Upload
allanmenzies
View
221
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
1/105
COMPLEMENTARITYAS A
SOCIAL SCIENTIFIC ORIENTATION
Allan Menzies
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
2/105
CONTENTS
I INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. 1
II THE SHARDS OF "OLD-CULTURE SLAVERY" ........................ 6
III THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL SCIENCE TO RESPONDIN DIALOGUE .......................................................................... 13
IV THE COMPLEMENTARITY OF OPPOSITES ............................. 20
V FROM THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE TO THE SOCIOLOGYOF KNOWLEDGE .................................................................... 33
VI THE SCIENTIFIC PSYCHOLOGICAL AFFIRMATION OF AUNIVERSAL HUMAN NATURE ........................................... 50
VII THE SHARDS OF ARMORED MAN .......................................... 74
VIII CONCLUSION .............................................................................. 92
This work is licensed underthe Creative CommonsAttribution 3.0 Unported License.
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
3/105
In this paper I wish to address what I perceive to be at the very
source of all social perplexities confronting contemporary, post-industrial
civilization: a conflict-dualist weltanschauung. It is just such a weltansch-
auung which serves to perpetuate the endurance of a socio-political apparatus
predicated on the hierarchical arrangement of social relations and, atten-
dantly, domination and competition. With recourse to Philip Slater primarily,
I will endeavor to indicate that from such a conflict-dualism we may observe:
the domination of man over man, man over woman, and man over nature;
the domination of property over person; the domination of producer over
consumer and owner over worker; the domination of material needs over
spiritual needs; the domination of quantitative perspective over qualitative
perspective, as well as the domination of means over ends and technical
concerns over human concerns; and so on.
Again with recourse to Slater primarily, and to a lesser extent Marcuse,
I will argue that all of this is, contrary to widespread belief, not an
irrevocable fact of human existence. From within a sociological context,
I shall develop the notion that the societal nature of things need not be
founded on the politics of domination and competition that are perpetuated
and fortified by the conflict-dualist world-view. The position will be
forwarded that just such an undying belief in social nature is predicated
on a scarcity of natural resources; yet due to the tremendous advances of
technical know-how, we have advanced beyond the age of scarcity into an age
I INTRODUCTION
1
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
4/105
of adequacy. The conclusion follows that, if material well-being may be
guaranteed every man, then the politics of domination as we know them today
can potentially become an artifact of social history. In other words,
technology could conceivably be utilized to serve the community of man
rather than collaborate in the domination of man . . . over his fellow men
and over nature.
In order for such a radical transformation to occur, it is imperative
that modern man generally re-evaluate his predominantly materialist frame
of reference; it is with a no less idealist sensitivity to the innermost
natural needs of man that such a transformation may be hoped for. In this
regard, two essential points are raised.
First, such an attentiveness to man's existential and essential needs
demands a breakdown of the conflict-dualist weltanschauung (ie. a materialist
-idealist balance is pleaded for). This is assumed to be an unrealistic,
idyllic dream by those entrenched in the Lockean or Hobbesian tradition
which underlines the incompatibility of natural man with the imperatives of
societal living. (Again we witness here a symptomatic appendage of conflict-
dualist).
In this respect, Sorokin, Northrop, and many others have argued from a
functionalist or integralist perspective that the Lockean and Hobbesian view
is rooted in, or at the very least meaningfully related to, a Newtonian
mechanistic and deterministic world-view. However, I shall indicate that
this is a natural scientific paradigm that has been almost completely dis-
missed in this century, and is coming to be replaced by an emergent paradigm
guided by the scientifically-based postulations of Heisenberg, Bohr, Einstein,
2
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
5/105
Planck, Cassirer and Nagel, to mention but a few. Of especial importance to
this paper, Bohr forwarded a principle of the complementarity of opposites
and Heisenberg forwarded a principle of indeterminacy (meaning here tele-
ological meaningfulness, though not exclusively so) and uncertainty in nature.
One is logically forced to the conclusion in this regard, then, that not only is
conflict-dualism predicated on an antiquated social phenomenon (ie. scarcity),
but further it is predicated on a social contract tradition integrally related to an
antiquated, deemed-to-be-mistaken understanding of natural processes. Hence
it is perfectly viable to propose that conflict-dualism is about as scientifically
defensible a position today as, say, Ptolemaic cosmology or Aristotelean
physics . . . that is to say, hardly at all.
