• IuriiVovchenko
    17
    I'm finishing my second novel in which one of the main themes is whether control a good thing or not. If we take the extremes: full control like in the fascist or dictatorial regimes vs the complete absence of control like in libertarian or tribal utopias, then it is clear that the both extremes are sort of "bad".

    On the contrary if we take evolution that let all the living things to compete across generations and produce "better" generations in complete chaos maybe control is not necessary at all. Moreover control by definition means that one entity gets additional power over other entities, which feels "unfair".

    Now the main argument for control is of course ethics of it all. Only in controlled environment the "weak" can get fair treatment. Only in controlled societies the kindness can be achieved.

    What do philosophers tell us about control vs chaos?
  • Banno
    11.6k
    On the contrary if we take evolution that let all the living things to compete across generations and produce "better" generations in complete chaos maybe control is not necessary at all.IuriiVovchenko

    Evolution just happens - there are no "better" generations. Nor is it chaotic, in that there is a clear order to the process by which it occurs.

    Juxtaposing chaos and control looks muddled. Better to juxtapose Chaos with order; Control with relinquishment.
  • IuriiVovchenko
    17
    Evolution is chaotic in a sense that "individuals" in evolution freely compete against each other for survival and for the right to continue to live. This process is not controlled by a higher entity. This process is amoral from human's morality point of view as it lets the weak to die.
    I am not a major in philosophy and I would love some members on this forum to give me good references from well known philosophers that wrote on this topic. Thank you.
  • Outlander
    1.1k
    Noted philosophers? After my initial introduction (from my favorite book "Philosophy for Dummies", largely mentioning Plato, Socrates, etc.) I tended to avoid reading works of others, If I come up with something worthwhile and "oh wow that sounds like what so and so says", all I want to be able to say is "How curious, never read 'em."

    I wouldn't cast the die so quickly however, as far as the main argument for control being ethics. Do you think the inventor of the computer or Internet just "did it real fast" in between fighting off his fellow man and bashing them and getting bashed over the head? History tells us quite another tale. In fact, it would seem those who would stand steadfast by brute strength and domination over his fellow man when he can do so from his own might, if allowed to, would remain in primordial rags equipped with primordial weapons such as clubs and other blunt instruments. Whereas the thinker, who has no desire to dominate his fellow man but by output of his benevolent and sometimes innovative works that would help all mankind progress, and so would be dominated by such brutes without external intervention, clothes mankind is progress and prosperity. So I would ask you now, which of these is truly the weaker and pitiful amongst the two? By merely answering through the Internet, and on the computer, inventions that were forged by brain not brawn, the answer would appear to be quite clear.

    Of course, control can lead to perpetual chaos, the kind that could never be achieved without control or civility if you will, alone. Perhaps these inventions made to benefit mankind will instead by usurped by the same brute force and chaos they sought to prevent or make irrelevant, and result in the perpetual enslavement of mankind. Such as the scientific formula that spawned the nuclear bomb. How ironic. If not tragic. Though I suppose, if those who choose or perhaps must live this way wish to make their move, it's better they do so now than before the brilliant may create something of much greater potential and destructive magnitude. How curious life here on Earth is.
  • Banno
    11.6k
    Evolution is chaotic in a sense that "individuals" in evolution freely compete against each other for survival and for the right to continue to live.IuriiVovchenko

    Well, no. It's not exclusively about competition, as what you've said might seem to imply. Individuals can and do also cooperate.

    Talk of a "right" to live is nonsense.

    The process of evolution is not controlled, but it is ordered. The idea that evolution is "random" is a mutation that survives in creationist circles.
  • IuriiVovchenko
    17
    "Of course, control can lead to perpetual chaos, the kind that could never be achieved without control " It is interesting that you said that because it is one of the conclusions in my novel.
    It is a bit ironic you mention that computer was invented without any competition which is of course quite the opposite because the first functional computer - the Enigma machine was invented during World War 2 to decrypt Nazi communications, since Nazis invented their own machine encrypting messages.
  • Outlander
    1.1k
    It is a bit ironic you mention that computer was invented without any competitionIuriiVovchenko

    I didn't mean without controlled, civil competition, a far cry from the days of cavemen and all out war. Curious times those days were. Who's to say what their purpose was in human history and why God allowed such monsters to rise to power, all we know is to avoid such atrocities in the future. After all, "when evil sees itself, it shall die".
  • Jack Cummins
    2k

    One area of thinking which I see as relevant to your question is chaos theory. However, that involves randomness but with some underlying order, as well as feedback loops.

    Perhaps life and our lives involve order emerging from chaos. We have the order of physical laws and the whole process of creation is the emergence of order from the possibilities of random order. While there is a general background of chaos, essential order is required for the development of the physical body as well as the organisation of social life. Perhaps free will, and freedom, can be seen as feedback loops because it is at this leve that consciousness comes into the picture of subjects participating in the process of creating order.

    Another aspect to the consideration of chaos and order is that they are also constructs in our minds as well as, rather than just being aspects of the external world.
  • counterpunch
    1k
    Philosophy tells us that the two are not exclusively dichotomous. On a venn diagram - chaos and order intersect, and in the intersection there's government!
  • IuriiVovchenko
    17
    I just published the novel. Really wanted to give credits to famous philosophers but no one gave me good references on this forum. Here is the novel link if someone interested diving into the topic: https://www.amazon.com/World-War-3-1-3rd-ebook/dp/B0927ZPQ1K
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment