In one of the Smithsonian buildings in Washington DC crouches a bronze statue of a pre-historic figure. It is not a large statue but striking in its pose. Although it did not project power, it appeared with teeth bared as if it was getting ready to fight. It may have been naked or covered with some rags, yet I don’t recall if it was male or female. Life was a real and constant struggle.
Early humans had to survive alone. Some time later one of them picked up a club and that person became more powerful. He was the guy to contend with. Some time later we learned to work together and probably hunted in packs like wolves. This was real power. Small groups grew into larger groups and social hierarchies emerged to help create a division of labor. We never gave up the club as a weapon. It became a tool that morphed into knives, guns, and more.
Max Weber, a German sociologist, philosopher and political economist, noted that what we call the nation-state is that entity which has a legitimate monopoly on the use of coercive force within a certain boundary – here referred to as a monopoly on the Coercive Force of Arms (CFA). The nation-state is not a living being, although we refer to it in the feminine as the “motherland”. A nation exists because there is agreement among various groups and mostly between leaders of those groups.
Whether or not a coercive force really exists, there is something that feels like a force field that emanates from this CFA monopoly somewhere near the top of the social hierarchy and it helps to define the social hierarchy. This force can limit our thinking and actions. It can prevent many people from saying and doing what they might otherwise. The force field is a part of the system and does not change when people at the top are overthrown because it seems to provide stability in the life of most people who live there.
Activists may work against this force field because they want that same power. They may devote their whole lives to a cause, but they themselves can get caught up in the force field established by a CFA. Fighting the good fight engages people but opportunities are missed when they cannot hear ideas from the outside. We still make them heroes.
Regan Penaluna’s recent book “How to Think Like a Woman” started these wheels turning and thinking. Along her own journey as a philosopher, she weaves the stories of four notable women philosophers who pushed forward in an area that was, and still is mostly a man’s world of ideas. One must ask, does philosophy try to figure out how the world works – or how it should work? Or both? Most early scientists were philosopher-scientists, spending much of their time asking questions about how everything works and what exactly constitutes matter or “stuff”.
Marcus Aurelius was called “Philosopher-King” by Plato, possibly because he succeeded at a time during which he also sustained many political, military, and personal losses. Through a series of questions and new stories (“Meditations”)
he began to change the way he thought about his challenges and about life itself. This begs the question then “How does a Philosopher-Queen think? What are her sources of strength and power?”
Powers
The power of The Story is great. The first hearing of a Story has the most influence on the listener, just as the first hearing of music feels “the way it should sound.” Social hierarchies established by CFA affect the Story in powerful but subtle ways. There is resistance to change in the Story, especially by those near the top who surround the leader, and all of these people are very good storytellers themselves.
Political leaders certainly have CFA power. Do they have other powers as well, and do they know how to use them wisely? A broader definition of power might include “Getting Things Done” or “Slowing Things that already have Momentum.”
Does the story we tell us where we need to go? What will tomorrow look like?
Social, economic, and natural environments have all shifted, and so have their stories. Some stories are not allowed, especially those that are difficult to verify. Some stories reveal a weakness or loss of direction by current leaders who may have difficulty keeping up with the changes. Julian Assange stories are not allowed.
Other kinds of power must be considered and may be used by PQ’s. These include the power of Communication, Organization, and Economic power (COE). These are the Queen’s powers. We will not get rid of CFA-type power, but COE powers can be nearly as effective, or even more so for people who knows how to use them.
Formal education is important but so is self-education, plus the care and tending of the spirit which can make the critical difference for some people. Math and science have predictive power. Women must give permission to others to talk about technical stuff like heat and energy.
Beware of piggyback power that gains it’s muscle by riding on other power structures, like Bitcoin riding piggyback on the US Dollar. Without accountability this can continue indefinitely, but like a paper tiger, its power can vaporize.
Power in the story only works if it touches reality at some point. Some fiction can do that with its description of human nature. Metaphors can hold a lot of power if the mental model or picture is close to reality. Even comedy can have power although a lot of contemporary comedy is simply a jibe at someone else rather than revealing a new and funny way of looking at things.
Secrets hold power, especially at the highest level. Social clubs and priesthoods of academia hold secrets and prescribed ways of thinking. Economists who predicted the 2008 recession were shut out of new positions at the most elite institutions. This leaves one to wonder if current economic conditions suffer due to lack of input of new ideas. Even leaders in academia will not give up CFA power and may unknowingly isolate themselves from information needed to make corrections.
So another role of the philosopher is to find new pathways. Forced to make a choice, the philosopher presents a third way. They work to develop alternate methods of moving useful information. This helps to create accountability and feedback. When a philosopher comes upon some truth or reasonable explanation they try to paint a picture in the other person’s mind by using the right words and concepts.
