MHC breytir/dýpkar sýn á málin
Bókin sem hér er vitnað til er nýkomin út (1 sept 2017) Höfundur hefur sagt að heimilt sé að vitna í hana hvar og hvenær sem er sé þess getið hvaðan tilvinunin kemur. Freinacht, Hanzi. The Listening Society: A Metamodern Guide to Politics, Book One (Metamodern Guides 1) (Kindle Locations 4161-4179). Metamoderna ApS. Kindle Edition.
Hanzi talar um skala sem er miklu “vísindlegri” og meira behavioristic heldur en nokkuð integralt (SDi) eða önnur módel sem við höfum verið að skoða.
Mælikvarðinn, sem heiti MHC og mælir eiginlega hæfni (hversu flóknar hugsanir hann ræður við og það er skýrt í smáatriðum í bókinni, læt bara fylgja hér í byrjun smá samanburð frá honum á MHC og IQ.
Það sem ég er að sýna þér er hvernig mismunandi flækjustig hugsunar, eða hæfni til mismunandi og síaukins flækjustig hugsunar fær viðkomandi til að sjá algeng viðfangsefni á mismunandi hátt.Hanzi tekur fyrir stig 10-13 en til eru bæði hærri og lægri. Hann segir að 90% alls fólks sé á þessum skala 10-13.
Þau fyrirbrigði sem hann svo skoðar í ljósi þessara fjögurra þankaganga, ef svo má segja eru:
1 Rök gegn rasisma
2 Rök íhaldsmanna fyri sinni skoðun
3 Rök feminista
4 Rök libertanista (sem vilja engin ríkisafskipti)
5 Nátturuverndar rök.
6 Sýn á stjórnmál dagsins.
Og tekur nú Hanzi við:
It’s that high IQ, in humans, seems to only be loosely correlated with MHC stage. Mensa folks are seldom at the lower adult stages, but they tend to be at stage 11 Formal or stage 12 Systematic. So you have people whose brains are very quick and efficient— but without necessarily climbing to the more abstract forms of thought and behavior of higher vertical complexity. About 67% of your IQ score seems to depend on your MHC stage (or at least, that’s how much the two seem to go hand in hand).[ 92] So, what is vertical complexity? The MHC stages measure orders of vertical complexity. This means that each stage coordinates the actions at the preceding stage. You go from constructing stories to finding abstract variables in those stories, to finding relationships between abstract variables, to finding systems of relationships, to finding common properties in systems, and so on. There are actually five rules that determine the relationships between the stages, but here we just need to mention the three most basic ones— it’s a bit technical, but bear with me: Higher-order actions are defined in terms of lower-order actions. This makes the higher-order tasks include the lower ones and requires that lower-order actions are hierarchically contained within the relative definitions of the higher-order tasks. Higher order of complexity actions organize lower-order actions. This makes them more powerful. Lower-order actions are organized by the actions undertaken with higher order of complexity, i.e., more complex tasks. Higher order of complexity actions organize those lower-order actions in a non-arbitrary way.[ 93] A simple example. Alex the parrot increased in stage when he learned to combine words into sentences— in ways that made sense. There is a hierarchy between sentences and single words— and the sentences are more powerful. Basically, you can imagine a pyramid, where different people create original thoughts and behaviors at different heights. The organisms at higher cognitive stages can then master taller pyramids— and high IQ people can master broader ones. If you don’t like the image of pyramids (because it feels imperialist, or whatever) you can switch it for something cuter or more organic, like a “network of networks”, drawing on biological metaphors. The super-intelligent folks of world history are the ones who happen to have both exceptionally high IQ and MHC stage— the clearest example being John von Neumann, a Hungarian 20th century Jew who moved to the US, and arguably the smartest person who ever lived.
Hér kemur svo samanburðurinn
SOME STAGE 10 ABSTRACT REASONING ABOUT POLITICS
Our stage of hierarchical complexity also affects how we think about politics and society. Regardless of political persuasion, we can think more or less complexly about political issues. Let’s look at some stage 10 Abstract arguments of different political hues.
Anti-racist argument: Racism is bad: It is a self-contained and self-explanatory essence that spreads by itself unless you stop it, causing discrimination and possibly tyranny and war.
