Why Societies Develop Like Embryos
Here’s a sample of a thesis: you claim that mind is a lonely prisoner in the darkness of the skull. I think about that for a while and though I don’t admit it to myself, I have to carve out a separate spot for myself in attention space. I need to make sure you are not the only one getting the spotlight. So I have to say something that makes me unique, something in opposition to what you said. I make a counterclaim, an antithesis. I declare that the mind only exists in the interplay between human beings, in the interplay, for example, between you and me. We wrangle over who is right. Is mind trapped in the cranium, using the brain to create the illusion of an external reality? Or is mind itself external: a product of conversation, competition, collaboration, social structures, and history? We wrangle until we see a brand-new light. Both of us are correct. There is a larger weave, a shared tapestry, a shared kit of mind tools, that somehow arises from the interplay of lonely prisoners of the skull like you and me. Something called culture knits itself with the needles of lonely prisoners of the cranium, prisoners seeking each other’s company. Mind is both internal and external. From our competition we gain a potential new insight into the way culture is built. We even get a glimpse into the way that mind tools may arise from the interplay of individuals seeking a bit of attention. That larger vision is a synthesis. Thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. The positive power of opposites.
In 1837, Chalybäus published the lecture in which he promoted his magic triad of creative opposites—“thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.” A student at the University of Berlin who belonged to his university’s Hegel Club read Chalybäus’s book, grabbed the three magic words of creative competition, and ran with them. Ran with them and in 1847 promoted them as the words of Hegel himself. His promotion campaign was so successful that in the future, most educated men and women would swear that the words “thesis, antithesis, and synthesis” were Hegel’s. They were not. The idea merchandiser who gave us this false impression was an occasional guest at John Chapman’s establish- ment at 142 on the Strand. His name was Karl Marx.
But Hegel had promoted the positive power of opposites. And Herbert Spencer declared that this was a concept “against which I feel an obstinate prejudice.” In fact, once Spencer got wind of Hegel’s drift, he refused “to read further any work in which it is displayed.”333 He refused to read any more Hegel. But opposites joined at the hip show up all over Spencer’s work. The opposites in this case are differentiation and integration. And that, in fact, was one of Spencer’s great contributions: differentiation and integration.
Great excerpt. Just to perhaps one can say be the antithesis of Spencer, you do have Victorians who become obsessed with the idea of devolution. One example, is Hardy’s “Tess of the d’Urbervilles” where the once aristocratic d’Urbervilles have devolved to the Durbeyfield’s.
Herbert Spencer’s landmark book was named Social Statics.
Get the details right if you want credibility.
http://www.amazon.com/Social-statistics-Order-abridged-revised/dp/1171907060/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1344443679&sr=8-1&keywords=herbert+spencer+social+statistics
That must be the only edition ever to refer to it as “Social Statistics.” Every copy I’ve ever seen, including the original, is called “Social Statics.” Every reference I’ve seen to it in bibliographies and in authoritative works on Spencer refer to it as “Social Statics” also.
Hmm. If you Google “herbert spencer social statics” and “herbert spencer social statistics” you get pretty much the same number of responses.
But I think the authoritative one, in the Supreme Court decision Lochner v. New York, uses “statics.” (The court would be careful to cite its sources carefully.)
I wonder if our word “statistics” did not evolve from “statics”. Anyone know?
You don’t get the same number of results; you get at least 6 or 7 times more for “Social Statics.”
That said, I now see that “Social Statistics” has been used in reputable publications.
You just explained how SHTF won’t work. Another pernicious myth bites the dust, but I’m sorta glad for it……….