Bohr's principle of complementarity is of the highest importance in this
regard for it stands 180 degrees in the opposite direction of conflict-dualism.
This principle denotes the mutual harmonious interaction of opposites in
contrast to an intractable irreconcilability of opposites. Thus materialist
and idealist orientation for example, could be - and I will argue should be -
mutually complementary approaches towards amelioration of the human
condition.
While this century has provided scientific confirmation of this principle of
complementarity, one must by no stretch of the imagination suppose that
this is a twentieth century discovery of natural processes. The ancient
Chinese yang-yin circle, and Greek Heraclitan philosophy have dated this
view of nature to be at least 2500 years old. In order to further illuminate
the modern scientific weltanschauung, I would like to discuss the Taoist
understanding of complementary harmony permeating all of natural, psychical
3
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
6/105
and social reality as it is elaborated by Lao Tse and Chuang Tse.
A second challenge to the potential for a radical transformation of
society, as we know it today, in the direction of one based on a complementarity
weltanschauung is that, although we may well have arrived at an age of
material sufficiency, man's innermost instinctual nature is held to be
in opposition to even the minimal requisites of an orderly social existence.
Now, an additional purpose for considering Taoism is that it is supremely
consonant to a scientifically-based redefinition of human nature that has
unfolded in this century. In this respect, despite their apparently dissimilar
theoretical orientations, I will argue that Carl Jung, Ronald Laing and Wilhelm
Reich each forward a complementary (to each other) delineation of human
nature which parallels the Taoist and twentieth century natural scientific notion
of complementarity permeating all of reality. Moreover, each of these men urge
the necessity of recognizing immediate intuitive apprehension as an epistemological
mode that is absolutely essential to the integral realization of vital natural life
processes, and the integral realization of human nature in its totality and unity.
As Reich, Laing, and Jung each would have it, to negate the validity of intuition
is to concordantly delimit our knowledge of said natural life processes and
human nature.
Yet it may well be countered that intuition has no rightful place within the
epistemological confines of rigorous scientific inquiry. It will be my position that
it is precisely in the rejection of such a mode of pure intuitive experience, often
in the name of "scientism", that sociological inquiry specifically, and social
scientific inquiry generally, has to date served largely to perpetuate and corroborate
4
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
7/105
the status in quo of conflict dualism. It could not be otherwise: empiricism cannot
penetrate beyond the surface of corporeality towards the apprehension of vital life
process in creative duration, as Bergson conceived it. However a scientism
which negates the validity of intuition, at least within the confines of scientific
inquiry, appropriates it's directives from the natural sciences . . . and specifically
from an outdated Newtonian mechanistic and deterministic paradigm, as indicated
above. Therefore, were the social sciences attentive to the epistemological
directives of the new post-Newtonian natural-scientific paradigm, "scientism"
would, one might say, negate it's own existence.
Following from the above, I shall address the need to develop a social
scientific epistemological and ontological framework that is amenable to an
all-embracing knowledge of natural vital life processes and human nature.
I will do so with reference to F.S.S. Northrop's and Karl Mannheim's
contributions to the sociology of knowledge. It is my belief that these two
thinkers, probably more than anyone else in the field, have substantially
responded to the challenge of revealing a framework that: one, is responsive
to the very latest natural scientific development; two, provides for a rigorous
social scientific orientation that is, nevertheless, sensitive to the subject of man
in his totality.
5
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
8/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
9/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
10/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
11/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
12/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
13/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
14/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
15/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
16/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
17/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
18/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
19/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
20/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
21/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
22/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
23/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
24/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
25/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
26/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
27/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
28/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
29/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
30/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
31/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
32/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
33/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
34/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
35/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
36/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
37/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
38/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
39/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
40/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
41/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
42/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
43/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
44/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
45/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
46/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
47/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
48/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
49/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
50/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
51/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
52/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
53/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
54/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
55/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
56/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
57/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
58/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
59/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
60/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
61/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
62/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
63/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
64/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
65/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
66/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
67/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
68/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
69/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
70/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
71/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
72/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
73/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
74/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
75/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
76/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
77/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
78/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
79/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
80/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
81/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
82/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
83/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
84/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
85/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
86/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
87/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
88/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
89/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
90/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
91/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
92/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
93/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
94/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
95/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
96/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
97/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
98/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
99/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
100/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
101/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
102/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
103/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
104/105
8/7/2019 Complementarity as a Social Scientific Orientation
105/105