Forces
Back here I started talking about left and right, and I could never get anyone to grasp, for a moment, what I was talking about. I looked at “left” and “Right” as pure forces; nobody could comprehend what I was talking about and even Pascal would not divorce himself from his own prejudices about the terms ‘right” and “Left” for the purposes of the thought experiment.
So rather than confuse the issue (it was never confusing to me) I’m going to speak of two forces. I’ll call the first one “biff” for lack of a better name. The force “biff” is equal to reason. Period. No further discussion is required. The second force, I’ll call “”tazz”. Tazz is the absence of reason. I don’t want to discuss what anyone else thinks of the terms Biff and Tazz. For purposes of this discussion, “biff” equals “reason” and “Tazz” equals “the absense of reason”. It would be easier to call these forces “right” and “left” (for me) but “biff” and “tazz” will do.
The people of the left- liberals, communists, socialists, statists, are deeply imbued with ‘tazz”. They rely on “tazz” for their very ideology. But it does not mean they are utterly without “biff”. Likewise, the people on the right- capitalists, conservatives, etc. rely on “Biff” for their very ideology, but it certainly does not mean that “tazz” is absent from their lives.
I cannot believe the depth of discussion I have had trying to make that point. I hope it’s clear now. because it is completely not the point of the discussion I want to have.
The discussion I want to have is about force. At many periods during our history we have seen changes in the way the nation has turned, and we are witnessing one now. If, for instance, Barack Hussein Obama becomes our next elected president, it will be because the “tazz” force has become dominant. WHy is this? it’s a matter of differential pressure.
When the two forces, “biff” and “tazz” are in equilibrium there is no flow. But when there is a marked amount of “biff” in an area, it will flow to an area of “tazz” until equilibrium is regained.
This can be looked at as the desire of a people- like our fellow countrymen- to have change SO BADLY that the Biff is driven from their minds, leaving them full of tazz. And the tazz causes them to act in an unreasonable manner.
Now, again, no person is ever completely without either. SO what causes the Biff to disapear leaving tazz in it’s wake? well, the media, for one. The educational system, for another. The desire for immediate improvement without considering the long term consequences.
No well educated person knowledgeable in economics and social structiure can ever believe that “leftism” and the exces tazz it contains are good for the country- and in fact, it’s quite easy to make the case- as many have- that leftism is a mental disorder, which fits well with “tazz” being the lack of reason. I don’t believe that ther is a scale with reason on one side, and emotion on the other side, because I know some incredibly reasonable and well reaosned people who are quite emotional. No, I think it is more like this: In the absense of reason, people look to emotion, becuase they think it a good substitute for reason- anyone who’se ever been in love at 18 knows, the heart wants what it wants, nevermind the cost.
I posit this thought experiment because I think old Hari Seldon had a small grain of reality in his freakisly stupid science. THe idea that things can be predicted as Asimov describes, is, well, flatly asinine. But it can be studied- and the quantitative analysis of the forces I’ve called “Biff” and “Tazz” may be a way to do that. As I said, only a thought experiment, but one that intrigues me.
15 comments Og | Uncategorized
While the concept of predicting a Seldon Crisis in the future is obviously impossible, it is possible to look back into the past and label certain events as Seldon Crisises.
Unfortunately it looks like we are in the middle of one at the moment, and it’s about anybody’s guess which way it will go.
I think that the overwhelming desire for the “tazz”-infested among us to feel good about ourselves is the actual driving force behind all of this; not so much the unreasonable desire for change but to be able to pat ourselves on the back for doing something we think will be seen as impressive. After all, what sort of real change will electing a Real Black Person™ like Obama cause? Absolutely none of significance. The only thing that will happen is that Tazz-Americans will be even more insufferably smug than before, because now they will have done something “noble” in the eyes of the world. (This goes for “tazz”-poisoned Biff-Americans too — those of us who are “biff” aren’t immune to the urge to self-praise.) It will be amusing to see how long the world, whose tainted love the Tazzes so yearn for, is willing to put up with an (as the world will see it) even more insufferably smug and full-of-ourselves America. The entire country as Uriah Heep — I may overdose on popcorn.
I had another side-thought — isn’t Obama’s “black” heritage purely East African, via his Kenyan father? Where no American-bought slave came from, being instead East-African? So he’s not actually part of the legacy of suffering at the hands of white America as are the descendants of black American slaves? So what exactly are we proving by voting for him? That all Africans are alike to us?
“Biff and Tazz”: dude, I’ll have what you’re smokin’, but that some strong smoke, dude.
Dog, I’m just trying to use stupid words to divorce the concepts from preconceived notions.
Andrea, an interesting angle. I think you understand what I’m trying to say. Now I need to get a billion and a half more people to understand.
Charles, I enjoyed the HELL out of Hari Seldon- but I also understand it was a pure fiction. I think the idea, as I said, had a seed of a notion that we can use, and I am trying to determine a way to make it practical- or maybe at least measurable. In science, as in anything, you can’t understand anything until you can measure it well.
Charles;
I think the joke on Ol’ Ike was that — to the people living through them — all times look like a Seldon crisis. But, young and idealistic as Asimov was when he started Foundation, he appears to have been blind to that.
Og;
I suspect the reason for the pendulum swings in politics is that people are incapable of learning from the mistakes of others. They have to feel the pain for themselves in order to learn the lesson that a hot stove is — whatta concept! — hot.
