Break Vs. Crisis Management

February 24, 2009

http://www.amazon.com/Realist-Social-Theory-Morphogenetic-Approach/dp/0521484421

This is not a suggestion to go buy the book!

A cycle occurs everyonce and awhile in all social strcutures. This cycle for example may be witnessed in the economic cycle.

Amy writes ‘The relationship between the cultural system and sociocultural interaction is THE DECISIVE factor influencing whether or not the relationship between will favour morphogenesis (elaboration) or morphostasis (maintenance).’
I agree, and I would like to argue a couple aspects of archer’s thesis that may elucidate significantly one of the many broad aspects of analysis needed to comprehend structural and cultural emergent properties as a cohesive and overly-stable social condition of reality and harbringers of chaos. In other word morphostatic systems fail….inevitably! Yet the choice of the agent is constant.
I too feel that change is in the air…always! However, I question THE WORLD’S ability to maintain its cultural sanity ‘with rapid and incessant change’. I feel a ‘deep and continuous reflexivity’ is, not just possible, but a needed for cultural survival. (Sorry Amy I know I took you slightly out of context, as usual).

Is this a CEP? you betcha! Let’s use an example,
In any environment a SEP could be inserted that would shape the CEP. However, we know that CEP is required to shape the SEP. In this casechanging structure is the process of changing culture, and we know that an insertion of a new SEP would be at the expense of a great deal of collateral damage- just look at any country that went communist over the last hundred years.
Morphogenetics is based on a natural system of emergent properties (CEP+SEP) that are the basis of both deterministic values and exotic extraneous vectors + the unknown.
That makes sense,I think. If: we assume (A)

A1) These changes are simply necessary components of the evolving complexity of human relations (a positive assumption), or they are reflections of deeper more complex underlying entities or shadows, socio-psychological factors THAT DENY us something structurally connected- to say something akin to Marx’s species being. (A positive and negative assumption)

A2)Or is it our own curse for being the way we are, greedy, murderous-gluttons, who pillage third world countries and get off on fast-food. Any means to valued ends of survival (Wholly negative)

A3) Or is there a way to maintain the consistency of CEP, yet endeavour to move beyond it to something much more efficient to our ever-growing and ever-challenged ideologies of contemporaries times. Perhaps as a basis of SEP this can be had, and good times for all- I hope, or in till something better comes along

Structure gave me life, now ‘does it’ show me how to live?

If we accept that CEP’s are relatively autonomous or epiphenomenal then we accept the effects of structure on our agency. We can also assume our agency can effect structure, but we may declare this as rare. The question comes is there a ‘tipping point’, ‘singularity’, a ‘critical mass’ where the structural determinants (SEP’s) can’t hold the CEP,and agency overwhelms structure? If we come to look at SEP as products of our indoctrination and habitualization, then we become knowledgeable and responsible for our agency CEP towards changing the social structure SEP, for which we perform inyour

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: