progressivism, individualism, and the public ... - Telmarc Group

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, INDIVIDUALISM, AND THE PUBLIC INTELLECTUAL "that you think printing influenced the course s the universities taught and the role of the university, altogether?” "No, sir, " said McLuhan, "it did not influence; printing determined both, indeed, printing determined henceforth what was going to be considered knowledge.” This concept later evolved into the medium being the message. In our context it is the fact that both Kuhn and McLuhan recognized, albeit in differing fields and in differing ways, that fundamental changes in technology and technique, call it paradigm or the medium, will change the world view, also the message. In fact the world view and its implementation in a governing architecture will also determine what henceforth is to be considered the law! That is applying McLuhan to this process, if we take the change in architecture to a change in the medium, then the message, the "law", is then morphed to what the underpinnings of the controlling group has of their world view. Thus, architecture is the combination of three parts; (i) the common elements, namely the entities which will comprise the structure we desire to build. This may be the electorate directly, each and every person, a selected in-group, property holders only, the exclusion of a selected out-group, such as women or slaves, (ii) the underlying effectors; these are the governing tools available to the group governing; (iii) the world view; the way the world works for those governing based upon a set of explicit or implicit paradigms, or examples, of what the world is like. We have a conceptualization of architecture as the amalgam of these three elements. We shall develop this construct more fully as we proceed. The concept of a world view is an overlying concept that goes to the heart of the arguments made in this paper. To better understand what it implies, we further examine several common views and analyze the implications of each. If we view our world as hierarchical, then the political structure may very well reflect that view. If we view our world as a conflict between good and bad, a Zorosateristic world, then we may establish bulwarks against the evil, namely a strong central government against the Trusts. The world view is what we bring to the table and around which we negotiate and try to establish terms for Governing. The very observations that we make about our environment and the needs of the users of that government which we put in place will be reflected against that view. As an external observer, we at best can deconstruct the view and using the abilities of the hermenutic observer, determine the intent of the builder of the networks 192 . 192 See Gadamer's interpretation as discussed by Winograd and Flores, pp 27-30. Also see the historical context of the hermenutic approach in the sciences as discussed by Greene in Depew and Weber, pp 9-10 Page 192
The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, INDIVIDUALISM, AND THE PUBLIC INTELLECTUAL Thus, architecture can be defined as the conceptual embodiment of a world view, using the commonly understood set of nonstructural elements, based upon the available set of technologies. For example, Gothic architecture was a reflection of the ultimate salvation in God in the afterlife, in a building having a roof, walls, floors, and windows, and made of stone and glass. Romantic architecture was, in contrast, a celebration of man, using the same elements, but some employing a few more building materials. The impact of the differences in world view are self evident in the embodiments of the architecture 193 . 7.1.2 Architectural Alternatives Is there a natural taxonomy for the set of network architecture alternatives? Do these present limitations on what can be done or are they extensive? Is there a natural limitation in the existing architectures that prevent the new technologies from introducing the new paradigms to the communications world? We address these issues in the context of several existing network hierarchies. We present them below: 1. Hierarchical: The current network architectures are structured in a hierarchical fashion. As we have already indicated, there are substantial historical reason for this political architecture. Indeed the classic structure of Rome and even through the Middle Ages has been a strong central Government, and in a strong sense this is Hobbesian. Specifically, we see the set of control and governance schemes connecting from a lower level to higher ones and back down. A political path may or may not go horizontally. It may go vertically, all controlled by a single control at the highest level. Hierarchical means a single point of political control. 2. Centralized: A centralized political architecture is similar to a hierarchical political system in that the control function is centralized focus but not a central person. The pure hierarchical structure is no longer present, but there is a single point of control and management but decision is shared. This is the form of government we have in the U.S. It is centralized but not hierarchical, at least most of the time. There are checks and balances. 3. Distributed: The distributed architecture has distributed control, distributed interconnection and flat transport alternatives. The network is much less dense and the switch is actually co-located with the interface. The local town meetings are typical of this. In a sense this is communitarian anarchy. Small communities 193 See the discussions on the impact of world view on architecture in Wolfe. In addition see the cultural or world view impact on the Gothic architectures in Jantzen and in Toy. Page 193
Page 1 and 2:
+++ The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM
Page 3 and 4:
The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, IN
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
The Telmarc Group Preface PROGRESSI
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
The Telmarc Group 4.1.3 Hobbes and
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
The Telmarc Group 4.5.2 The New Fre
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142: The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, IN
Page 147 and 148: The Telmarc Group Hofstadter contin
Page 191: The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, IN
Page 223: The Telmarc Group and the Progressi
show all

progressivism, individualism, and the public ... - Telmarc Group

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?