A planetary system of ethics is an aspiration that has long been anticipated on the world scene today. Although organized religion has long been celebrated as the standard bearer for the promotion of a virtuous life style, the various conflicts that afflict many of the major world religions clearly expose the inherent weaknesses to such a simplistic interpretation. Ideally, a scientific foundation for such a global ethical perspective should prove exceedingly beneficial towards resolving many of these difficulties. Here, a formal behavioral tie-in with ethical principles proves particularly effective for removing many such cultural stumbling blocks towards widespread acceptance. In particular, a foundation within behavioral psychology proves to be the most effective solution: invoking instinctual principles shared in common as a human species (as well as the rest of animal kingdom) general unifying themes. When these distinctive behavioral principles are further expanded to encompass the more abstract human social levels; namely, group and universal authority, the affiliated domain of the traditional groupings of virtues and values rightfully enters into the picture. Nostalgia • Approval ................. Guilt • Blame
Glory • Prudence ................. Honor • Justice
Providence • Faith ................. Liberty • Hope
Grace • Beauty ................. Free-Will • Truth
Tranquility • Ecstasy ................. Equality • Bliss
Desire • Solicitousness ........ Worry • Submissive.
Dignity • Temperance ......... Integrity • Fortitude
Civility • Charity ................. Austerity • Decency
Magnanim. • Goodness ...... Equanimity • Wisdom
Love • Joy ......................... Peace • Harmony
Accordingly, a radically new model of motivation is currently called for, one that melds modern behavioral psychology with the long-standing traditions associated with value ethics: a trend encompassing the group, universal, humanitarian, and transcendental realms of ethical inquiry. This comprehensive fusion linking instinctual conditioning with ethical philosophy permits the first such grand-scale synthesis of motivated behavior. The currently proposed motivation solution endeavors to provide the first clear dynamical understanding for the general public, providing a grand unified synthesis of the virtues/values in correlation with the behavioral principles underlying instrumental conditioning. Through this systematic behavioral understanding, the reader is effectively provided with unique examples of this behavioral dynamic in action, as well as insights towards dramatic employment in one's personal life. The specific details for such a global ethical achievement invoke a portrayal of the general span of human culture as a ten-level hierarchy of personal, group, universal, humanitarian, and transcendental domains comprising both authority and follower roles. Furthermore, this ascending authority/follower hierarchy formally appeals to the systematic principles underlying Set Theory. Here, the elementary concepts of the one, the many, and the absolute are specified in terms of the personal, the group, and the universal authority realms, respectively.
Each of these distinctive conceptual levels is further associated with its own unique complement of ethical/motivational terms, extending (at the uppermost levels) to include the traditional listings of virtues and values relevant to a planetary system of ethics. This master ten-level hierarchy of authority/follower roles is correlated with a related complement of over two-hundred individual virtuous terms. The traditional ethical listings defined within this system all appear linked on an intuitive level, suggesting a clear sense of overall cohesiveness, the complete breakdown of which now will be described.
THE MOTIVATIONAL MATRIX
The key conceptual innovation arises as a direct outcome of the fledgling science of Communication Theory, borrowing the crucial concept of the metaperspective. It is defined as a higher-order perspective on the viewpoint held by another: schematically defined as “this is how I see you-seeing me.” The higher-order groupings of virtues/values are ordered as subsets within this hierarchy of metaperspectives, each more abstract grouping building upon that which it supersedes. Take, for example, the cardinal virtues (prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude), the theological virtues (faith-hope-charity-decency), and the classical Greek values (beauty-truth-goodness-wisdom). Each of these traditional groupings is further subdivided into four subordinate terms permitting precise point-for-point stacking within the hierarchy of metaperspectives. Additional listings of ethical terms can further be added to the mix: namely, the civil liberties (providence-liberty-civility-austerity), the humanistic values (peace-love-tranquility-equality), and the mystical values (ecstasy-bliss-joy-harmony). When taken in concert, the complete ten-level hierarchy of virtuous terms emerges in full detail.
This cohesive hierarchy of virtues, values, and ideals proves exceedingly comprehensive in scope, accounting for virtually every major term celebrated in the Western ethical tradition. It is particularly easy to gain a sense of the trend towards increasing abstraction when scanning the individual columns from top to bottom. The traditional sequences of terms line up seamlessly within this hierarchy of metaperspectives. Indeed, it proves exceedingly unlikely that this cohesive system could have arisen solely by chance. Furthermore, the ethical hierarchy mirrors the specialization of personal, group, spiritual, humanitarian, and transcendental realms within human society as a whole: which (when further specialized into authority/follower roles) accounts for the full ten-level span of ethical terms.
