Continued Studies - 02/28/2006

CONTINUED STUDIES

Of

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

Observations

And

General Philosophy

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

02/16/2006 ~ 07/19/2006

02/28/2006

I have continued in reading the fourth volume in Montesquieu's complete works, and happen upon yet another intriguing comment which is issued in D'Alebert's Analysis Of The Spirit Of Laws.

He is addressing what he states as "men in a state of nature" when he refers to what I have come to know as the "First Degree Of Civilization," being a rudimentary and barbaric form of "democracy" derived from "right of the strongest." He addresses as a loose paraphrase, the contracts and treaties of law as one designed to establish an "equilibrium" within society.

He then continues to cite the inherent (and re-occurring) imperfections within such treaties, and as well cites them as source of many disputes - this being seen as true enough through out history, I am still compelled to state that it is just as true to suggest that many strengths and advances have been derived from such treaties (properly employed), as well.

So as not to stray too far from the point of interest, it is then that he states that these same motives which are inspirations for, as well as derived from such developments as laws and other such treaties - bring them together as much as pull them apart. It is the tendency he cites for such contract to place interested parties in opposition with the larger spectrum, which I find so interesting at the moment.

To quote D'Alembert; "The same motives push them continually to want to enjoy the advantages of society without bearing the burdens of it."

He then states that the establishment of such agreements essentially pits the interested parties "from the time they enter into society, are in a state of war."

I find this interesting on many levels as well as the obvious humor which is human folly.

Here it is that humans have derived a means for which to erect a more efficient society - which, through the "natural barbarism" and other tendencies of humans , leads supposedly and directly to war. Albeit, and as he has stated, a more "equal" state of war.

Further this interests me in the fact that it supports my observations pertaining to deeper reasoning in the bold, social engineering step of coupling commerce with the idea of power.

A person can see where it is that such a social move made sense at the point in time when these realizations were made concerning the dynamics of structured societies. In seeing the longer term effect, I have to wonder to some degree, if such a decision was entirely thought through or if, in the novelty of such realizations and inspired thought - and tendency of humans - such steps were hastily made in any degree?

When considering it, such is entirely logical for the purpose of furthering the prosperity and progress of "peaceable" and tranquil societies - that is to say - civilized societies without the bloodshed and carnage of war being made a real state of existence - to move, or realign the focus of social power into the realm of commerce and business.

Obviously I am not saying such was un-successful - as that is not the case. Factually in my opinion, it is a stroke of genius unmatched in history from the perspective of social interests pertaining to civility. My concern, again, is the effect in the long term upon humanity in various ways.

first of which seems to me being as I have already explored in the devaluation aspects, through that re-arranged social dynamic, even the very act of procreating.

Then further even, as "hard" as it may sound, what of the effects from over population? What of the issues which arise concerning such problems, within said established civility?

Already we see signs of problematic areas pertaining to sustenance as well as other resources. Such puts humanity in the position to need a "bad guy" figure simply to stem that tide.

I am of a personal opinion that such isn't the best option or even entirely necessary, and is as result of our failures in addressing the real dynamic and resonation effect of that "shift" in "power" focus. Yes, I do believe such was a brilliant stroke in many degrees.... but I feel that we have yet to continue with that structuring development to meet its entire potential.

In plain terms, its seems that something else should be attached to it in its workings, or more that it should be augmented - modified to address the detrimental "side effects" of the initial intended results that I can discern. Something which will work with it in just as a sublime and positive manner, to check the to date unchecked aspects of it which have ballooned out of control it would seem - becoming even a detriment to that initial stroke of brilliance. It is as if within the aspect of built in ability to augment, we somehow have lost the deeper attention and meaning of that.

I do hold that should the mechanism within the concept of the third degree of civilization be more readily adhered to as it naturally manifests (I do realize this statement can be used out of context in a myriad of ways), we would already have - or perhaps begin to see and be inspired into the directions of that mechanisms progression, containing its own solution there-in.

At least perhaps presenting it.. and perhaps again setting into motion the reaction of those human tendencies.

We as a species tend to "develop" toward the area of complicating things to feel as though we have progressed - I believe those mishaps and missed detrimental effects are as result of such distractions as well.

The effect of those detrimental aspects seems essentially to play through dysfunction and despotism, the same or similar results as would have been achieved within a singular tyranny rule. though in such an instance, it is the potential for prosperity and even prosperity itself which has fallen on itself as that yoke of tyranny.

It seems similar to a monarchical or empirical despotism and tyranny, yet it differs - as different species of dogs, I imagine.