Conservative argument: The Arabicness inherent to Arabs gives them traits that are irreconcilable with Western civilization.
Feminist argument: Feminism means to stand up for women and crush patriarchy.
Libertarian argument: The less state control, the better.
Green argument: Human greed causes crises and destroys the environment.
Day-to-day politics: I am frustrated both by high taxes and low spending; by both high unemployment and low starting wages.
——
SOME STAGE 11 FORMAL REASONING ABOUT POLITICS
Anti-racist argument: Racism results from economic and social inequalities in society and causes further inequality and discrimination.
Conservative argument: Some cultural norms followed by Arabs may be irreconcilable with Western civilization.
Feminist argument: Feminism is to apply the principles of gender equality and to make these principles prevalent throughout society.
Libertarian argument: The less state control, the better, except that maintaining law and order is necessary. To establish law and order may temporarily require increased state control in “failed state” areas.
Green argument: The lacking proportionality between our emphasis on human interests, especially those of rich people, and the interests of animals and ecosystems, is what causes crises and destroys the environment.
Day-to-day politics: I see a trade-off between high taxes and high spending, between low unemployment and high starting wages.
—
SOME STAGE 12 SYSTEMATIC REASONING (POLITICS):
Anti-racist argument: Racism is an emergent property of all societies and interacts with things like inequality. Blaming and pointing fingers is generally unproductive and one should instead try to address the long-term issues that may be causing ethnic tensions under these particular circumstances.
Conservative argument: There are challenges in reconciling Western and Islamic culture which depend on how these categories interact, rather than flaws inherent to either category.
Feminist argument: Feminism means to work towards a long-term equilibrium where self-reproducing inequalities have petered out and people of all sexes and genders have less reason to feel insecure and frustrated.
Libertarian argument: State control and policy implementation tend to have unexpected and unwanted consequences as society is always more complex than we recognize. It is therefore good to be restrictive with regulation and policy.
Green argument: There are serious systemic flaws in our economic system that cause crises and may lead to ecological collapse.
Day-to-day politics: Public spending should carefully follow and counter international trends— this optimizes the labor market. But the labor market can unfortunately not be expected to function perfectly; it always lets some people down.
SOME STAGE 13 METASYSTEMATIC REASONING ABOUT POLITICS
Anti-racist argument: Racism emerges as different cultures and status hierarchies interact, where ethnic markers are used in order to increase one’s position in the status hierarchy. It should be prevented by the creation of both greater psychological security and by the facilitation of productive dialogue about cultural differences.
Conservative argument: Liberal values prevalent in Western countries may be more functional in late modern society than the more traditionalist values of many Arab Muslims, but for the successful integration of these different cultures one must take the perspectives of all parties seriously.
Feminist argument: Feminism is an interest group movement as well as a social justice movement. As an interest group movement it must be weighed against other interests and perspectives. As a social justice movement it must be coordinated with other social justice issues such as class, ethnicity, global inequality, other gender issues (including men’s issues), and the exploitation of animals and nature.
Libertarian argument: State control and policy implementation always interact with other societal systems and are dependent upon these for their successful functioning. It is thus important to carefully weigh state regulation and policy against other possibilities: markets, culture, and civil sphere. State regulation is often not the best path ahead.
Green argument: The logic inherent to the economic system is fundamentally alien to the logic of the ecosystems of the many biotopes. This means that there is no self-regulating feedback cycle directly present between our economic and technological expansion and the ecosystems upon which we depend. This lack of feedback means that we have to drive the ecosystem to collapse before the market self-adjusts. We must thereby create some other feedback, e.g. by means of policy, public awareness or cultural development.
Day-to-day politics: Public spending can be high or low, where higher spending is generally made possible by strong institutions such as rule of law, policing, democracy and free press. This keeps corruption down and allows for public support of spending and makes spending less wasteful. There is no one answer about high or low taxes; you have to coordinate it with the other societal systems.
Freinacht, Hanzi. The Listening Society: A Metamodern Guide to Politics, Book One (Metamodern Guides 1) (Kindle Locations 4600-4615). Metamoderna ApS. Kindle Edition.