The major groupings of virtues, values, and ideals serve as the elementary foundation for the master motivational matrix. This grand-scale unification of ethical principles necessarily argues for a radical reinterpretation of the organizational principles currently under consideration. The key salient insight resides in viewing the individual as the rightful product of a diverse range of social and institutional influences. In addition to the most basic one-to-one style of personal interactions, the individual is further incorporated into a broad range of group contexts (namely, work, family, country, etc.), as well as an all-encompassing universal context. These distinctive contexts collectively summate into a unified authority hierarchy consistent with the theoretical principles governing the field of Set Theory. Set Theory remains in full agreement with the three-level model of the power hierarchy: with the unit set, the group set, and the universal set equating with the designated personal, group, and spiritual levels, respectively.
The concept of a three-level set hierarchy is actually nothing new, proposed centuries earlier by German philosopher, Emmanuel Kant. In his masterpiece, Critique of Pure Reason, Kant outlines a comprehensive system of conceptual categories he considers crucial to the formation of the human intellect. Most notable within this system is the relevant category of quantity: which Kant further subdivides into the concepts of unity, plurality, and totality. In a more basic conceptual sense, these three fundamental themes equate to the notions of the one, the many, and the absolute: equivalent (in a human social sense) to the personal, group, and spiritual levels within the power hierarchy.
This three-level social hierarchy, although appealing in its simplicity, clearly differs from Set Theory in that complex interactions between individuals do not exist solely in a vacuum, but rather are further specialized into both authority/follower roles. For the personal realm, this amounts to the personal authority and personal follower roles, extending to the group realm as the group authority and group representative variations, culminating with respect to the spiritual authority and spiritual disciple roles outlining the proposed grand unification of virtues, values, and ideals.
THE MOTIVATIONAL MATRIX
In summary, the completed cursory analysis of the ten-level hierarchy of virtuous terms aimed to provide a suitably comprehensive overview of virtuous realm, a mere glimpse of the detailed terminology to follow. At the heart of this system lies the unified power hierarchy shown in Fig. 1, a confluence of authority/follower roles spanning the personal, group, spiritual, humanitarian, and transcendental realms. In tribute to this dramatic scope, this new conceptual paradigm is respectively termed the motivational matrix, in direct analogy to the semantic style of linguistic matrix that it suggests. This ascending hierarchy of authority/follower roles emerges as a direct outcome of the principles governing Set Theory, the true value of this system emerging in terms of the respective listings of individual terms, intriguing in their overall quartet style of systematic organization.
This basic pattern formally reflects the cohesiveness of the individual terms, as previously established with respect to the cardinal virtues, theological virtues, and classical Greek values. Returning to Fig. 1, in the left-hand column denoting the authority roles, the first quadrant lists the ascending sequence of nostalgia-glory-providence-grace-tranquility. All five terms share a common past-directed focus stressing past notable achievements. The same quadrant within the right-hand column of follower roles yields the related sequence of approval-prudence-faith-beauty-ecstasy: themes that reciprocate the authority trend through the reinforcement of such notable perspectives by the follower figure.
A similar pattern further holds true with respect to the upper right-hand quadrants of Fig. 1. The respective authority roles lead to the sequence of guilt-honor-liberty-freewill-equality: themes all sharing a past-directed focus although now specifying a more submissive sense. The remaining follower trend (blame-justice-hope-truth-bliss) further verifies this contention, a sequence mirroring that based on approval with the exception that negative reinforcement is now called into focus. Indeed, it proves particularly amazing that these ethical trends should exist at all, each lining up so perfectly within its respective quadrant of the power hierarchy. This grand scale organization is certainly a major selling point, its perfect symmetry and cohesiveness far too intricate to have arisen solely by chance. Indeed, these ten basic ethical groupings actually turn-out to be a skeleton framework for the much broader system of terminology covering the entire range of emotionally-charged language in general: an issue clearly warranting further investigation and analysis.
THE TRANSITIONAL POWER MANEUVERS
The extended four-part hierarchy of virtue and vice, however, suffers one crucial shortcoming; namely, the respective authority/follower roles are fixed rigidly into place: allowing precious little flexibility to operate within the system. Versatility plays a key role in our modern mobile society, with continually shifting social coalitions placing ever-greater demands upon the individual. Each new adjustment within the social hierarchy calls for alternate mechanisms for integrating this new modification, an innovation that the established groupings of virtue/vice fail to take fully into account. In addition to the incremental pattern of maneuvering for power initially described, a more direct avenue, in turn, must exist for leapfrogging directly into the higher authority levels; e.g., the group, spiritual, and humanitarian levels, respectively. This further sequence of options is respectively termed the class of transitional power maneuvers, being that they “transition” the individual directly into new social contexts.
A number of key features distinguish this new class of transitional power maneuvers, whereby permitting a greater degree of versatility in terms of discrete transitional points across the entire ten-level span of the power hierarchy. These transitions represent direct motivational analogs of the main power maneuvers they serve to imitate. This often occurs in an exaggerated fashion in order to make the point more clearly. This flair for the dramatic can be either humorous (as in the realm of comedy), or tragic (as in the genre of melodrama). This strategy is the stock-in-trade for the standard “situation comedy,” when the guest star intrudes upon the graces of the standard ensemble cast, typically with hilarious consequences. A similar pattern further holds true with respect to the more serious realm of melodrama, as particularly evident in the tradition of the daytime soap opera.
