a Cosmopolity, such as McLuhan's Global Village, as the fundamental unit, a Nation is a subdivision of the Whole.  Accordingly, under the conditions of the full actualization of that Organicist concept, nationalistic domestic and foreign policies are complementary, not disjoint, as they typically are presented these days.

Genesis 3, Techne, Laissez-Faire

While in the popular imagination, the main theme of Genesis 3 is Sexuality, according to some learned interpretations, the passage presents a Promethean myth.  As in the case of the latter, humans are therein portrayed as appropriating divine Techne, the punishment for which is "toil", to which the 'knowledge of good and evil' can be applied.  Thus, one lingering influence of the passage is the theologization of Leisure--as reflecting divine blessing.  Another is the condemnation of the involvement of Techne in social processes, e. g. "social engineering".  Thus, Laissez-Faire Capitalism is often expressed in terms of the fallibility of human Techne vs. the Justice of the Invisible Hand.

Atomism, Genesis 1, Preamble

Gutenberg's invention facilitates the propagation of the central document in a theology of Salvation.  The Salvation is of the individual human Soul, from a curse placed on the human species.  In other words, that theological doctrine articulates a triumph of Atomism over Organicism.  But it does so by abstracting from a more fundamental moment of conflict that lies at the root of its source material.  Genesis 1 offers a cosmogony of the human species that pleases its creator. Nevertheless, as if those events had never even transpired, Genesis 2-3 presents an alternative cosmogony, one upon which that Atomist theology is founded.  The two significant points of conflict between the two passages are: in the first, a couple other than Adam and Eve are the first humans, and, their reproductive activity is blessed, which completely undermines the premise of the need for Salvation in the theology that is based on the second.  In other words, like the Preamble to the U. S. Constitution, Genesis 1 presents a generally neglected formidable challenge to the Atomism that is traditionally associated with adjacent texts.

Gutenberg Bible, Medium, Message

As has been previously discussed, Gutenberg's invention is a medium that individuates and privatizes society.  But, the Gutenberg Bible has a content that is independent of the medium in which it is transmitted, which can be summarized as 'the salvation of the individual soul'.  In other words, in Gutenberg's invention, the message and the medium of its original product are not merely the same, but consonant.  In non-McLuhan terminology, the form of Communication of the Gutenberg Bible is appropriate to its content.

Capitalism and Theology

The positing, by Smith, in order to reconcile the inadequacy of his concept of the parts of his system to its whole, of an Invisible Hand, blatantly violates the principles of his erstwhile Empiricism.  Instead, regardless of the traditional inattention to that methodological inconsistency, that positing is an patently an expression of faith in the existence of a deity.  Now, that his system entails this theological dimension suggests an explanation for the other enigma in his oeuvre: the relation between Egoism and Sympathy.  For, once it is recognized that the latter is a corporeal species instinct, while the former is a vestige of the principle of an incorporeal individual Soul seeking the preservation and happiness of Eternal Life, Smith's advocacy of Egoism becomes less perplexing.  That this theological legacy, in combination with Smith's methodological incoherence, remains generally ignored and unchallenged in Capitalism, only reinforces the Atomist resistance in the U. S. to a transition to Organicism that is proceeding much more smoothly elsewhere.

Plebocracy and Global Village

What might be called a 'Plebocracy' consists in the determination of every action in a Polity by a referendum. By contrast, what is usually understood by 'Democracy', is revealed as a mediated Plebocracy, consisting in regularly occasional referenda that choose representatives, who then determine actions. Now, hitherto, the primary value of such mediation has been efficiency.  But, with the emergence of the World Wide Web, a referendum in every case is becoming feasible, i. e. a universal vote and its tallying can transpire as quickly as possible.  In other words, McLuhan's Global Village, when fully actualized, is a Plebocracy.

Right and Human

In the past century, the Human Right is a variety of Right that has become prominent.  Now, there is both an Atomist and an Organicist version of 'human': according to the former, it is a characteristic possessed by each of a set of entities, while according the latter, they possess it by virtue of being parts of the human species.  Plainly, Human Right is an Atomist concept, since it presupposes an inherent antagonism amongst the members of a society that prompts the establishment of such a protective measure. In contrast, in the context of a society in which each member recognizes each other as a part of the same whole, no such protection is necessary, as is evinced in smaller Wholes, e. g. an orchestra, a sports team, etc.  So, the effort to have each Human qua Human treated with dignity, is undermined by evoking a 'right' to such treatment.

