ISR/IST, Lisbon 16 June 2008

www.viriatosoromenho-marques.com 1

UNDERSTANDING THE ECOLOGY OF INSTITUTIONAL

LANDSCAPESThe Contribution of Political Philosophy

Viriato Soromenho-Marques(University of Lisbon and Lisbon Academy of

Sciences)ISR/IST, Lisbon16 June 2008


Table of Issues

I) Why do we care about artificial societies?II) What is the political realm of the “mortal

God”?III) Why are individuals and «factions» social

disrupting factors?IV) The Major Danger: How to Dwell on Earth?V) Is there a Political answer?VI) Final Words


1

Why do we care about artificial societies?


Why do we care about artificial Societies? (1)

The modern perception of social dynamics driven by design shifts: technology, political software, growing individual performances…

The growing feeling of an «ingenuity gap» (Th. Homer-Dixon), also pervasive to the core of political institutions.


Why do we care about artificial Societies? (2)

The belief in the «technological fix» ideology, or in its extreme form: «technological fatality» (the «principle of plenitude» against the «precautionary principle», see: Hermínio Martins).

The constellation of alternative artificial societies: from biopolitics (J.B.S. Haldane, 1923 and John Desmond Bernal, 1929) to transhumanism (Nick Bostrom et al.).


2

What is the political realm of the “mortal God”?.


Basic Semantics in Political Philosophy (1)

Three modalities to consider political phenomena:

Politics: The field of pluralistic experiences.

Policy: Trying to stabilize the long run horizon.

Polity: Framing a world for ourselves.


Basic Semantics in Political Philosophy (2)

Two major schools of thought in Western Tradition:

Looking societies as teleological driven experiments (key concepts: unity; efficacy in fulfilling ends; common good).

Looking societies as compacts (pluralism; abiding by rules; pursuit of happiness).


Three Polity Models (1)

Priorities in Hierarchical Polity Model

Administration (strongly bureaucratic)

Politics (centre<>periphery) Constitution >Extreme situation: Military Power



Priorities in Organic Polity Model Politics (clubs, like in 19th century

GB) Administration Constitution >Extreme situation: Tribal Society



Priorities in Covenant Polity Model

Constitution Politics Administration >Extreme situation: Anarchy


3

Why are individuals and «factions» social disrupting factors?


Individuals as a disrupting factor (1)“For there is no such finis ultimus,

utmost aim, nor summum bonum, greatest good, as is spoken of in the books of the old moral philosophers […] Felicity is a continual progress of the desire, from one object to another; the attaining of the former, being still but the way to the later […]


Individuals as a disrupting factor (2)

“[…]So that I the first place, I put for a general inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death”, Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (1651), cap. XI, 85-6.


Individuals as a disrupting factor (3)”É cosa veramente molto naturale e ordinaria

desidare di acquistare; e sempre, quando gli uomini lo fanno che possano, saranno laudati o non biasimati..”, Maquiavel, Il Principe (1513).

“La servitude volontaire” in Étinee de la Boétie (1530-1563).

Die ungesellige Geselligkeit, in Kant (1784).


Individuals as a disrupting factor (4) «Le danger de la liberté antique était

qu’attentifs uniquement à s’assurer le partage du pouvoir social les hommes ne fissent trop bon marché des droits et des jouissances individuelles.» (liberty to)

b) Le danger de la liberté moderne, c’est qu’absorbés dans la jouissance de notre indépendance privée, et dans la poursuite de nos intéréts particuliers, nous ne renoncions trop facilement à notre droit de partage dans le pouvoir politique. »( 616) (liberty from).


Sub-societies as a disrupting factor (1)“By a faction, I understand a number of

citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community”, Madison, Federalist Paper (1787) 10.


Sub-societies as a disrupting factor (2) Gender discrimination Social Classes Bureaucracies Vested Interests Economic Sectors avoiding innovation. Ethnic Groups with overwhelming

decision power.


Remedies against the two first disturbing factors (1)“Constitutions of civil government are not to

be framed upon a calculation of existing exigencies, but upon a combination of these with the probable exigencies of ages, according to the natural and tried course of human affairs […] There ought to be a CAPACITY to provide for future contingencies as they may happen”, Hamilton FP 10


Remedies against the two first disturbing factors (2) The Practical Reason Triangle: Ethics,

Law and Political wisdom. The «original position and the veil of

ignorance» (John Rawls, 1971) The “Promise” against

“unpredictability” and “pardon” against “irreversibility” (Hannah Arendt).


4

The Major Danger: How to Dwell on Earth?


How to dwell on Earth: the crucial disruption factor (1)“The moment we started natural processes of

our own – and splitting the atom is precisely such a man-made natural process – we not only incresead our power over nature (..) but for the first time have taken into the human world as such and obliterated the defensive boundaries between natural elements and the human artifice by which all previous civilizations were hedged in.” H. Arendt, The Concept of History, 60.


How to dwell on Earth: the crucial disruption factor (2)“To act into nature, to carry human

unpredictability into a realm where we are confronted with elemental forces which we shall perhaps never be able to control reliably, is dangerous enough. Even more dangerous would it be to ignore that for the first time in our history the human capacity for action has begun to dominate all others.” H. Arendt, op. cit., 62.


Are we able to avoid global collapse?In the path of John Stuart Mill…“(…) system failure will eventually

slow down and simplify things for us, whether we like or not.

(…) So confronting and changing our values, I’m convinced, will be our greatest challenge of all”, Thomas Homer-Dixon, “Ingenuity Theory: Can Humankind create a Sustainable Civilization?”, 2003


What’s new in the environmental global crisis?…exacerbated by the climate change Planetary dimension Irreversibility and entropy (massive

extinction) Cumulative acceleration Growing political and social unrest

(decline of classical State's power)


5

Is there a Political answer?


Between “Old” and “New” Values (1) Ideology of Progress. Scientific and technical Optimism. The Core Role Played by State structures

(the Ermitage metaphor). The Teleological (final oriented) conception

of historical process The War Analogy in the Reading of Political

Process (Feind-Freund political theory).


Between “Old” and “New” Values (2) Pluralism instead of Progress

ideology. Critical Reading of Science-

Technology. Suspicion about State's Power

& Performance Capabilities.


Between “Old” and “New” Values (3) Refusal of any 'end of history'

worldview (the 'show must go on'...). Political Process as integrating Co-

operation Behaviour aimed at common Survival.

New Emphasis on the Local Participatory Political Process and in the care for Local Cultural Roots.


Promoting new institutions for common survival and welfare (1) Promoting a Covenant Polity Model at

European and wider Scales (spill over dynamics).

Helping to Promote sustainable development by the rule of law at international cooperation

Contributing to Political and Institutional Improvement: a better Interface Administration<>Civil Society


Promoting new institutions for common survival and welfare (2) Enhancing societal Conditions for

sustainability: Capacity of Innovation and

Reform. Capacity of Long-run Planning. Capacity of “social burden-sharing”

in a “war-like” experience.


6

Final Words


Final Words (1)

“If I had to lay bets, my bet would be what everything is going to go to hell, but you know, what else have we got except hope?”

Richard Rorty, interviewed in the Believer, 29 June 2003.


Final Words (2)

“It is a mistake to look too far ahead. Only one link in the chain of destiny can be handled at a time.”

Winston Churchill

ISR/IST, Lisbon 16 June 2008

Documents

Transcript of ISR/IST, Lisbon 16 June 2008