This transitional class of power maneuvers (as their name implies) refers to a relationship initiated for the first time. Here, the individual endeavors to establish a new transitional interaction within a pre-established social order. Indeed, the virtuous realm of humor/comedy is fully explained in terms of the dual transitional interplay of double-bind and counter double-bind maneuvers. Consequently, the distinctive classifications of lesser virtues represent transitional variations targeting the main virtuous realm. The pervasive human fascination with humor and comedy is fully explainable in terms of this versatile set of transitional power maneuvers, accounting for many of the lesser virtues (such as loyalty, responsibility, humility, etc.) not directly accounted for in terms of the major listings of virtues, values, and ideals.
Loyalty • Humility ................. Responsibility • Innocence
Fidelity • Majesty .............. Duty • Vindication
Piety • Magnificence .......... Allegiance • Exoneration
Felicity • Grandeur ................. Righteous.• Immaculateness
Discipline • Modesty ................. Vigilance • Meekness
Chivalry • Chastity ................. Courage • Obedience
Nobility • Purity ................. Valor • Conformity
Zeal • Perfection ................. Triumph • Pacifism
The transitional variations of the virtuous mode serve as direct transitional entry-points in relation to the major virtues.
This transitional pattern of organization further predicts the existence of a related class of ethical terms specified for the lesser virtues (II). This alternate class of virtuous terms is distinct from the lesser virtues (I) primarily in terms of the specific order given for the respective authority/follower roles. For the lesser virtues (II), this authority-then-follower pattern of roles superficially conforms to the initiation of a completely new operant sequence. This circumstance directly contrasts with the lesser virtues (I), where the sequential order is effectively reversed. Consequently, the lesser virtues (II) enjoy neither the pedigree nor tradition previously established for the better known lesser virtues (I). The lesser virtues (II), nevertheless, are associated with a suitable range of ethical traditions: wherein accounting for many further categories of lesser virtue, as schematically depicted in the compact table below.
Self-Esteem • Reverence ................. Apology • Clemency
Pomp • Veneration ........... Rectitude • Pardon
Sanctity • Homage ................. Penitence • Absolution
Dominion • Benediction ................. Contrition • Deliverance
Congeniality • Concession ................. Sympathy • Appease.
Cordiality • Indulgence ................. Compassion • Conciliate
Hospitality • Gratitude ................. Mercy • Accommodation
Goodwill • Altruism ............. Forgiveness • Sacrifice
It proves a fitting tribute to the English language tradition that the predicted complement of lesser virtues (II) so convincingly reflects the specifics of the transitional class of terms. Consequently, a clearer understanding of the dual interplay of authority/follower roles proves crucial towards validating the respective interplay of double bind and counter double bind maneuvers. For example, the nostalgic sense of self-esteem expressed by the personal authority figure, in turn, prompts the reverential treatment of the established follower figure (in a disqualified expression of approval). Similarly, the apologetic sense of guilt expressed by the personal authority further prompts a disqualified sense of blame; namely, the clemency perspective of the personal follower figure. Furthermore, the personal authority’s congeniality maneuver, in turn, prompts the disqualified sense of concession on the part of the follower figure. Similarly, sympathetic behavior further prompts a disqualified sense of appeasement.
This dual interplay of double bind and counter double bind perspectives (targeting the personal level), in turn, serves as the elementary foundation for the remaining sequence of authority levels: namely, the group, spiritual, and humanitarian levels depicted. For instance, the initial double bind sequence of self/esteem-pomp-sanctity-dominion, in turn, sets the stage for the remaining counter double bind sequence of reverence-veneration-homage-benediction. Furthermore, the related authority sequence of apology-rectitude-penitence-contrition, in turn, leads to the remaining follower sequence of clemency-pardon-absolution-deliverance.
A similar pattern further holds true with respect to the remaining sequences of terms based upon congeniality-concession and sympathy-appeasement. For instance, the initial authority sequence of congeniality-cordiality-hospitality-goodwill is formally countered by the respective follower sequence of concession-indulgence-gratitude-altruism. Furthermore, the related authority sequence of sympathy-compassion-mercy-forgiveness, in turn, prompts the remaining follower sequence of appeasement-conciliation-accommodation-sacrifice.
In summary, the current introductory chapter aims
to provide a basic overview of the entire outline for the motivational matrix. The preceding two pages of precise terminology offer a preliminary indication of the major/lesser ethical categories to be discussed. The discerning reader is encouraged to refer back to this extensive listing of terms (for easy reference) throughout the remainder of this book.