The Brits are great at creating stories about knights in shining armor coming to save their queen. In 1917 King George V had an epiphany (or maybe some good advice), so he created awards for the Order of the British Empire (OBE) that continues to extend to many people for their service or for some contribution to British society.
The cynic would say that King George just made up some rewards to keep his subjects happy, but this award is a way of giving meaning to other lives. The necessity for honor runs deep and something we should keep in mind going forward. For Trump followers who do not have large networks of individual support, Trump gave meaning to their lives. They could be a force again if someone gives their lives meaning or helps them find meaning in a new way, either in a constructive or destructive way.
Creation of a social hierarchy is essential to help decide the questions about who does what. Large groups do not function well without a complex, multi-layered division of labor. Well, bees do. They have the queen bee, a few soldiers, and then everybody else. But mostly they make honey for people like me to enjoy. . .
Librarians, teachers, and children of slave owners who taught other children and some adults how to read might be true revolutionaries incognito. Teaching someone to read is the most powerful tool to bestow upon anyone since it speeds the rate of discovery of many things and enlarges one’s world. This was the reason that teaching slaves to read was illegal in many places.
Philosophers are often not appreciated in their time. They ask too many questions. Other visionaries exist among us who also don’t conform or who can see a better way. Some of them are philosopher-engineers like John Houbolt, a NASA engineer who made the effort to ask the right questions and pushed for acceptance of the Lunar Orbit Module, almost single-handedly saving the space program from catastrophe. But at the beginning his ideas were not popular.
Then there is the current International Relations expert John Mearsheimer who is not appreciated by others in high places because he asks questions that no one else will ask, leading to unpopular conclusions. In an atmosphere of high tension when others are calling for “de-escalation”, he points out to the fact that de-escalation means going back to the status quo. Could it be possible that one side does not want to go back to the status quo? This forces us to be more creative in finding alternate pathways to present-day conflicts.
Role of the Philosopher
What is old and what is perennial are determined by changes in the environment. Some people can think young and respond. Others seem unable to make decisions.
For discussions at a deeper level, women might point to their feelings. Men might discuss the structural aspect of building a bridge, another kind of depth and an important one too if the bridge is to hold up under stress. Both are seeking answers. The role of the philosopher here is to help formulate better questions and push these questions in front of those who need to know.
In reality, the social hierarchy is a dense mass of layers that limit what we see and hear. 5th graders know they are superior to 4th graders who know that 3rd graders are just dumb. Each level takes care of, but also takes advantage of the layer below.
If women are not where they should be in the hierarchy, part of the reason may be that they don’t want to leave others behind, and so they step aside. Working their way up to the C-suite might change their outlook – but maybe not.
Leaders Push the World
Leaders are lonely. There is no one else in charge and they must hone their arguments for the layers of ambitious advisors that surround them. Are women leaders prepared to be lonely? What exactly do leaders do? Must they simply “lead vigorously” as JFK once said? A good leader must do at least the following:
1 – Turn. Turn around to see if anyone is following.
2 – Task. Give them a task – a specific task.
3 – Tools. Give them the tools to do it, then help set up some experiments.
Philosophers should do more experiments, like scientists or engineers, checking to see what is happening at several points along the way. The true philosopher still wants to know how the world works. Sometimes that requires a push. Just a bit of a nudge. A self-driving car pulls up beside you. I think guys are more likely than girls to edge over a bit, just to see how the auto-car reacts. I’ve not seen any research on this, but I would wager a small amount on it.
. . . Push, Push, Push . . .
Push others to make decisions. This may reveal hidden weakness but also hidden strength. Bring people together in groups to work on a specific problem for which they must make a decision. It may be better to create a mix of people than to use all from the same social group.
. . . Push, Push, Push . . .
Push people together, not apart. Push them to work together on some specific problem or to answer some specific question. Ironically, this may require the use the kind of gentle competition we already use in sports such as baseball or soccer.
. . . Push, Push, Push . . . all levels of society. Push people up the hill with higher expectations. It may be our only way out.
Bend the Story
Recent stories from North Korea ( “Without You There Is No Us” and “In Order To Live” ) indicates people in North Korea still have what we call human values and love for one another. They need to create a better story, even if done inch-by-inch. Start with the existing story: “Kim Jong-un is the Supreme Leader of North Korea. He is an important person and a great leader.” Then look for ways to bend the story in a positive direction. Maybe find someone at the grass roots or middle management of North Korea who has ideas about how to improve their agriculture output or improve health care. Then push useful information toward them, quickly.
According to psychologist Michael Gurion, we should look at screens as story-making machines. Many young and middle-aged people have become isolated with their only life being on a screen. They seem to wait for the screen to give them a cue. Is this power? Or is this a problem? If it is a problem, find a small group to refine the questions that might lead to a better outcome. It may take a number of iterations to bend the story, but with the right process, this can be done.
