The world according to Spin
We can study a subject of interest from a narrow or broad point of view. The points of view affect considerably our ability to comprehend reality.
Our comprehension of a subject matter depends to a large extent upon our original assumptions. Our prism of observation is determined by our assumptions. To view reality is to establish a framework for comprehension. The frame work determines the horizon of our comprehension. Our view cannot extend beyond our initial assumptions and we cannot breach that frame work no more than we can jump out of our skins.
The assumptions we frame our subject with can be ontological, epistemological, and social. In matters of a social nature our social assumptions are most important. We live in a social structure of positions. We are not really a collection of individuals but we are sets of positions. A social position is defined by a distinct set of patterns in relation with other patterns and relationship. An engineer is associated with other technical people generally within a large corporate structure. These associations determine many aspects of that personas existence. The same applies to the nurse, the merchant or the factory laborer. These are not chaotic willy-nilly relationships but are highly structured and are the same for almost all individuals in like working conditions.
Because we all inhabit these general forms of structured relationships our forms of thought and our every day experiences fit within that association. Our categories of perception and thought are similar.
Since a narrow point of view is necessarily limited by assumptions, those within that structure are unaware of the limitations. There is an inherent tendency that, despite the narrowness of view, those within the structure claim universality and claim its view as absolute.
Spin-World is my tag for these sets of positions, which are forms of structured relationships. Some people call these ideologies; I like to call them Spin-Worlds because “the man on the street†shies away from talk about ideologies. Spin doctors are the apologists for each of these spin-worlds. We have spin doctors for each spin-world; spin-worlds such as Communism, Capitalism, Catholicism, Protestantism, Democrats, Republicans, Americans, etc. all have their apologists to praise their spin-world and to kick their opposing spin-world. Many of the members of each of these spin-worlds become mini-apologists.
A spin-world has a dual character. It has an empirical existence in the form of its group; it has a normative existence as its group relates to the rest of society. The inside members see ‘facts’ and the outside world sees ‘norms’ emitting from the group’s apologists. The group embraces mediating concepts of human nature and condition. From these perceived human nature and conditions the spin-world deduces appropriate moral recommendations.
Examples might be pro-choice versus pro-life, or cut-and-run versus stay-the-course-to-victory, or state owned property versus private owned property, also known as socialism versus capitalism, one might add Christianity versus Islam.
The members of one spin-world is biased toward that world and biased against a competing spin-world. Inhabitants of spin-worlds are impatient with diversity; they consider their ‘facts’ to be universal and natural while the competitor’s ‘errors’ are a mess. Members of a spin-world are critical of other spin-worlds but are seldom critical of their own world.
Each individual who continually lives in a particular spin-world becomes unable to perceive another world. Until members of each spin-world becomes critical of their respective worlds and thus transcend their limited view, they cannot become critical of their concept of reality and thus transcend the mess that society is in.
A critical self-consciousness is necessary if we have any chance of changing our society to better fit our nature.
Are you a critically self-conscious citizen who is prepared to help society to restructure itself?