The remainder of the current section is devoted entirely to the main virtuous realm; in particular, the major groupings of virtues and values representing the cardinal virtues, theological virtues, classical Greek values, etc. This initial Part I is further subdivided into eight separate chapters reflecting the personal, group, spiritual, humanitarian, and transcendental levels within the power hierarchy including the accessory and general unifying themes.
This fundamental pattern of organization is fundamentally altered in Part II with respect to the transitional variations on the virtuous mode devoted to an examination of the lesser virtues. Following a short introductory chapter (that describes the transitional realm in general), Part II is further subdivided into six component chapters outlining the lesser virtues (I and II), as well as affiliated accessory issues.
In terms a final general overview, the remaining Part III enters into speculation concerning global applications for the master motivational system. Chapters 15 and 16 formally outline avenues for further research proposing applications relating to improvements to the global ethical mindset in terms of international cooperation. Perhaps the most dramatic potential applications are detailed in Chapter 17 with respect to an ethical simulation of artificial intelligence, the basis for two previous US patents. This novel innovation employs the systematic coding system as an aid to the programming of complex sets of ethical parameters. Through the aid of this computer technology, the task of detecting and cataloguing ethical behavior should greatly be simplified, eventually permitting the development of effective mediation within an international sphere of influence.
This conceptual grounding within a purely secular (scientific) foundation fortuitously avoids offending the sensibilities of any particular world religion or culture in the process, wherein celebrating the commonalties embraced by all ethical traditions as a whole. Granted, the world’s religions have enjoyed considerable long-term success in the promotion of a virtuous lifestyle, with origins considerably predating our modern technological age. For the vast majority of recorded history the existing complement of world religions have essentially co-existed more-or-less peacefully, although some degree of religious fanaticism has periodically instigated conflict amongst cultures. With the advent of our modern age of high technology, however, it would appear that mankind can no longer afford such a clash of cultures when extending to the realm of fanatical terrorism on a global scale. The newly proposed scientifically-based system of planetary ethics holds the greatest promise in this regard, and one with the potential to overcome the considerable threats to global peace and harmony.
The following chapter launches this grand-scale endeavor with respect to a detailed examination of the personal authority/follower roles. Indeed, it is precisely at this most basic level that the technical rationale behind the quartet-style organization of ethical terms is finally adequately addressed, ultimately explained in terms of the behavioral terminology of operant conditioning. The psychological field of behaviorism is devoted to the study of instinctual styles of goal-seeking behaviors, an undertaking definitely suggestive of the more abstract focus of the virtues, values, and ideals. The father of modern behaviorism, B. F. Skinner, proposed a similar correlation of behavioral and ethical principles in his quest for an all-encompassing “Technology of Behavior.”
In his masterpiece, Beyond Freedom and Dignity (1971), Skinner examined the behavioral correlates for a broad range of ethical terms (such as freedom and dignity), although with a limited degree of success. Through the aid of the unified power hierarchy, however, this motivational style of analysis can be carried to its logical conclusion, incorporating virtually every major term within the Western ethical tradition. Indeed, it proves particularly crucial to view the ascending hierarchy of virtues/values as based entirely within behavioral principles and terminology, as indicated in the elementary nature of the ego/alter ego states.
Appetite • Rewards ................. Aversion • Leniency
Nostalgia • Approval ................. Guilt • Blame
Glory • Prudence ................. Honor • Justice
Providence • Faith ................. Liberty • Hope
Grace • Beauty ................. Free-Will • Truth
Tranquility • Ecstasy ................. Equality • Bliss
+ Reinforce • Approach ........ – Reinforce • Avoidance
Desire • Solicitousness ........ Worry • Submissive.
Dignity • Temperance ......... Integrity • Fortitude
Civility • Charity ................. Austerity • Decency
Magnanim. • Goodness ...... Equanimity • Wisdom
Love • Joy ......................... Peace • Harmony
The science of behaviorism, therefore, serves as the rational launch-point for any further ethical analysis, beginning with the detailed chapter to follow (please see Chapter 2 excerpt, accessible from the web-links menu)…
The Schematic Definitions
The comprehensive organization of the ethical hierarchy, although intriguing in an intuitive sense, nevertheless calls for a more convincing degree of precision than has so far been demonstrated. The systematic organization of the ethical-hierarchy allows the construction of what are termed the schematic definitions. This crucial innovation spells out (in longhand) the precise location of each virtue or value within the linguistic matrix, while preserving the correct status of respective authority and follower roles. Each definition is formally constructed along the lines of a two-stage sequential format; namely, (A) the formal recognition of the preliminary power maneuver, and (B) the current countermaneuver now being employed, and hence, labeled. Take, for example, the representative schematic definition of justice reproduced below:
Previously, I (as your group authority) have honorably
acted in a guilty fashion towards you: countering
your (as PF) blameful treatment of me.
But now, you, (as group representative) will
justly-blame me: overruling my (as GA)
honorable sense of guilt.
