EDITOR’S NOTE: This is an exerpt from the author’s book in Chinese on philosophy and social theories published in 2013. The book partially summarizes the results of the author’s decades-long exploration in the realm of ideology and is rich in ideas both old and new at the same time – new expositions in modern terminology of traditional Chinese thought as applied to social issues and ideologies of the world today. Any comment and criticism and any offer to help improve the English translation of the whole book will be welcome and appreciated. For a list of contents of the book with links to other translated parts, please see:

Where is the Mankind Heading for: Contests and realignments between ideologies in the new century: List of content

THE TEXT

II. Human Society: A dynamically-balanced multi-dimensional whole

Both human society and the human-perceived world, the former being an extremely tiny part of the latter, are dynamically- and comprehensively-balanced multi-dimensional wholes, which fact corresponds to the structure of human consciousness as a dynamically-balanced multi-aspect whole. Meanwhile, the multi-stage progression of the evolution of human consciousness structure, as mentioned before, results in the fuzziness of the “extension” and “intension” of the ever-changing human-perceived world and the human society, which latter is the focus of this book. Hence, this second part will start with the characteristics of human consciousness structure and go on to analyze the constitution of human society as a multi-level, multi-dimensional and dynamically-balanced whole.

II-1. Characteristics of the structure of human consciousness

The structure of human consciousness, as should be the same with that of other possible species of conscious agents, is quite limited in scope and function. To recognize this is very important to a correct understanding of the world and the human society, as already mentioned before.

II-1(1). Multiple and mutually complementary aspects of the human consciousness structure

Among the many aspects of human conciousness structure, the primary one is the division of labor with mutual complementarity between the different senses (vision, hearing, touch, smell and taste). Then there is the use of tools of observation (microscope, telescope, etc.), which is actually the extension of human sense organs and therefore should be considered as part of human consciousness structure.

Another dimension is the distinction in the way of thinking between “thinking in images” and “abstract thinking”, the former being based on direct observation and perception as typical of, but not limited to, artistic creation and perception while the latter on the use of concepts, language, other symbols and principles of logic, hence also called logical thinking, which goes beyond the limit of direct observation and perception and makes possible thinking about and apprehending macro-scale space-time as a whole as typical of academic speculation.

As a matter of fact, the two ways of thinking are often used simultaneously in daily life, supporting and complementing each other. Also, conclusions reached through logical thinking, i.e., the application of abstract principles, can be expressed in images, e.g., religious myths or secular fables; and in the other way round, literary and art works in images can be interpreted in abstract logical terms. Although the two ways of thinking are based biologically on the two divided halves of the brain in co-operation, their respective functional capability in a same person, or between different individuals (such as between the two sexes), even between different ethnic groups or between peoples with different cultural traditions are usually not even, that is, one being stronger than the other. For example, Western learning is generally more on the abstract side, whereas the Chinese, while not weak in using abstract terms, would more often than Westerners use some special group of symbols and imagery to exhibit some system of thought that is so grand and profound as to be beyond the understanding of the average person (such as what has been called “mysticism” by Westerners). This kind of symbolic imagery is obviously not the same as mathematical symbols or diagrams in their roles and significance in the thought process and still more distinguished from the images of human characters and non-human things in artistic creations. This special way of thinkng is perhaps worth further exploration and research.

In a word, the varying features of different aspects of the perception structure, whether of an individual, or of different individuals or social groups or cultural traditions, can complement one another so that, through mutual interaction and adjustment between the intersecting aspects, the perception structure of each individual, group, and the general mankind can reach a sort of balance and the results of their perception get closer to total truth.

II-1(2). Multi-stage progression of the whole consciousness structure: From exclusively direct observation through multi-dimensional comprehension

The development of human consciousness structure in progressing multiple stages results from its finiteness and evolutionality. Just imagine the humans of remote times before their evolution reached the stage of language use and conceptualization. At that time, their cognitive and communicative ability showed no essential difference from that of other animal species. They could only obtain visual images, sometimes accompanied by sounds, smells, tastes, or tactile sensations, of things in a very limited space within their eyesight. This is the primary stage or level of the perception structure.

