Nobody claims that the present “standard” series of names for the major ideologies – “protostatic” to “metadynamic” is ideal. It is not even sufficient. One feature of each ideologies a particular view of the ideological series, and this means we need at least six more sets of terms for the major ideologies, each set defining… read more »
Toward the end of 1979 Margaret Chisman invited me to give a talk to South Place Ethical Society under the title: A SYSTEMATIC IDEOLOGIST LOOKS AT REVOLUTION. As a former Marxist I had long been interested in revolution, but since taking up systematic ideology I had never really sat down and thought about it. When,… read more »
When people first come into contact with systematic ideology they often draw attention to a discrepancy between the basic “model” put forward and the actual behaviour of the groups whose behaviour that model is to explain. Systematic ideology holds that the behaviour of each of the main political groups (Fascist, Conservative, Liberal, Labour, Communist, Anarchist)… read more »
IC has received a paper announcing the establishment of Problems Researching Exchange (PRE). The aim of this project is “to provide a point of contact and focus for institutions, groups and individuals concerned with human problems and their solution” (If you would like to make contact, a note sent to IC will be forwarded). PRE… read more »
The handles on teacups make it difficult to carry many of them. They don’t “nest” neatly, the pile topples to one side and you drop the lot. Teacups would be easier to carry if they did not have handles. But teacups are not, primarily, for carrying about. They are for drinking hot liquids from, and… read more »
One comment received, in response to the talks at Friends House, was that the key terms used ought to have been defined. The trouble with definition of terms is that it presupposes a number of terms, with meanings thoroughly understood and universally accepted, that can be used to construct the definition. Failing this, one is… read more »
At Friends House, on October 3, 10, 17, George Walford delivered a series of three public lectures on systematic ideology. This was a new departure for the WS, whose meetings devoted to systematic ideology had previously been (semi-) private. The speaker did not use the protostatic-paradynamic series of terms for the major ideologies, but referred… read more »
Writing on Australian history R. Hughes records the readiness of Australian Aborigines to burn off square miles of territory for the sake of catching a dozen or two small animals, at the cost of destroying all slow-moving creatures in the area. He also gives the background to the practice (shared with other foraging peoples) by… read more »
James Lovelock helps us to grasp the distinction between the two ideologies of Precision and Principle. He points out that the accuracy of predictions derived from them provides the best test of scientific hypotheses (Precision), while facts in law (Principle) are tested in debate between adversaries and established by judgment. He goes on to note… read more »
Any appearance of “absolute” causes IC‘s pointy ears to prick up; NOTHING is Absolutely True. Our present example of an assertion to the contrary comes from Elisee Reclus: “Fundamentally anarchy is nothing but perfect tolerance, the absolute acknowledgment of the liberty of others.” An admirable sentiment, one that will go directly to the heart of… read more »