According to this specific example, the honorable sense of guilt expressed by the group authority represents the preliminary power maneuver, countered by the just-blaming strategy initiated by the group representative. According to this basic format, the preliminary power perspective represents the one-down power maneuver, while the immediate power perspective is designated as the one-up variety. Power leverage is accordingly achieved by rising to the one-up power status; namely, ascending to the next higher meta-perspectival level. This comprehensive hierarchy of schematic definitions is essentially viewed as a motivational style of calculus replete with the transformational rules governing how each level meshes with those above or below it. In keeping with the principles of a numerical calculus, the integral is viewed as a “one-up” power maneuver, whereas the differential is seen as the “one-down” variety.
The instinctual terminology of operant conditioning is seen to dominate at the initial levels, replaced in due fashion by the virtues, values, and ideals of the higher levels. At each succeeding level, a new term (underlined) is introduced (representing the power maneuver currently under consideration). Beginning with the group authority level, the initial terms begin to drop out of the definitions, necessarily freeing up space for the current terms under consideration; (whereby maintaining a stable buffer of terms within the definitions). The respective authority and follower roles remain fixed throughout the entire span of the power hierarchy, systematically abbreviated approximately half of the time for sake of brevity in non-critical (redundant) positions. Accordingly, PA stands for personal authority, PF equals personal follower, GA stands for group authority, etc. Three of the atypical abbreviations are GR (group representative), SD (spiritual disciple), and RH (representative member of humanity). A complete multi-table listing of schematic definitions is posted at:
Main Definitions --- A Complete Listing of Major Schematic Definitions
These tables are partially borrowed from the two related patents for ethical artificial intelligence that rely upon the systematic programming of this schematic format as the foundation for ethical AI
_______________________________________
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF SITE WEBLINKS A more comprehensive overview of the companion explanatory web-links is provided below,
also listed at the top of this page for sake of convenience ... _______________________________
Chapter Excerpt --- A More Comprehensive Overview Chapter Outlining the Unified Ethical hierarchy Contact Info--- Contact the Author Foreword --- Foreword by Darryl Macer PhD Table of Contents --- A Complete Listing of the 16 Individual Chapters Spanning 206 Pages Order Info --- Internet and Publisher-Direct Order Options Coding System --- Link to Book-Release: A Diagnostic Classification of the Emotions 1st Patent --- Link to First Patent for Ethical AI - #6,587,846 2nd Patent --- Link to Second Patent for Ethical AI - #7,236,963 Main Definitions --- A Complete Listing of Major Schematic Definitions Character Values--- Link to Book-Release: Character Values: Promoting a Virtuous Lifestyle DSM Apps.--- Link to Book-Release: Communication Breakdown: Decoding the Riddle of Mental illness World PeaceChallenges to World Peace Brain Apps.... Applications to Neuroscience and Brain Mapping
________________________________
Site content c. 2023 by John LaMuth
|
THE SCHEMATIC
ORGANIZATION
FOR THE MOTIVATIONAL
MATRIX by
John E.
LaMuth PhD
The most basic personal level of interaction refers to the one-to-one style of interaction occurring between individuals, much as typically encountered in one’s personal friendships. This personal interplay, in turn, is specialized into either authority or follower roles. This is exemplified in the case of the master craftsman who typically remains dependent upon the services of his faithful apprentice. A similar scenario also holds true with respect to the hero and his side¬kick, or the celebrity and his straight-man. Flexibility emerges as the key distinguishing feature, with the authority and follower roles complementing one another in terms of such an equitable balance of power. The authority figure formally depends upon the attentions of his follower (as much as the other way around), resulting in an equal balance of power within the personal power realm.
This elementary personal foundation, in turn, gives way to the equally pervasive notion of group authority. The group set surpasses the unit set in terms of its expansion to a multitude of elements (or class members) within this group-focused style of context. Personal concerns, accordingly, become subordinate to such a group power base, being that enough followers remain to continue group authority whether or not any single individual decides to desert. In a single stroke, the group authority sets oneself well above any personal power struggles, an innovation exploited since ancient times as the well-established custom of tribal-based authority.
Group authority, in turn, is susceptible to its own unique form of follower countermaneuver: in this case, that expressed by the group representative. The latter’s distinctive style of “strike” leverage is fully realized at this juncture, as witnessed in the modern trend towards collective bargaining. By organizing as a union collective, the rank-and-file nominates a shop steward to represent them in negotiations with management. The group representative, in essence, reminds the group authority that the cooperation of the labor pool is crucial for maintaining the group status quo. Here, the group authority (in concert with the group representative) shares an equal balance of power within the group power realm.
A similar pattern further holds true with respect to the remaining spiritual authority level, although this sense of “spiritual” is restricted to the universal sense of the term implicit in Set Theory. In this latter respect, the universal set clearly surpasses the multiplicity of the group domain: in essence, the sum-totality of all such groups within the universal realm. The universal set represents the “group of all potential group sets,” a 3rd-order style of set-hierarchy (equivalent to the domain of all mankind). Indeed, whereas group authority surpasses the influence of its individual members, the spiritual authority similarly overrules the strike power of any of its constituent groups, wherein claiming authority over the sum-total of all mankind.
