Hi Bryan
I don't care for the table much. It classifies things in terms of
current and part dilemmas, which I think is stupid because it doesn't
let you look at the different philosophies in terms of all possible
dimensions -- liberalism, for example, can't have an attitude about
order because it is already on the freedom side of the old dilemma.
Best
Rick
···
On 6/25/07, Bryan Thalhammer <bryanth@soltec.net> wrote:
[From Bryan Thalhammer (2007.06.25.1115 CDT)]
Rick,
I read this several days ago, but I needed some background to reply. Last year I
read John W. Dean's Conservative Without Conscience. I might have posted a bit
about it, how Dean really digs into the definitions of the main words in his
book's title. In defining Conservative, he also talks about authoritarianism,
expressed by many who see nothing wrong with the Rule of Man in place of the
Rule of Law. In his argument, I saw a very nice depiction along the lines of
PCT, where he describes a set of values (principles) that become the components
or attributes of a person's system image. Right? Your system image will have
less error with disturbances from the social environment, depending on the
perceptions you have. I send you scans of pp. 34-37 of Dean's book.In this excerpt I send, Dean presents a grid of different political views
according to two dilemmas each with a conflict between two ideals:1. Freedom to Order, the Original Dilemma
2. Freedom to Equality, the Modern DilemmaThe four quadrants thus describe the four major movements:
I. Communitarians: Equality and Order
II. Liberals: Freedom and Equality
III. Libertarians: Freedom and Freedom
IV. Conservatives: Order and Freedom
(The file "Dean - Freedom-Order-Equality.jpg" illustrates each movement.)
Files are in a zip folder. If you can't open it, I will personally send you the
individual files.If you read the book, you will be reminded that Dean is not a Liberal, nor is he
a Libertarian or a Communitarian. He claims to be a Goldwater Conservative.Back to PCT. If one could review the Janda-Goldman self-test or the libertarian
self-test, or some other descriptors of what control systems comprise the
principles of freedom, order and equality, one could develop a test of the
Self-System (al� Dick Robertson's experiment) to examine the nature of the
Self-System that Dean describes as the Conservative without Conscience, as well
as other multi-factor modes such as Communitarians, etc.I will leave it at this, stating that in each movement there certainly ARE good
and great ideals, but that in isolation or in excess, create error in the other
movements. Further, when adherents of these movements find themselves in the
same word-space (like a forum, dinner table, street corner), the disturbances
from the cycle of control of perception by several disparate speakers creates an
arms race of disturbance and control.Now, given the perceptions suggested by Dean, is there a way to resolve conflict
(internal and interpersonal)?--Bry
[Rick Marken (2007.06.23.1040)]
>>Bill Powers (2007.06.22.0715 MDT)--
>> .....
>> By the way, Rick
>> Marken started, a few weeks ago, to introduce some serious PCT analysis of
>> the differences between conservatives and liberals. I really would like to
>> see that followed up seriously.
>
> I don't remember this but I'll be happy to participate in such a
> discussion. The first thing we might do is decide what we mean by
> "liberal" and "conservative". If we go by the current cultural
> definitions in the US then a "conservative" is a person who (in PCT
> terms) controls for certain principles: free markets, small
> government, sanctity of life, less separation between church and
> state, more separation between state and business, low taxes, free
> choice in healthcare, no affirmative action, etc. A "liberal" is a
> person who controls for other principles: regulated markets, big
> government, allowing women to kill their innocent embryos while
> banning the state from killing convicted murderers, secularism,
> regulation of business, high taxes on the rich, socialized medicine,
> affirmative action, etc.
>
> Wile it is probably rare to find anyone who is a pure conservative or
> liberal, I think we should first agree on what we mean by these terms.
> Does that sound reasonable? If so, what do you think of my
> definitions? (As one who sees himself as a liberal I can vouch for my
> definition of "liberal" since I believe in all these things).
>
> Best regards
>
> Rick
> --
> Richard S. Marken PhD
> rsmarken@gmail.com
--
Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com
