Considerations

A fundamental problem
of human understanding concerns the relations of humans to one another, in terms of social hierarchy. Hierarchies of social ranking and status or pecking orders, are predominant throughout the animal world, and seem to be inherent of most animal species.

The extent to which hierarchical tendencies apply to human relations has political implications, in terms of anthropological authority for political and economic systems, as either oriented toward hierarchical authoritative, or non-hierarchical cooperative political and social systems.

Theories of the inherent nature of hierarchy, may be conjoined with aspects for instance of the theory of evolution, called the survival of the fittest, which promotes the idea that competition and violence, enhance the ability of species to survive and build superior models of adaptation. Theory such as this is then used to justify the validity of patriarchal hierarchies as opposed to more cooperative egalitarian perspectives.

Social hierarchy affects the psychology of the individual in terms of such as self-esteem, individual power, ability and freedom, and would seem to be antithetical to the ideals of democratic equality. Are the social constructs of hierarchy inherent to the natural human condition, or are they artificial constructs which are supported to suit systems, which hierarchy benefits some at the expense of others?

Social hierarchy can be said to be conditioned, as learned from birth like the subservient condition of the child to parents, the strictures of age, development and abilities, or the conditioning of the class room. Or it can be said to be inherent to the human condition.

Social hierarchy as either inherent to the human biological make-up or considered as a conditioned mechanism, is a dilemma in which there is no agreement; the individual reconciliation of which may reflect whether one benefits or is hurt by systems of hierarchy, independent of the question of its legitimacy as biological or conditioned.

Hierarchy is considered from the perspective of its various manifestations. A context in which a form of hierarchical relationship would seem apparent as inherent to the human biological make-up is the area of sex, as the distinction between male and female, and has often been the justification for Patriarchy.

Inherent to the human biological make-up is sex, as the distinction between male and female, particularly in the form of the sexually oriented feelings and role playing of domination and submission. This sexual distinction has been used for centuries to justify unequal status between the sexes, based on the authority of what is called the natural order of animal and human nature.

However the propensities of domination and submission are not universal, and vary relative to the individual. Some prefer egalitarian relations in every aspect of their lives including sexual activity. Others prefer sexual role playing but may limit it to the sexual act. Others prefer sexually dominant or submissive role playing as a total aspect of their personalities. Hierarchical social relationships may be preferred by individual's concerning their personal affairs, but not be acceptable in terms of the public policy of the political, economic and cultural institutions which affect their lives.

Since everyone is not the same, a hierarchial propensity is not innate and inherent. In fact stratified levels of social hierarchy can be shown to be a condition of the perspective and consciousness of Progressive Materialism.

When the consequence of being of the natural world becomes material resource for the adoption of Excess and Profit, which is institutionalized by private property, what will be inherent is the the distinction between workers and owners and the hierarchy of rich and poor.

The underlying class system of unequal means and education will stratify society and culture. However the greater the complication and sophistication required to produce ends, the greater the degree and necessity of hierarchy.

Complex civilization is mandated to hierarchical social structures to maintain infrastructure such as roads, bridges, water and sewage, phone service, transportation services, to say nothing of things like satellite communications. In terms of progressively advanced technological society the necessity of complex social hierarchy is not inherent to the human genetic or biological structure but is created by the aims and ends of society.

Hierarchy is an inherent aspect of Progressive Materialism and works well in terms of the efficient operation of all forms of societal institutions. However in a truly non-hierarchical society, the problem is not solved by external means as so thought by Marx and the communists. People are equal in fundamental ways, as a somewhat similar functioning body, wants and needs. But in other ways people are not equal. Some are stronger, smarter, shy, rambunctious, more ambitious, less honest, differences as a matter of internal mental attitudes of mind.

An alternative may be the concept of an archetypal personage where the individual has an identification with more universal attributes than merely physical characteristics. This concept has traditionally been manifest in spiritual or religious venues, in which the individual may take on personality attributes which are more universal in character, patterned after the attributes of God, as the individual may define themselves as, a child of the Holy Father.

In sectarian terms, the individual may develop an inner character and identity based upon more general attributes, which involve the development of the self, as a character which transcends time and space, such as artist, humanitarian, writer, philosopher or historian.

The individual may take on a new and different perspective of the self, in which the person becomes grounded in characters based on universals which transcends the prevalent attitudes of the current cultural place and age. Ordinary affairs of everyday life which may involve hierarchical relationships may be viewed as role playing, in which the individual adopts the perspectives and attitudes necessary to accomplish what is necessary, based upon the dynamics of the particular thing that needs to be done.

A suggestion might involve what is called the Ego, Identities and Ipseities. The Ego is the first mind and personality and is concerned primarily of everything that affects the body. We could call the Ego that which is equal to all and what all have in common.

The Identities are created by the Ego or already existing Identities for the purpose of accomplishing objectives, in which to get something done, a personality is formed. Identities may conflict with the Ego, and while the Ego will mostly be innocent, it is the Identities that create evil.

The Identities are what is distinct and individual and what is greatly the difference between people as primarily professions, but also what produces most of the evil in people.

The Ipseities are created persona's that represent non-physical spiritual or religious characterization, as immolations to imitate such as Christ, Buddha or Mohamed. Conceivably the Ipseity as a character could be created to watch the Ego and Identities. A panoply of Ipseities representing the equality of all and hierarchical free culture, even as in the complex societal today.

(31 of 96) Next Page