It is true (in practice) that each of the world’s religions competes for the beliefs of the world’s faithful. In principle, however, such religions vigilantly strive to convert all others, giving further credence to the universal sense of the term. This claim to universality is traditionally made binding through an appeal to God or Messiah-figure. This mystical style of sanction dates to the earliest of times. Here, a king could inspire the loyalty of his troops in the name of a “god of war” far in excess of what might be claimed as a mere mortal ruler.
Taking this trend to the limit, even a realm as abstract as the spiritual authority role must (by definition) be susceptible to its own unique form of follower maneuver: namely, that specified for the spiritual disciple. As spokesman for the spiritual congregation, the spiritual disciple reminds the spiritual authority that the blessings of the faithful are crucial for maintaining the spiritual status quo. Witness the power of the spiritual revolutionary for influencing such diverse historical events as the Protestant Reformation, and even the founding of Christianity, itself.
In summary, the ascending three-level hierarchy of personal, group, and spiritual domains, when further viewed in terms of both authority and follower roles, provides the basic conceptual framework for explaining the grand unified system of virtuous terms. This format is schematically depicted in Fig. 1, including the respective three-digit codes for each of the individual virtues and values. This master schematic format (tentatively termed the motivational matrix incorporates the major ethical classifications described so far (plus an equivalent number of new ones) for a grand total of ten: serving as the foundation for the remainder of the book to follow.
As the underlying captions serve to indicate, the uppermost three levels of this diagram are designated for the personal, group, and spiritual levels: accounting for the most basic groupings of virtues and ideals. The remaining lowermost pair of levels, in turn, introduce two hitherto un-mentioned categories; namely, the humanitarian and transcendental realms, respectively. This additional set of authority levels is classified as uniquely abstract styles of power maneuvers, clearly surpassing the more basic organizational pattern previously established for the lower three levels. A brief description of these final two levels is definitely in order here, for the most abstract listings of virtues and values fall within these final two domains.
Although the spiritual realm is clearly the maximum level of organization (in keeping with the traditions of Set Theory), this very sense of chronological time permits the introduction of the more abstract notion of humanitarian authority. The great theoretical physicist, Albert Einstein defined time as the fourth dimension of the universe, making it exceedingly fitting that this humanitarian theme enters into consideration precisely at the 4th-order level within the power hierarchy. Humanitarian authority transcends the spiritual variety by claiming to speak for all generations of mankind, not just the current one: experienced as past traditionalism or future potentiality. Its extreme sense of generality precludes its identification within any singular social institution, its themes rather incorporated into the spiritual (and sometimes political) framework of society as a whole.
This extreme sense of the power of abstraction (when considered in its own right) ultimately serves as the basis for one final innovation within the power hierarchy; namely, the crowning transcendental authority level. Transcendental authority regains the upper hand by transcending the routine sense of concreteness shared in common by the lower levels, an innovation accounting for the most abstract listings of values within the authority hierarchy. The transcendental perspective enters freely into the realm of pure intuition and imagination, wherein forsaking the constraints of ordinary reality for the supreme and incontrovertible realm of pure abstraction. This transcendental domain (in concert with its humanitarian counterpart) is also specialized into both authority/follower roles, for a grand total of four categories. In concert with the six respective roles characterizing the personal, group, and spiritual levels, the master ten-level hierarchy emerges in full detail as depicted in Fig. 1.
Although basically only an introductory chapter, a few general observations necessarily can be made with respect to this distinctive schematic format. The ten individual categories of virtues, values, and ideals are organized as descending columns of five groupings each. The left-hand column represents the hierarchy of authority roles, whereas the right specifies the corresponding follower roles. This dual schematic format represents the sum-totality of reciprocating interactions between the authority/follower roles, as the respective directional arrows serve to indicate.
The distinctive groupings of virtues and values for each individual level exhibit their own unique range of distinguishing characteristics. Each is represented as a quartet-style format depicted as quadrants in a pseudo-Cartesian system. The more traditional groupings (such as the cardinal virtues) are already established as four-part listings fitting quite nicely within the quartet-style format. Others (such as the theological virtues) have been supplemented beyond their traditional number in order to achieve a quartet-style status. A number of other groupings appear entirely new to the philosophical tradition, yet these too respect the quartet-style pattern characterizing the unified power hierarchy.
Similar to the reciprocating pattern of authority/follower roles (which build in a hierarchial fashion), the affiliated groupings of virtues, values, and ideals similarly mirror this ascending pattern of organization. These ethical groupings build from the most elementary (the ego and alter ego states) clear up to the most abstract listings targeting the transcendental level (the humanistic and mystical values). This virtuous realm runs the entire gamut of human experience, ranging from the instinctual to the sublime (and everything in between). A brief description of each of these individual ethical groupings is definitely in order here, serving as a basic overview for the remaining detailed treatment to follow.
