Theme: Decidability

PHILOSOPHY AND IDEOLOGY

Technically speaking all **Paradigms** (ontologies) serve as (relatively) coherent systems of measurement, decidability, choice, and preference given the information (knowledge) at our disposal.

* *Decision: Measurement(existence) > Decidability (necessity) > Choice(agreement-time) > Preference (satisfaction-now) *

**Philosophy** (like logic) is a widely abused (overgeneralized) term, because only Europeans invented and practiced rational philosophy under constraints of realism, naturalism, and testimony (empiricism) as investigatory and continuously adaptive rather than explanatory and static.

Even such we divide european philosophy into Aristotelian (Testifiable, Empirical, Legal, Scientific) and Platonic (Ideal, Literary), and later Abrahamic Synthesis (Augustine, Acquinas) that tried to bridge semitic supernaturalism and European naturalism. And this distribution remains today as Anglo (legal, analytic) and Continental (literary, empathic). And our fundamentalists retain the Abrahamic Synthesis. As do jews and Muslims maintain their fundamental Abrahamism.

The broader term that refers to the equivalent of European philosophy across all civilizations regardless of it’s composition (Aristotelian, Confucian, Platonic, Buddhist, Abrahamic, Hindu) is ‘**wisdom literature**’.

So we label other society’s wisdom literature as ‘philosophy’ by analogy, but this a misapplication of the term. Instead, all civilizations had to, and did, produce a wisdom literature as a system of measurement that limited description, decision, choice, and preference to **coherence** with (or advancement of) the group’s survival (evolutionary, competitive) strategy.

The structure and content of that wisdom literature was and remains dependent upon the **order of the development of civilizational institutions**.

This is probably a lot to absorb, but there are only **three methods of coercing** humans: force threat or defense, material reward or lost opportunity, or social threat or social advancement.

We develop systems of State (Bureaucracy), Social (religion), and Trade (Law) in some order. The difference in our means of persuasion – our ‘wisdom literature’ is dependent upon the order. With the last of the three developed the weakest or non existent.

* *State(Bureacracy) using ****force**** <-> Law(Judiciary) using ****deprivation**** <-> Social(Religion) using ****ostracization***

Just as Philosophy is an abused term, so is **law**. The west developed rule of law and politics. No other people produced law or politics. They produced command and rule. So there exists rule **OF** law, rule **BY** legislation, rule by tradition (religion, priests), and rule by regulation (bureaucracy), and rule by command (authority).

* *Rule of Law <-> Rule by legislation <-> Rule by Tradition <-> Rule by Regulation <-> Rule by Command*

**The west developed law first**, the state with Rome, and formal religion only with Xianity. The far east developed state and bureaucracy first and neither religion nor law. And the middle east developed religion first and state second and never law; The Jews developed religion and law but not state. Arabs religion and neither law nor state. And Indians religion and limited law and even more limited state.

**PHILOSOPHY AND THE MIDDLE AND UPPER MIDDLE CLASSES**

We use philosophy as the lowest order system of measurement – in an attempt to organize a **paradigm of decidability **within a given domain of questions. Once we have discovered it, and it is coherent with all other paradigms, under the paradigm of realism, naturalism, and operationalism – we call that a science.

However, the sciences can only provide decidability (universally). They can only inform choice (between people). They can only inform preference (by the self). But we are faced with a kaleidic universe, limited personal abilities, limited energies, limited resources, limited knowledge, limited sexual, social, economic, and political market value, and the resulting limited relationships.

What consistent paradigm of decidability will assist the individual, the family, the alliance, the organization, the class, the bias, and the polity or the civilization in maximizing the return on our time on this earth?

That is the role of philosophy: choice.

The role of science: decidabiilty (no choice)

The role of the logics (measurement)

The role of Argument (truth), Philosophy (choice), ideology (political power), theology (power), deceit (theft, fraud) each have their functions.

**DEMOCRACY GIVES RISE TO IDEOLOGY**

With the displacement of the aristocracy (limits on the people and the state), the decline of Church, Pulpit and Theology, the replacement of the Church with the (leftist) Academy, the rise of leftist pseudoscience, the rise of mass production, mass printing, mass radio and mass media, and the opening of the franchise to the unpropertied (unaccomplished), then we were faced with the problem of organizing a population to act to bring about policy changes.

**The purpose of ideology is not coherence**, not consistency, not truth, but to motivate a population to bring about policy and political change

What is the difference between ideological conquest in the modern world and theological conquest in the ancient world? There isn’t any. In the ancient world and in the modern world the technique is the same, with the justification switching from supernatural and sophomoric to pseudoscientific and sophomoric. In all cases ideology is a means of motivating those lacking the knowledge to decide, to grant power such that policy can be changed.

Why? Representative democracy forces this behavior; the population is not capable of the knowledge necessary to choose; and the population is vulnerable to false promises of freedom from physical, natural and evolutionary laws – and there is no longer a short term constraint on political action by hard (commodity) money.

Ideology is closely related to propaganda. propaganda to postmodernism. Postmodernism and propaganda to theology. And propaganda, postmodernism, and theology to the Abrahamic tradition of undermining populations from within.

**PHILOSOPHY IN THE SPECTRUM OF HUMAN SPEECH**

1. **Physical** Sciences: Descriptions of constant **physical** relations (causation)

2. **Formal** sciences: Logics are systems of measurement of constant **symbolic** relations.

3. **Behavioral** Sciences: Description of **operational** relations (incentives, actions)

But what comes after these?

**THE GRAMMARS**

Think of **The Grammars** as a **Periodic Table of Speech**. This list is severely abbreviated but it will get the general idea across rather quickly.

The Spectrum of Human **Faculties**:

… Physical

… Verbal

… Intuitionistic (intuition, perception, emotion)

Produces The Spectrum of Human **Communication**

… Measurement (True)

… Description

… Communication (Honest)

… Explanation

… Fiction

… Fictionalism (Dishonest)

… Deceit

… Denial (False)

Produces The **GRAMMARS:**

**Descriptions** (Testimonies)

… Physical: **Physical** Sciences (physics, chemistry, biology)

… Verbal: **Formal** Sciences (math logic-positions, set logic-inference, algorithmic logic-sequence)

… Intuitionistic: **Behavioral** Sciences (language, psychology, sociology etc.)

**Narrations** (Explanation, Communication)

… Physical: Testimony (empirical)

… Verbal: Ordinary Language

… Intuitionistic: Storytelling, Narration

**Fictions** (analogies)

… Physical: History

… Verbal: Literature

… Intuitionistic: Mythology

**Fictionalisms** (pretense of knowledge)

… Physical: Magic to Pseudoscience to Pseudomath ==>Pseudoscience.

… Verbal: Sophistry to Idealism to Philosophy ==> Philosophy

… Intuitionistic: Occult to Religion to Theology ===> Theology

**Deceits**

… intuitionistic: Loading framing obscuring

… verbal: Baiting into Hazard, (Marxist) Critique

… physical: Fraud

**Denials**

… Intuitionistic: Avoidance(silence)

… verbal: Evasion

… physical: Denial