Right, Health Care, Organicism

As has been previously discussed, a Right is a symbolic prohibition of interference in an activity of its bearer, not some inherent real property.  Thus, it is not applicable where a deficiency is due to mere neglect.  For example, the Right to an adequate standard of living, as included in the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights, must presuppose as a cause an act of deprivation, e. g. alienation of a worker's products of their own labor, greedy seizing and hoarding of resources, etc.  But, such diagnoses are more difficult in the case of a Right to Health Care.  Accordingly, proponents of single-payer universal Health Care would do well to abandon that rhetorical tack, which is gaining little traction in the U. S. anyhow, in favor of the argument that insofar as a Society is only as strong as its weakest member, the health of each is in the interest of each.  In other words, advocates should jettison an Atomist argument, and replace it with one derived from an Organicist principle.

Right and Society

One of the cardinal concepts of Modern Political Philosophy--Right--is perhaps its most problematic feature.  For, on the one hand, it is usually presented as a property that inheres in an individual entity, sufficiently determined by either a supernatural ground, e. g. a divine creator, or a natural one, e. g. Might.  But, on the other, Right signifies a prohibition against interference in an activity of its bearer, and, hence, is an a posteriori concept that presupposes the existence of others.  Thus, that this presumed property of an individual entity presupposes the existence of others exposes a latent Collectivist dimension of this Atomist concept.  It thus anticipates a transition from Social Atomism to Social Organicism, in which the concept of Right is no longer necessary.  For, in such a Polity, the Whole is only as strong as its weakest Part, so, the well-being of each is in the interest of all, thereby obviating the need of a protective measure such as a Right.

Psychological Egoism, Moral Egoism, Global Village

Often confused are Psychological Egoism and Moral Egoism.  According to the former, all behavior is reduced to immutable Self-Interest, e. g. Sympathy is only a means to feeling good about oneself.  In contrast, Moral Egoism recognizes the possibility of non-self-interested behavior, but prescribes that one ought to behave only in one's self-interest.  Typical of the confusion is the association in American society of Psychological Egoism with Capitalism, a doctrine which Smith grounds in Moral Egoism.  His scrupulousness in not settling for what would be a less vulnerable basis for Capitalism is a strong argument against the tenability of Psychological Egoism.  He also thereby unwittingly strengthens the possibility of a Global Village, the Organicism of which is precluded if the behavior of the members of a society is immutably Atomistic.

Gutenberg Bible and Social Media

The thesis--the prevailing Means of Communication in a society is a factor in the determination of its structure and the relations therein--is strongly confirmed by the influence of Gutenberg's invention.  For, the general availability of the print Bible Democratizes, individuates, and privatizes religious practices that are previously pervasive, foreshadowing general societal developments over subsequent centuries.  So, applying the formulation to the World Wide Web, and to its perhaps most prominent feature, social media, society is tending towards a Holistic, public, Cosmopolity.  Now, if the time-frame of the earlier transition is any example, it may be centuries before such a Global Village is fully actualized.  In the meantime, the thesis has application to current events, e. g. it locates the recent American repudiation of NAFTA in a more comprehensive historical context, thereby prompting the inference that it is a symptom of growing pains, rather a simple expression of Nationalism.

Atomism and Global Village

According to Atomist Psychology, the primary source of value of Communication is its content, e. g. a useful piece of information, which its medium can augment, e. g. by a more efficient transmission.  Now, one of the implications of McLuhan's "The Medium is the Message" formulation is that since a medium contributes content to a message, it is attractive for its own sake, which explains why a couch potato keeps watching TV regardless of the quality of the programming.  Furthermore, as has been previously proposed, the ultimate message of all electric media is: "We are parts of a Global Village".  Thus, if Atomism is correct, at least part of the appeal of the World Wide Web is that it offers an Atom the experience of being part of a whole, and no longer an isolated self-interested individual among other isolated self-interested individuals.  In other words, the WWW induces Atomism to self-contradict.

Medium, Message, Global Village

According to Psychological Atomism, Communication has value only as a means to Egoistical ends.  So, in particular, the value of a medium of Communication is a function of its usefulness in promoting those ends, e. g. by speeding up their accomplishment.  Thus, that a medium might also itself be a message, as McLuhan famously asserts, is of no special interest to the Atomist.  But, that semantic capacity of a Medium may also entail an antithesis to Atomism.  For, the ultimate message of all electric media is: "We are parts of a Global Village", as he almost as famously characterizes the networks that thoseThe media constitute.  So, if McLuhan is correct, the introduction of electric media into a society governed by Atomist principles, while increasing efficiency, creates a profound psychological disjunction in its members, one which might not even be recognized as such by a leadership that persists in Atomist agendas, i. e. most major political parties around the world, regardless of more superficial differences.