The most rational point of initiation for this comprehensive analysis is certainly the most basic personal level within the power hierarchy. According to the upper-most level shown in Fig. 1, the dual categories are respectively listed as the ego states for the personal authority role (guilt-worry-nostalgia-desire) and the alter ego states for the follower role (approval-blame-solicitousness-submissiveness). The behavioral flavor underlying these groupings make them tailor-made for incorporation into the personal power realm, the respective terminology particularly effective for specifying the interpersonal dynamics underlying this elementary level. The specific behavioral rationale behind their particular assignment, as well as the related distinction between the authority and follower roles is an undertaking best reserved for a more detailed treatment in Chapter 2.
Although only briefly outlined, this initial complement of ego/alter ego states, in turn, serves as the foundation for the remaining listings of virtues, values, and ideals outlined in Fig. 1. Indeed, a general pattern of organization emerges from this schematic diagram; namely, the left-hand column is characterized by what are termed the authority ideals: read downwards as the personal ideals, civil liberties, ecumenical ideals, and humanistic values. The right-hand column of follower roles, in turn, specifies a parallel trend based upon the virtues; namely, the cardinal virtues, theological virtues, classical Greek values, and mystical values. For sake of consistency, the initial authority trend will be examined in its entirety first, followed, in turn, by an equally comprehensive treatment of the respective sequence of follower roles.
The first mentioned sequence of authority ideals begins with the group authority level; namely, the provisionally termed class of “personal ideals” (glory-honor-dignity-integrity). The personal designation for this grouping might appear somewhat of a misnomer although more properly viewed as ideals within the group sense of the term. These personal ideals, in turn, build directly upon the ego states previously established for the personal authority role, wherein accounting for the hybrid quality of the grouping. In this latter respect, the group authority gloriously acts in a nostalgic fashion or honorably acts in a guilty fashion towards the personal follower figure. Similarly, he might dignifiedly act desirously or worrisomely act with integrity, again building on the elementary foundation in the ego states.
The personal ideals collectively derive from the Latin tradition, effectively highlighting the Roman’s fascination with the heroic principles governing group leadership. This enduring group focus is primarily expressed in the many symbolisms for royalty and nobility; as in the heraldic traditions of the circle of glory, the honor point, the cap of dignity, and the social symbolisms for integrity. Guided by such lofty ideals, the group authority rightly aspires to such noble themes befitting leaders of society.
The next higher level of spiritual authority rates a similar treatment indicative of the respective class of “civil liberties” (providence-liberty-civility-austerity). Each of these themes is prominently featured in the founding of the United States, as collectively celebrated in the precepts of the Declaration of Independence. This revolutionary document celebrates divine authority as one of its central premises, invoking the universal rights of man to overrule the tyrannical edicts of English monarch, King George III. Although this designation of civil liberties might appear to suggest somewhat of a political context, further analysis reveals the deep spiritual underpinnings for these four basic themes. Indeed, each of these themes was traditionally worshipped as a classical deity in its own right; namely, Providentia, Libertas, Civitas, and Auster. In terms of this “universal” context, providence represents a more advanced counterpart of glory, whereas liberty makes a similar correspondence to honor. Furthermore, civility amounts to a spiritual refinement of dignity, whereas austerity denotes integrity from a universal perspective.
The universal prerequisites for spiritual authority, in turn, serve as the foundation for the related concept of humanitarian authority, an innovation firmly rooted within the concept of “historical” time. This enduring humanitarian focus is directly reflected in the abstract listing of ethical terms, provisionally termed the ecumenical ideals (grace-freewill-magnanimity-equanimity). The en-during significance of this grouping certainly suggests a common stereotype; namely, timeless themes in keeping with such a grand humanitarian perspective. Although closely affiliated with spiritual concerns, a more detailed analysis clearly reveals a grand humanitarian focus: as reflected in the long tradition of ecumenical councils where generational issues were thrust into focus.
This grouping enjoyed particular favor during the Protestant Reformation. According to the basic tenet of Martin Luther: “By grace are thee are saved through faith.” These ecumenical ideals add a more enduring historical dimension to the civil liberties previously established for the spiritual tradition. For example, grace imparts a more enduring humanitarian significance to providence, whereas free will provides a historical perspective for liberty. Similarly, the remaining ecumenical ideals of magnanimity and equanimity extend a similar mindset to civility and austerity.
