ethics (ethical dynamics) ch. 3

November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 1

Socio-political Structures:


DomainsIndividualsInstitutionsSocieties

Socio-Political

Landscapes

Socio-political landscapes and ethical dynamics…

More open, shared and responsible ethical dynamics will aim to mutually:

Grow individual, institutional and societal domain contributions,

Grow the individual and the institution's influence - their

authority and power - on their various landscapes; and, Create ‘landscape’ opportunities for increasingly meaningful

and relevant realities.


Socio-political landscapes and ethical dynamics…

Towards those goals, we will examine how:

Ethics are dependent on the dynamics of authority and power, Authority and power dynamics may come to serve the goal of

more open, shared and responsible ethical dynamics; and,

Ethical tensions are the manifestation of our socio-political instincts for ‘our’ survival and growth on our many socio-political landscapes and, for the survival and growth of our landscapes themselves.


Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of ‘authority and power’ … ‘Background -1’

“Authority and power: the capacity to inspire and control other individuals and institutions.”

Authority - landscape legitimacy to decide what is ‘right’ e.g.,

the Church, the state and, parents… and, Power - ability to control the behavior or contribution of

others – individuals and institutions alike.


Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of ‘authority and power’ … ‘Background -2’

Socio-political landscapes, via the dynamics of ‘authority and power’, provide individuals, institutions and societies alike with the opportunity to participate in a world of synergy comprised of – as examples:

Our individual or institutional sense of vision and its embedded sense of beauty and meaning; and,

Our individual or institutional transcendental relationships –

those that take us outside of our selves (institutions included) - and which provide for us and our institutions the potential for a sense of ‘faith’ and, ultimately, ‘hope’.


Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of ‘authority and power’ … Background -3’

Authority and power are evolving phenomena dependent on:

The ability of authority and power dynamics to mediate landscape relevant realities on the basis of multiple as an example, institutionally driven domain contributions or, more simply,

Their ability to contribute to the landscape's effectiveness in bringing about valued landscape realities.


Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of ‘authority and power’ … Background -3’ (institutions)


DomainContributions

Institutions InstitutionsDomain

Contributions

Authority /Power

LandscapeRealities

Socio-PoliticalLandscapes

Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of ‘authority and power’ …

In summary, while ‘institutional’ domain contributions:

Participate in the creation of the landscape’s authority and power reality -

They are dependent on the landscape’s authority and power

reality for their legitimacy and for their landscape effectiveness.


Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of ‘authority and power’ … Ethical tensions

Institutions (individuals and societies) are dependent on the landscape’s authority and power reality - structure - for effectively coupling their domain contributions to other institutional… domain contributions towards the creation of relevant institutional / landscape realities.

Hence,

Ethical tensions have their origins in our human ‘social’ dynamics – in our individual, institutional, and societal competition for authority and power – e.g., whose vision will ‘carry the day’ and who controls the ‘money’?



At the outset, ethical tensions are driven by those forces that provide the basic energy for bringing about our world (from Chapter 1).



Ethical tensions are also driven by our core social potentialities – forces (Chapters 6, 7 & 8) e.g., by our different capacities, accountabilities and sense of destiny...


Social PotentialitiesEmpathy / Belonging

Capacity /Contribution

Connection / Synergy

Accountability / Destiny


‘Ethics’ - the arrows in the graphic - aim to create an ‘ethical’ synergy between these forces – creating the possibility (+ or -) for each to become more of ‘that’ which it is capable of becoming -.


CoreIndividual

Potentialities

CoreInstitutional

Potentialities

CoreSocietal

Potentialities


Societies help individuals and institutions to resolve ethical tensions - issues of authority and power – via (individuals and institutions do so also):

Their core ‘human’ potentialities, those that pull together individual and institutional contributions into relevant societal contributions via e.g., a shared societal identity and sense of hope and,

Their ethical structure i.e., hierarchy of core values usually

complemented by a framework of ethical principles and norms, and preferred relationship commitments and qualities.



Issues of authority and power and landscape ethics also result from institutional (individual or societal) interactions embodying and enacting the cognitive potentialities and characteristics of the institutions involved e.g.,

Institutions do not have similar social and historical realities or stories that make up their universe or ethos, or sense of beauty and,

Meta institutions e.g., church or state have cognitive characteristics – ideology … -, that impact on landscape authority and power and ethics affecting myriad institutional relationships.


Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of ‘authority and power’ … Ethical tensions -

In the world of individual and institutional cognitive potentialities -



Ethical tensions also stem from the landscape’s preferred hierarchy of institutions - some institutions have the authority and power to impose their own ethical framework and,

Institutional actions are contingent upon their landscape’s ‘historical’ authority and power structure and, its own ‘historical’ authority and power e.g.,

The importance of the Catholic Church in medieval Europe and of media and financial institutions in our world and their impact in shaping their society’s ethical framework.


Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of ‘authority and power’… Resulting challenges

A paradox -

Societies (or landscapes) have always sought via their institutional framework - hierarchy of institutions -, their authority and power structure -

To channel individual and institutional domain contributions towards valued societal realities -

Those that contribute to the growth of their core societal

potentialities e.g., societal identity and vision.



LandscapeInstitutionalFramework

LandscapeAuthority

/Power

LandscapeEthics

Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of ‘authority and power’… Resulting challenges…

Resolving the paradox – “tensions” – The ‘practical challenge’ –

Mutually growing the individual and the institution's influence – their authority and power – via ethical dynamics aimed at:

The growth and relevance of their core human and social potentialities e.g., for consciousness and sense of hope, and their cognitive potentialities e.g., ideology and knowledge,

Via domain contributions aimed at the creation of increasingly

relevant landscape or societal realities.


ethics (ethical dynamics) ch. 3

Government & Nonprofit

dynamics of authority

power dynamics

abraham chiasson

power background

ability of authority

power ability

landscapes effectiveness

various landscapes