"Beware of schemes," said the Harvard doc when we did lunch, but here goes: it boils down (fire burn, cauldron bubble for years) to the perpendicularity of time and life. Time forms a polarity, imposes a continuum between preservation and innovation, the ubiquitous right/left political spectrum, here represented as a vertical line. This is contrary polarities superimposed, life hidden between the lines, and before we differentiate we save this view, one state of the field of human relations. Reality reduces to it for every day. Life draws a polarity of affirmation and negation and the full field is thus:
+ H -
implicit in (easy as):
but to facilitate inference we can lay it out generically:
eight terms (nine, actually; we're one up from generic; "anarchy" has replaced "chaos"; the human element) with long histories, geometrically related. The outer four (old and new, yes and no) are constant and so unnecessary, from here on implicit along with the tiny diagram wherein lies the logic. Definition's easier with words, so I'll use these, but all relations hold for any a/b-c/d and the laws of human nature are invariant in all systems, when related by this matrix.
The field is filled with the first four impulses: for form and freedom and from them. Since aversion is an insufficient mindset, from freedom seems to be for form (thus order, the appearance of form but really the denial, fear, hatred of freedom) and from form seems to be for freedom (anarchy). Laterally the field is characterized by an apparent equivalence of opposites. Form and freedom are contrary affirmations, defined in opposition at any rate, but the polarity itself is life. Form/freedom is an antithetic affirmation (biophilia), a creative tension. Order/anarchy is an antithetic negation (biophobia), a destructive conflict. Vertically the field is characterized by an apparent opposition in entities.
Together the apparencies conspire to foreshorten the field, hide the real choice, substantiate the false one, shift the conflict ninety degrees and fog vision fullfield. Form will see freedom as a firebrand and order as a friend indeed. Freedom will see form as a whip hand and be a fool for sheep's clothing. Order and anarchy will be blindered by pretense at the core, of course, and by the Iago defect: knowing only their own impulses (motiveless malignity, say) they'll use them to account for opponents' behavior and feel suspicion confirmed, but they'll misjudge adversaries to whom malignity is foreign. As the long-distance runner said, "I can see farther into his kind than he can see into mine." All this reduces a/b-c/d to ac/bd, to politics, perpendicular to ethics, temperamental, style merely, and the immeasurable cost of its insistence here so long must be considered, but the account is squared in the end and from that vantage point it wouldn't do to take the antipathy seriously. Remember the Montagues, the Capulets and Mercutio's last words: "Both your houses!" It was a huge waste of time.
This and more is given in three lines and two signs defining four positions unambiguously so they split both ways, link diagonally and overlay laterally to yield nine pair: three of lookalike opposites (a and c, b and d, a/b and c/d), three of antithetic halves of entities (a and b, c and d, ac and bd) and three of enmities (a and d, b and c, a/b and c/d). Applications correlate aspects of the condition (as a magnet tapped up against filings on cardboard pops pieces out of place and positions them as they fall to reveal a field) discretely, but as cases of a matrix they stack and inform each other. Each is a panoply of statements which must all be true (or it's paradigm hara kiri) and can all be read.
The one for gender,
for instance, is simplicity itself, but to say it endorses androgyny, defines it not as degendering but as health entailing the wellbeing of both male and female in each personality, would be redundant.
For art and antiart there are essence:
The pendulum, unimpeded, traces a figure eight, as form symmetrifies, freedom fights, drifts into drivel and form regains its appeal. With "transparency" the matrix takes the Humpty Dumpty prerogative, to make words mean what it says they mean, because there's no word for that which panders to a delight in the clarity of the obvious.
"Believe and doubt everything," said Spinoza; there are increasingly two kinds of people--those who can believe anything and those who can't.
The one for guidance
gives us the preoccupation with power as an antithetic entity and a linkage between credulity and subservience as traits. Presto, the selfdestruct mechanism for tyranny: systems select for subservience and only secondly for talent; threatened, they select specifically for subservience and purge talent. If you off the best the rest can't tell, can't tell the best are gone and once they're gone can't tell at all. But an institution in crisis must be guided delicately to safety in perpetual response to a dynamic reality, and if the selection for subservience is an initial response to a threat, the ship is rudderless and rotten before the storm hits, and founders.
History is between theism and authoritarianism:
Judaism proclaims the sovereignty of God (to whom anything can be said on behalf of man) and humanism the sovereignty of man (who should live as if there were a God), so there's no conflict. Absolutism (the assertion that there should be one norm) and relativism (that there should be none) are flip sides of the preoccupation with power so there's no real conflict there, either, but aversion and coercion are destructive so the devastation is real enough.
An antisemite saw Israel as source of both humanism and bolshevism and
the political and metaphysical conflicts became one. That ended,
however, and Israel rose from the ashes and a generation passed and now
what? Israel awaiting messiah is another misapprehension. Israel
is messiah, and awaits redemption. We pick up now where the Bible
leaves off, with the injunction to "go up."