Tools and Tactics
Communication, Organization, and Economics. These are the powers of the PQ’s, not physical strength or violence. How does one put them into action?
Tie two things together. Bridge the gap. Problem solve. Do it with ad hoc groups. One can always withdraw support or ask a different question. That’s what philosophers do. Show us another way. Maybe go against the story, either with hypothetical or real situations.
Altruism is not for everybody. Jews and Palestinians will not likely act kindly toward each other but finding the right process can prevent a lot of wasted time and resources on both sides.
If one defines a hero as someone who thinks outside of the boxes, there are many heroes among us. One is the piano teacher who says “use your own fingering” rather than those printed in the book. He or she may be viewed by other teachers as heretical until they realize that the publisher simply hired someone to write the fingerings in the book, someone with a different size and shape of the hand.
The problem can be a small problem. A local story can be used, along with other leverage points, to start to bend the larger story. The news media tend to break stories into separate pieces, each with its own headline, but in real life it all runs together. Juxtapose two seemingly different problems: gun violence and Haiti.
Leader must pay attention to structures and how these structures interact with the flow of useful information. Give small, mixed groups of people a discussion question, then a place and time to talk. Plant a seed and water it. Remember that among the followers there is a spectrum of attention spans, education, resources, and networks.
Maybe not push individuals in public. Give time and space for them to ponder. Privacy, alternating with more public discussions can be very helpful. Give people a specific challenge, a specific question, and limited time. Then expect some good answers. The structure of small group discussions is part of the “how” that is needed to go forward.
The outcome cannot be pre-ordained. That would be politics or marketing. Still, it is important to push people together to work on problems. Act as if you have power. Chose action over anger. Leapfrog to positions of leadership, but don’t leave everyone behind, because you cannot. They have power too and will leave if they see a better pathway.
Philosophy for Big Questions
Both women and men philosophers must do some hard thinking on big issues of the day. The abortion issue is not settled. Then there is the issue of gun violence, the disappearance of prime age men from the workplace, artificial intelligence, the economy, and climate change. Big Questions surround us. Solutions may present themselves if the questions are placed properly to address real sticking points.
The call for justice seems to be everywhere, but does the call for justice lead to empowerment? They are not the same. Justice means that someone else makes the decision and then the issue often gets dropped. Activists and others may be at the front, giving inspirational speeches, but without action or forward motion it feels like inspiration porn, like a sales force dictator to consumers: “Get in line!”
Abortion is certainly an issue that needs input from a PQ as it is impossible to prove exactly when life begins. There are some women who believe that life begins at conception. For you and me, our lives and identity began at conception. But that’s not the whole story, is it? There are risks and benefits both ways. Abortion laws can be rewritten to give primary choice to women, yet push individuals, families and communities together to make difficult decisions.
Social scientist Nicholas Eberstadt has found that 4 out of 5 prime age males in this country are not included on the employment data. Where are they? Mostly at home surfing their screens or playing video games. They have become non-persons, losing touch with the real world. The implications are not good. This becomes a women’s issue too. As women aspire to positions of leadership they must be leaders of all people, not simply other women.
Climate change is the key Big Question with implications for all the other big questions. Rather than focus on what we can do at the national level or on what the individual can do, the philosopher might also focus on the middle, the town-size entity, starting with the question “how do we make this town sustainable on low carbon?” People who live within a specific town would seem to be the natural players, but outsiders can help to push them up the hill with good ideas.
A growing number of people are having second thoughts about AI (Artificial Intelligence) wondering whether it will bring with it a surveillance state and surveillance industry. The fear is that artificial intelligence will be used to enforce more complex laws that deal with all facets of daily life. Robo-Cat may already be out of the bag on this one however.
Manifestations of a surveillance state can already be seen with the construction of Cop Cities near Atlanta and another one planned in New Jersey. Training for mass uprisings is the reason for these large training areas. Whether or not supporters of Cop Cities are driven by fear or profit, it can be just as easy to fall into the arms of their opponents. Blame. Anger. Fear. These are the easy tools to reach for in the activism handbag. Are Cop Cities necessary because we have lost accountability to each other? Maybe. Maybe not.
It does not have to be that way if we can find and formulate better questions. Problems must be identified and decision loops made at a local level in a timely manner. Seeds of change may have to start in the inner city by creating decision loops among the social layers. Otherwise everything must go through the courts or some other branch of government.
In the modern era the club has become “The Club”, a small group of people who get together to share ideas and help each other. They assign roles and share stories. Sometimes they divide the spoils. Outside the issue of national defense, all governments are primarily about dividing the spoils. Long term, however, we must be in tune with the environment that supports us. We start with Questions, big and small, and for this we can use help from philosophers.
josuter
josuterdotcom 