Unknotting the Construction Knots in Society.

A pseudo-organism is a structure with internal interactions corresponding to outer actions on it and aiming at flexibility in existing allowing growth and extending of functioning by creating new substructures. The use of the concepts growth and creating suggest there is a pseudo-organism some use of energy but this is not specialized in the definition, so that growth and creating could also be used as abstract activities. A coral colony, a bee-hive or ant-hill may be seen as pseudo-organisms, any well ordered group of living organisms may also be seen as a pseudo-organism

Human society is a pseudo-organism with structural laws for genes and moral for epigenes,humans act as cells.It has reactions and plans dealing with environmental factors on earth as well as interior politics and strategies, allowing to adapt to changing circumstances and to conquer new bioptopes. The cells build substructures and create systems for gathering energy and use it in developing growth and survival.

Pseudo-organelles in society may be detected by their function, e.g. justice institutes (police…), educational institutes (schools…),social institutes ( labor unions,…) health institutions( hospitals,…).

There are countless other divisions defined by abstract or biological characteristics, say wealth, intelligence, religion,…, for the first type and for example, gender,race, sexual preference, physical appearance,…, for the second.

The organelles created by society fit in the pseudo-organism moral ,that is nothing else but a set of rules of behavior and development beneficial for the existence and coherence of the pseudo-organism society. The other divisions of society do not fit in the moral in fact these are divisions not benefiting the cohesion of society,almost by definition. We may distinguish two types of divisions in society. The second type consists of things relating to reality but in the situation it evolved to now,this is considered as non-relevant in the structuring of society. However that point of view is not a common to all members of society and over time it has a variable support within society with the majority being in the grey middle and extremes being more active . The first type corresponds to usually not well defined items which became prominent in choosing goals for individuals and by extrapolation for society or larger subgroups,of society.

Evolution of society is in the direction of doing away with the divisions of type 2 but depending heavily on the choice of dominating aspects between the type 1 items. For example in regions where religion dominates the divisions of type,2 are also stricter ,leading to some discrimination. If wealth dominates there is more indifference towards the division of type 2 but then that indifference turns into an exploitation of the division. If intelligence dominates then you would expect type 2 division to loose its validity and in any case there is not going to be neither an indifference nor an exploitation but there will grow out of some public debate a social fight between some of the divided parts because the reality aspect becomes twisted by an intellectual ideology, for example feminism, holebi rights, racial rights,…,human rights.

Now in the global world society as it is under construction now,none of the type 1 divisions seems to dominate but they are all present,the result of this is that all effects on the type 2 division are active, hence : discrimination, exploitation of the own population and ideological fights are mixed in the politics. Thus we arrive at a rather chaotic structure even if we have neglected many more existing divisions, society is a very complex knot tied between both abstract and real elements unlike any animal pseudo-organism like a society. At first sight the problems seem unsolvable, the entanglement between reality and the abstract world created by our cognitive constructions has to be rearranged in reality by cognitive actions. Is that possible ?What is the solution?

Well, neglect the divisions of type 1 and deal in an unbiased way with the divisions of type 2 only using the values of the society,these are the building blocks of the moral of society . These values should be chosen so that they are really valuable,let us assume that for the moment. Obviously when we seek to construct a real world society out of all existing regional societies the main problem is to find a common basis of the value system independent of religions and that will require a lot of tolerance,respect ,honesty and empathy. yet the search for a common value system,the first step, is not that difficult,one can start with the internationally accepted declaration of universal human rights. Once a common value system is accepted there will automatically be a common moral for the world society ,independent of religion but with freedom of thought,speech built in.

It is clear that the abstract divisions are the easiest to ignore while the biological are the easiest to declare non-essential.

Once society has a well-defined moral then one does not have to make abstract divisions. It seems to be human that our observation methods and analyzing thinking starts from classifications but we should not apply that to humans! Naming something is the first act of classification but it is not necessary to give abstract meaning to “groups” of items even after naming them for identification. Classification by identification is great when writing a botanical encyclopedia, but it is contra-indicated by society analysis!

Once the abstract divisions of type 1 are ignored we can turn our abstract desires loose on the overcoming of effects of the biological traits which are endemic to our species and so easy to accept as unchangeable and not essential. That sounds somewhat contradictory ,unchangeable means always present, but from an organizational point of view that makes these properties to prior conditions to be taken into account in the organization and thus to be interpreted as non-essential in the goals of the organization strategy. For example if the difference between men and women would be seen as non-relevant in society all inequality would be immediately gone. The special functioning of men and women (so not the fact of being different!) can lead to differences in functioning, for example special regulations for pregnant women would be perfectly possible. Similar reasoning would apply to all physical differences ,blind people would not be treated as handicapped but as people needing specific adaptions in their neighborhood which would be a task for society because it is a human society…that means by and for all humans. Everything follows from some small change in our thinking about reality, it is not difficult.

Born in 1947 .Real name: Fred Van Oystaeyen.Active in Math research, author of many papers and books . Hobby :Blues and plants.