Psychology, Atomism, Organicism

Complementing Social Atomism is Atomist Psychology, according ro which the behavior of an individual member of society is sufficiently determined by some internal principle, e. g. Self-Preservation, Self-Interest, Pleasure, Happiness, etc.  On the basis of such a principle, the effect of others on one's behavior is always mediated by the principle, e. g. whether or not someone else conduces to one's Self-Interest.  Social Organicism is likewise complemented by Organicist Psychology, according to which, at least some of the behavior of an individual member of society is determined by some principle that governs the behavior of the society as a whole, e. g. Harmony.  An example of the difference between the two concepts of Psychology is their contrasting analyses of Sympathy.  According to Atomism, one shares the feelings of another by virtue of a mediating mimicry of their Selfhood, while according to Organicism, in at least some cases, the sharing is the product of a direct transmission across a synapse, e. g. a mother's feeling of her baby's suffering as that of an extension of her own body.  Now, one of the advantages of the Organicist model is that, in it, phenomena that are classified as 'supernatural' under Atomism, e. g. 'psychic' phenomena, are easily explained as 'natural', albeit obscure.  On the other hand, one of the disadvantages, for some, of the Organicist model is that it tends to undermine Social Atomism, e. g. the foundations of a Capitalist society.

Electricity, Atomism, Organicism

The harnessing of electricity has enabled the emergence of a new era in Communication, from the telegraph and telephone, to, most recently, and most elaborately, the World Wide Web.  Also emerging in the past few centuries has been Organicist concepts of Society, e. g. Durkheim's.  Now, according to the Atomist concept of Society, the existence of others is extrinsic to the conatus of any individual member, so, likewise, the emergence of a new mode of Communication, even if beneficial, is never more than an extrinsic development.  In contrast, in the context of the concept of Society as an Organism, an electrical means of Communication can be recognized as a writ large neural network.  So, there are two significant implications if the Organicist concept is correct.  First, there is a radical incommensurability between experiences on the World Wide Web, and those in the Atomist dimension of everyday life, e. g. in the Economic sphere of individualistic competition.  Second, while Organicists can recognize that incommensurability, Atomists cannot.  So, since Politics is still predominantly Atomist, Conservative and Liberal alike, there may be a prrvasive social dissolution in process the remedy for which is nowhere in sight.

Means of Communication, Society, Psyche

The effects on society and its members of a change in the predominant Means of Communication can be observed in the case of Gutenberg's invention.  By making the Bible universally available, social hierarchies based on privileged access to those scriptures are levelled. Furthermore, with the books now available to each member of a society, the dissemination of the contents of those no longer requires a collective setting, and, thus, becomes a private experience, much like the fate of the cinema as a result of the development of the DVD.  In other words, two of the cardinal characteristics of Modern life--political democratization and psychological privatization, can be traced to a change in the predominant Means of Communication.  Now, entailed by Psychological Privatization are Phenomenalism, Egoism, and Atomism, so, the irony of, or, perhaps, the internal contradiction in, that influence of Gutenberg's invention is that it cannot be recognized as such, since, according to Atomism, Communication, as external to the personal Psyche, cannot alter it.

Atomism and Communication

According to Atomism, Relations are External.  Thus, Social Atomism entails the inessentiality of Communication to its members. Accordingly, McLuhan's theses are irrelevant to Atomist Political Theory or Psychology.  So, in societies that are fundamentally Atomist, e. g. Capitalist ones, the emergence of the World Wide Web, even if perceived as being influential, e. g. as affecting the Economy, is, nevertheless, not conceived as affecting basic human behavioral processes.  But, if Atomism is wrong, then profound Psychological transformations, resulting from changes in the predominant mode of Communication, e. g. the WWW, cannot even be recognized in an Atomist society as occurring.

World Wide Web, Medium, Message

McLuhan distinguishes a 'hot' medium, such as Radio, from a 'cool' one, such as Television. But, regardless of that distinction, each of those two examples is a passive medium.  In contrast, the World Wide Web is not only active, but interactive.  Now, the ubiquity of the WWW enables participation to be not only simultaneous, but, because transcending all particularities, e. g. race, ethnicity, gender, etc., universal and egalitarian, as well.  In other words, in McLuhan's famous formulation, the ubiquity of the medium is its message of Universality and Equality.  But, those characteristics are also attributes of the content of the WWW. For, the deepest stratum of the contents of that medium, binary code, actualizes Leibniz' concept of a Universal Language, envisioned more than three centuries ago.  So, in the case of this medium, its Language is the message, as well.