So, when Morlocks take power from Eloi, they recapitulate the Eloi’s mistakes while in power. And the populace at large — made up of an odd admixture of Mor and El — sways in the winds of change, drawn after wills o’ the wisp we can only guess at.
Everybody’s political weltanschauung is several parts logic and several parts wishful thinking — the proportions not necessarily indicating the reasonableness of their propositions.
We on the right like to think reason rules us, but we have this ideal notion of individual liberty which has never existed in nature and say THAT is our desiderata. Is that any more logical than the belief that man is perfectible — if only we can find the right formula… the right compound of coercion and incentives?
I think so, but is it objectively provable independent of empirical experience? Q: How much data does it take to make a proof? A: An infinite amount will not. You can only say that, in the cases you have tested, this is so. That is not a proof, but an observation, no matter how all-encompassing it may seem to be.
M
Andrea;
Perhaps more interesting is why we accept the contention that Obama is black. He is, after all, biracial.
Why can’t he be said with equal validity to be white?
Considering the liberal mixture of DNA among Africans and Europeans in America both before and after Emancipation — and the practice of “passing” in the Jim Crow era — how can anybody be really sure he is one or the other?
Wouldn’t it be a more reasonable assumption to assume the absence of “purity” than its presence?
Of course, that might make tazzy people uncomfortable with their prejudices. Can’t have that, now can we?
M
[…] Another fellow blogger put an intriguing blog post on Forces […]
Og: I think a lot of people have problems accepting the fact that the Democrat and Republican parties aren’t the same thing as “left” and “right.” Also the idea that lefties can be conservative and righties pretty liberal knocks people for a loop. “Nooo—! It can’t be! Head… asplodes…”
By the way, I made a mistake in my previous comment — I meant to say “Where no American-bought slave came from, their ancestors being instead West-African?” (I also left out “their ancestors.”)
Everybody’s political weltanschauung is several parts logic and several parts wishful thinking — the proportions not necessarily indicating the reasonableness of their propositions.”
actually that’s very precisely wrong. if a persons stand is 62 pct logic its 62 pct reasonableness, which is my point.
My concern is that there are people who disagree with your point, Og. Your theory seems readily apparent to me. The ideas of socialism and communism and ‘imagine all the people…’ sound great. They appeal on an emotional level. We all would like to live in a world where there was no war, no hunger, no hate. Anyone who does not agree that those precepts are a great ideal is a sociopath. The fact the world is full of sociopaths is exactly why the ideas of socialism is mere pie in the sky.
We all want to have the best life possible. For us all to be equal means we move to the lowest common denominator — we all live in mud huts, not mansions. What moves the Tazzies is the thought that they can do it better than the ones who tried before. If I can explain myself coherently here, that is the problem. The Tazzies all believe they are smarter, better, more capable than the ones who tried before. The believe they are elite, and not subject to the common life they envision for the rest of us. The result is special roads and driving lanes for the Party Elite in Moscow. Besides the social and economical reason (The Biffer reasons), the whole leftist idea will not even work on a Tazz level. Greed, jealousy, and pride are basic human conditions.
The idea of the United States was so radical at its inception. Never had a society based on equality worked. Even the so-called Republic of Rome and the Democracy of Athens were dominated by a ruling class. Every successful nation/society until the American Revolution was a kingdom or oligarchy. We can observe that with the rise of America the trend has been towards government based upon equality and ddemocratic principles, with limited success. History has shown us men will readily follow a strong leader right back into Dictatorship. What makes Americans alone immune?
Og and Mark
I believe that we are actually in agreement.
The way that I define a Seldon Crisis is as a point in history where things would have unfolded very differently, depending on the way things went.
A Seldon Crisis is thus the prime material for the writing of alternate history.
I do think it just possible that back during the FDR administration, when Azimov started writing the series, and even up to the end of the Truman admin when he finished the original Triology, he just might possibly have believed that the Seldon sort of predictability could be applied to human events.
Remember that this was prior to the advent of chaos theory and understanding just how important the random is. Think “butterfly effect” as it was as yet unknown. This can be shown from the fact that even after the Triology’s time billion$ were spent on the impossible but parallel dream of long-range weather forcasting.
Yeah, that vote I punched in Hillary’s direction paid off last night.
Just to throw another wrench in the thought experiment:
I think you can see one big difference between tazzies and biffies.
The tazzies, for the most part, have been insulated from the harsher realities of life. For example, they’ve not had to face and overcome hunger or earning a living by and for themselves. They’ve had the necessities of life handed to them by parents or the government or by being some insulated profession.
The biffies have had an opposite experience or have had the wit to see that life’s undistorted consequences are best weathered via action informed by reason.
(when are you going to get email notification of additional comments?)
“The ideas of socialism and communism and ‘imagine all the people…’ sound great. They appeal on an emotional level. We all would like to live in a world where there was no war, no hunger, no hate.”
Socialism and Communism are based on envy. Where the capitalist sees a rich man, he says to himself: “Look at all the money that guy has! That’s cool. I’m going to strive to be that rich too.” But where a communist sees a rich man, he says to himself: “Look at all the money that guy has! That’s not fair! I’m going to strive for a world where he can’t be richer than me (and where I can get some of his money).” So much for a peaceful paradisaical brotherhood free of hunger, war, and hate.
I agree completely Andrea. You stated my case more eloquently, clearly, and concisely than I was able to.