Aristotle believed that we are all political animals, and politics is part of ethics.
Pericles advised in 360 BCE: “Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn’t mean that politics won’t take an interest in you.”
I might wonder about Aristotle, but I immediately warm to Pericles—the warning still rings true more than two thousand years later.
How it looks in 2014: Since writing the above, it has become impossible to avoid politics by maintaining a bare minimum interaction with government. Everyone's movements, private communications and personal data is being actively or potentially accessed by governments. This represents a new era in political life.
Having said that, I found «politics» somewhat mysterious. Why do I find politics distasteful. Why does it intrude into my life? Do I engage in politicking and, if so, why? These questions kick-off the inquiry.
The position taken here is that responsibility», «the good of society», «benefit for the populace» should surely be embedded in any understanding of the notion.is to society what is to a person: it deals in some way with what is good and right. Notions like «
I was surprised to find that I am not alone. There is a confusion that appears to surround the very notion of politics.
If you can bear it, consider this slightly modified extract from www.britannica.com (2009), a site that regards itself as authoritative:
“Broadly defined, a political system comprehends actual as well as prescribed forms of political behaviour, not only the legal organization of the «government» or «state», but also the reality of how the state functions. Still more broadly defined, the political system is seen as a set of «processes of interaction», a subsystem of the social system interacting with other subsystems, such as the economic system. This points to the importance of informal socio-political processes and emphasizes the study of political development.”
This is too turgid for my taste. I need to capture a meaning with some vitality. The term should not look like avoidance, generate resigned confusion, or evoke the feeling "leave me alone: I know it when I see it".
A proper conception ofshould immediately help us in handling ourselves, our groups and communities, and our governments. I would prefer that the taxonomic meaning resonates with political memoirs rather than with the abstractions of philosophy or political science.
After the biggest puzzle, what politics is about, there are a range of other questions to answer like:
I got activated to claritywhile observing the turmoil in Thailand from 2006-2008. Following a request there, I wrote a short note about democracy.
In developing TOP to enable a specification of THEE in software during 2008, I became aware that I had made an error in regard to the Spiral transformation of the Principal Typologies. When I corrected the error, a framework for jumped out at me from the . obviously flowed from —just as Aristotle had always said it did. He seemed to place above :
“Even if the end [i.e. human good] is the same for an individual and for a city-state, that of the city-state seems at any rate greater and more complete to attain and preserve. For although it is worthy to attain it for only an individual, it is nobler and more divine to do so for a nation or city-state” (Aristotle, EN I.2.1094b7-10).
is a subject that everyone knows something about, and that everyone should understand for their own benefit. Now, perhaps as never before, everyone (myself included) needs to appreciate what is going on amongst our political and financial elites.
Location of politics in the taxonomy architecture.
I previously experimented with itineraries that guided you through key ideas in the Satellite: either quickly or in more detail. If you would like to have or produce a guide, it could be reinstated. Contact us.
Originally posted: July 2009; Last updated: 26-Feb-2014