Equality, Diversity, Democracy

Equality means Sameness, and Diversity means Difference.  So the political agenda that promotes both Equality and Diversity involves an internal incoherence.  One example of an unsatisfactory resolution of that incoherence is 'ethnic' fast food, which is only very superficially 'diverse'.  Another is separate-but-equal segregation.  But, even if some satisfactory formula of integration is seized upon, the achievent of mere Co-Existence is inadequate to the We principle of Democracy, which entails active togetherness.

Identity Politics and Sublation

'Identity Politics' signifies a prominent American political agenda that seeks to eliminate prejudice against an individual person on the basis of some type under which they are subsumed, usually a race, a gender, or a sexual orientation.  Often, the ideals guiding the agenda are Diversity and Equality.  However, the former is susceptible to tokenism, and the latter, to homogenization.  So, preferable to both might be Integration, but that condition does not necessarily preclude a suppressive factor.  In contrast, Sublation combines while preserving differences.  But, that process is a feature of Dialectical Logic, which, aside from being little known in America, is significantly associated elsewhere with Class-Conflict, a problem that Identity Politics neglects, perhaps, deliberately.

Communication, Unity, Equality

The World Wide Web is a communications medium, unprecedented in its extensiveness and simultaneity.  Now, the role of Communication in more fundamentally coordinating society than the Means of Production is missed by Marx, even as he publishes works exhorting the workers of the world to unite.  As is the case with any Network, the two fundamental characteristics of the WWW is quantitative Unity and Multiplicity, with whether or not there is a qualitative dimension to either an open question.  Thus, the nodes of any Network are Equal by virtue of the Unity that grounds it. Likewise, as the WWW illustrates, there is a fundamental Equality of the members of the human species that is derived from the Unity of the latter, and whether or not that Equality is more than quantitative is an open question.

World Wide Web and Political Philosophy

The World Wide Web, a more informative formulation than 'internet', manifests the current condition of the human species.  As an historical development, it is perhaps completely unprecedented, but also at least as plausible is that it makes explicit a species instinct that has determined that development from the outset.  What further development to which it itself might be a transitional stage, remains to be seen.  In the meantime, a Political Philosophy that takes the de-centralized Planetarism of the WWW as a fundamental premise thereby renders obsolete not only any particularistic models, e. g. Atomistic, Nationalistic, etc., but their currently pervasive actualizations, as well.

Coordination and Network

Over the centuries, there have been three main principles of Coordination in human societies: 1. Radial, i. e. from a central source, of which hierarchical organization is a variety; 2. Non-interference; and 3. Exchange.  Each can be found in contemporary America, #1 more covertly, e. g. corporate hierarchies, than the other two, which are overt features in economic activity, e. g. property and trade, respectively, and thereby influence most other modes of relation. Now, more recently, a fourth model has emerged--the Network, most concretely, the World Wide Web, and more abstractly, the telecommunications system.  But, there is a lack of coordination between the four, more precisely, an antithesis between the centralized #1 and the decentralized #4, which also entails one of Nationalism vs. Planetarism.  The ill-effects of this discordance are only becoming superficially, at best, recognized, e. g. protectionist reactions against Globalism.

Conversatility and Coordination

Versatility is typically diachronic, i. e. a multiplicity of potential functions that are actualized only one at a time. So 'conversatility' can connote synchronous multi-functioning, e. g. simple walking, the performance of an orchestra, etc.  Now, Conversatility requires the coordination of its various parts, the source of which can be an instinct, an articulated plan, a conductor, etc.  In other words, Coordination, as obtaining between Conversatile parts, is distinct from them.  So, an evaluation of some Polity in terms of Conversatility and Coordination is unthinkable if a Polity is conceived as an assemblage of Individuals, or of a Diversity of types of Individual, i. e. is unthinkable in the contemporary U. S.

Diversity, Individuality, Diversatility

In American society, 'diversity' is typically used in relation to certain types of person--ethnic, religious, gender, etc.  In contrast, 'individual' typically signifies a person in independence from any other.  Thus lacking is a term connoting variation at the personal level.  So, for want of a better alternative, 'Diversatility' can be used.  In other words, Diversatility connotes complexity of internal functions of a Society, with respect to which Type Diversity and Individuality, are limited and inert concepts, regardless of their ongoing prominence.

Versatility, Pluralism, Democracy

"A jack of all trades, a master of none" overlooks one mastery--what might be called Versatlity.  Such an ability, especially because it is not common, is usually appreciated as an asset.  It, thus, illustrates the value of Diversity, in which a variety of functions are incorporated into one Unity.  Likewise, the value of Pluralism is that it strengthens the Whole, a virtue that is difficult to appreciate in the concept of Society as a mere aggregate of discrete Individuals.  So, insofar as Democracy is the uniquely Pluralistic Political system, it is the only one capable of Versatility.