Later on, people began to use languages and abstract concepts to describe and communicate about the directly perceived world within their eyesight or what they had perceived before but was not within their eyesight at the moment, to analyze and compare what they observed, and construct in their minds a common world on their shared vision so as to be better able to work and live together. Both description and communication depended on imagination, which, however, continued to depend on the use of sense organs, and in which process the visual images obtained on the primary level were still playing a role as a kind of reference, a role similar to a blueprint. The imagined images, though no longer directly observed, can, however, still be verified by direct observation. Meanwhile, all processes of abstrat reasoning, induction or deduction, through the use of a language are still dependent on the results of direct observation in the primary stage as the initial premise for cognition and, further, on the primary structure of human consciousness. Now, the three-in-one combination of sense organs, languaged-based concepts and primary images obtained by direct observation constitutes the second stage or level of human consciousness structure.

Still later, people started to use diverse types of observing instruments with increasing complexities, which were actually extensions of human sense organs. Then the results of perception would be in the form of abstract conclusions or imaginary visions, which were even more distant from and therefore more difficult to verify by direct obervations. The truthfulness of such conclusions or visions can only be verified or denied by abstract reasoning such as induction or deduction, or just remains unproved.

On the other hand, the instruments for extended observation, while constraining the way of extending human perception and the results of such perception, the design of such instruments is first of all and in the final analysis constrained by the primary consciousness structure of the humans themselves and by the results of their perception in the primary stage. At the same time, the big pictures of the world perceived on the primary and secondary levels (the latter already different from the former) before the use of extending instruments would again leave their marks in the third stage on what is perceived with the use of such instruments. Hence, the consciousness structure on this third level has become a conprehensive integration of many aspects functioning on three levels, which are: the various kinds of sense organs, both original and extended, plus the results of thinking in both images and abstract terms on all these levels. See the following chart for a summary of –

The structures and results of human consciousness on the first three levels

 
           It is not possible nor necessary to explore in detail all the stages/levels in the evolving process of human cinsciousness structure and its results, but by the way it might be worth mentioning that what are called ten- and even twenty-six-dimensional timespace might perhaps be regarded as the results of human cognition realized through the consiousness structure of a certain stage/level, which are still bearing marks of primary-level visual images such as “space” and ”dimension” but conceptualized through the use of language in the second stage. It shows the essential importance to human cognition of primary consciousness structure and primary-stage visual images. Besides the primary visual images related to the concepts of space and time, the law of causality in logical reasoning also originated from direct observations and bodily sensations in the primary stage, e.g., the appearance or diappearance of the sun (alternation between day and night) or its always changing distance from us humans on this planet through different seasons causing the different sensations of heat and cold. In a nutshell, all the consciousness structures and results of cognition beyond the primary level are ultimately based on the primary structure of human consciousness.

The analysis above about the evolution by stages/levels is also applicable to the consciousness structure for knowing about the society. Although the division between stages of its evolution may not be so clearcut and easy to articulate as that for the consciouness structure for knowing about the natural world, the two kinds of consciouness structure share the same basic features: both having their root in the direct observations and sensations of the five sense organs on the primary level and both evolving in stages and becoming ever more complex by levels. Or, if any difference, such features for social consciousness structure may be even more obvious.

First about tools for observing the society. Though relying less on physical instruments, knowing about the macro society depends more on the use of language and abstract concepts and requires a way of thinking somewhat different from that for understanding natural things. Besides, ever increasingly far-reaching tools for travel and communication, while not directly used for observing the society, are playing a significant role in promoting the by-stage progression of the social consciousness structure. The evolution of such tools stage by stage in their features and function (how far they can extend people’s “eyesight”) has brought about that of the consciousness structure both directly (while the scope of people’s geographical mobility and the geographycal distance between communicating humans are expanding by stages) and indirectly (with the by-stage expanding in geographical scope of all kinds of social economic, political and cultural organizations). For instance, the ratios between the different factors, i.e., direct observation, emotional affinity and logical reasoning, in the consciousness structures for viewing persons at different geographical (and racial) distances are different, such as for viewing the mayor of a city where one is residing, the head of one’s own nation, the head of a far-off foreign state, and the head of the UN. Generally speaking, the farther the viewed person from oneself, the less role is played by direct observation, intuition, perceptual and emotional factors, and the greater role by hearsay or by passively accepting reports and opinions from the media, truthful or not. Though the evolution by stages of social consciousness structure facilitated by ever progressing transport and communication tools and that of the consciousness strcuture for exploring the macro and micro natural worlds in timespace brought about by ever improving observation instruments are not toatlly the same, an understanding of the latter can make that of the former easier.

Now about the significance of the primary stage with direct observation and perception to the understanding of social affairs. It needs to be stressed here that the limitedness of the scope of the primary level is even more prominent. This is because the understanding of social matters is even more dependent on abstract concepts and involves more emotional than other factors. The difference or even conflict between people in social status and thus in interests causes different or conflicting emotions, and emotions can wittingly or unwittingly distort or mislead people’s understanding and use of language and cencepts. Only experiences involving vital interests in daily direct intercourse and communication between people within very limited distances can correct such distortions and misleadings; but such experiences can be obtained and accumulated only within grassroots-level or other small-scale social groupings such as families, business units, residential communities, and other kinds of organizations. Therefore, experiences based on direct observation and perception of people and things within such micro social groups are of primary importance to people’s ability of observing and understanding macro social personages and matters and of identifying distortions and misleadings in macro social media. (This topic will be further discussed later when dealing with the relation between democracy on the grassroots business unit level and that on the macro social level.)

To sum up, an awareness of the by-stage evolution of social consciousness structure with the improvement of conditions for cognition in term of expanding geographical scope can serve to caution people about the reliability of prevalent social theories and public opinion so as to be sure that they understand the society truthfully and act accordingly in social practice.

II-2. Multi-dimensional and multi-level structure of human society

II-2(1). The multi-level feature of human society in its multi-dimensional time-space

Like the three dimensions of the natural space, human society also has three dimensions: East-West (cultural circles), North-South (dominating vs. dominated nations since modern times), top-bottom (division into levels in many a sense). If we add the historical dimension, it would show the four-dimensional “time-space” of human society. Actually, there should be more than four dimensions, as each new “top-down” series of levels would make one new dimension, e.g., among the more directly perceivable, a) the whole human community – nations – local regions - grassroots business units/families - individuals, b) the top administrator - social elites/aristocrats - the commoners; or among the more abstract ones, c) the economic basis - political superstructure - cultural superstructure. Some more complex series may contain simpler ones in it, for instance, between the whole human community and nation-states, there are cultural circles, country blocs, supranational organizations of all kinds, etc. Between the state level of a nation and the grassroots units there may also be more than one regional levels. The different levels along one dimension may run parallel to one another but are not of equal rank in their relationship, or partially overlap. Different dimensions crisscross each other, but not necessarily to be imagined as at specific angles like the right angles between the three dimensions of the natural space. Each dimension actually represents one kind of social relations or series of such relations. And different perspectives of a society may lead to different ways of defining dimensions. So, the above is only one of the possible makeups to sketch the multi-dimensionality of the human society.

Now to discuss in some detail about the division into levels of the human world, which has a major influence on the understanding of social relationships in other dimensions but has been ignored by the currently prevalent atomistic, linear and flattened way of thinking.

First of all, the different levels of a series are not of equal rank but related to each other as part and whole (in a relative sense). For instance, among the three levels of A) human society, B) the earth’s biosphere and C) the uinverse, A is only a part of B and C, not on a par with them, still less their center. Thinking in the other way round would mean that humans have fallen in the trap of anthropocentrism and will get punished for it. At the same time, a part can mirror the whole: Not only the human society but the individual human body as well is like a “mini-universe mirroring the actual immense universe”. Both traditional Chinese social theory and medicine were built around frameworks of multiple levels being in simultaneously dividable and yet inseparable relationships.

Secondly, each and every level in such series has its own relatively independent subjectivity and at the same time joins with all other levels in the same series to constitute a whole (series) with its own subjectivity functioning on a still higher plane. Neither of the two aspects of each level’s “relatively independent subjectivity” and the wholeness of the entire series with its own subjectivity should be ignored. For instance, neither of the following two extremes should be allowed: either the over-assertion by a nation-state of its uniqueness and interests at the expense of the common interests of the whole human community, or the denial to a nation-state of its sovereignty under the pretext of upholding “universal values”, whether genuine or hypocritical, as a camouflage to cover up the expansion of one’s own interests. Likewise, both pitting democratic rights of lower-level entities against necessary concentration of power on a certain higher level and vice versa should be prevented. Here is an issue of how to adjust in a proper extent so as to realize a yin-yang balance. As to the issue of what extent is proper will be discussed later.