The crowning transcendental level ultimately rounds out the stepwise description of authority roles. This transcendental perspective formally appeals to the idealized realm of pure abstraction, in essence, transcending the more concrete nature of the four initial levels. The respective grouping of humanistic values (peace-love-tranquility-equality) rightfully enters into consideration here: ideal themes befitting such a lofty transcendental perspective. Each of these terms fits such a supremely abstract perspective, ideals attuned to realms wholly transcending routine experience. This distinctive set of values dates at least to classical times, worshipped as abstract deities in their own right: namely, Pax (peace), Cupid (love), Quies (tranquility), and Aequitas (equality). These themes, in turn, served as the inspiration for many modern movements, as in the New England Transcendentalists and the Peace Protest against the Vietnam War.
The completed description of the authority ideals, in turn, sets the stage for a discussion of the remaining sequence of the follower roles. Whereas the authority hierarchy was based upon the ego states, the remaining follower sequence alternately targets the alter ego states, further extending to the well-established traditions of the cardinal and theological virtues. These two basic categories of virtue have collectively enjoyed a distinguished place of honor in the Western ethical tradition. As their qualifiers imply, the theological virtues (faith-hope-charity-decency) are specific to the spiritual disciple role, whereas the cardinal virtues (prudence-justice-temperance-fortitude), by default, target the group follower perspective.
The latter cardinal virtues directly serve to initiate the follower trend, derived from the Latin cardos (hinge): based upon the belief that all higher virtues hinge upon these basic four. Accordingly, the cardinal virtues exhibit distinct parallels to the more elementary class of alter ego states; in this case, prudent-approval, just-blame, temperate-solicitousness, or fortitudinous-submissiveness. The enduring tradition of cardinal virtues figures prominently in the writings of the Greek philosopher Plato, particularly his fanciful dialogue, The Republic. These cardinal virtues provide an effective focal point within the dialogue, promoted as codes of conduct befitting Plato’s ideal concept of the Greek city-state.
The even more advanced grouping of theological virtues (faith-hope-charity-decency), in turn, builds upon an elementary foundation within the cardinal virtues. The great Church theologian, St. Thomas Aquinas, viewed the theological virtues as divinely inspired. This directly contrasts with the more elementary nature of the cardinal virtues, which were more widely regarded as naturally occurring, social predispositions. Befitting their exalted moral status, the theological virtues remain an enduring theme in NT scripture, particularly celebrated by St. Paul as supreme moral principles governing virtuous conduct.
Although the formal designation of “theological” originally applied only to the first three basic terms, the addition of the fourth related theme of decency effectively modifies this grouping into a form consistent with the schematic power hierarchy. This traditional shortfall in the full complement of terms further appears to account for the great theoretical insight missed throughout the ages; namely, the theological virtues represent the higher spiritual analogues of the subordinate class of cardinal virtues (just as the latter are based upon the alter ego states). Here, one acknowledges the prudent-faith or blameful-hope for justice professed by the spiritual disciple figure, in addition to the temperate sense of the charitableness or fortitudinous sense of decency germane to the discussion.
The completed description of the group/spiritual levels, in turn, extends to the humanitarian domain with respect to the “representative member of humanity” role. More properly termed the philosopher’s maneuver, this perspective invokes the prestige of speaking for all generations of mankind (not just the current one). In essence, the representative member of humanity reminds the humanitarian authority of his formal sanction from humanity, lest he lose prestige in such matters. The humanitarian authority perspective is initially seen as more of a policy-making strategy than any immediate style of power perspective. The humanitarian follower, in turn, retains the option of rejecting humanitarian policy; hence, maintaining an equal balance of power within the humanitarian power realm.
The traditionally revered grouping of classical Greek values (beauty-truth-goodness-wisdom) rightfully enters into consideration here, the major groupings of virtues already accounted for at the lower levels. This enduring notion of value invokes precisely such a humanitarian focus, the more immediate sense of virtue now extending to the timeless quality of value. Indeed, the classical Greek values date to the most ancient of times, celebrated by Plato as pure forms (or essences) that transcend the variability of the natural world. Each of these values was worshiped as an abstract deity in its own right; namely, Venus (beauty), Veritas (truth), Bonus Eventus (goodness), and Sapientia (wisdom). This classical sense of value, in turn, fulfills the trend previously established with respect to the cardinal/theological virtues. This formal correspondence extends to the beauteous-faith or just-hope for the truth, as well as the charitable sense of goodness or decent sense of wisdom expressed by the humanitarian follower figure.
Even a follower level as abstract as the transcendental must (by definition) be invested with its own unique form of follower countermaneuver, in this case, that invoked by the transcendental follower. Despite this extreme level of abstraction, it still proves feasible to distinguish a respective listing of ethical terms provisionally termed the mystical values (ecstasy-bliss-joy-harmony). Although the formal specifics of this grouping are scarcely warranted at this juncture, suffice it to say they encompass the enigmatic realm of religious mysticism tuned to realms wholly transcending routine experience. This crowning mystical level effectively closes out the “nameable” realm of the power hierarchy, although it is still possible to postulate the existence of a supernatural extension to the power hierarchy: a topic best reserved for the more detailed examination of mysticism contained in a later chapter.
_____________
|