7.8 Genetic factors and the evolution of society
K.E.Boulding (1978) has laid down his ideas on the evolution of society in a book called Ecodynamics. He discerns three groups of organisers of human society, "... which I have identified as the Threat system, the Integrative system, and the Exchange system. This is a recurring thread in the great drama of human life and history and I call it the "TIE" saga, for these relationships do indeed tie us together into organisational structures, thereby enormously increasing the capacity of the human race for making both material and personal artifacts." In summing up the three organisers we change the order TIE into ETI to correspond with the order in which we have discussed Plato's classes and Sheldon's temperaments.
Exchange: "You give something to me and I'll give something to you." It implies property, for you cannot exchange what is not yours.
Threat: "You do something I want or I'll do something you don't want." It has produced empires, states, armies.
Integrative structures: they contain an element of identity, which is closely bound up with community, family, religion, occupation, nation or political inclination.
"No human relation seems to exist that does not exhibit all three of these organizing relationships in various proportions. Each has pathologies of its own. The threat system may be the most inclined to pathology (violence, war, destruction), exchange systems can lead into unemployment, mal-distribution, and overemphasis on monetary values. Integrative systems can lead to tyrannies of conviction, unduly demanding parents, religious intolerance, persecution and xenophobia. Without integrative systems the threat system could never lead to organized warfare."
Rank and status can be based on either one of the three components: Wealth, Power, Holiness. K.E.Boulding mentions that for this group of genetic organisers of the human society "there is practically no parallel in biology." At first glance this remark is surprising, because the analogy with Sheldon's germ-layer based organisers fairly jumps to the mind:
endomorphs / viscerotonics (exchange - Wealth)
mesomorphs / somatotonics (threat - Power)
ectomorphs / cerebrotonics (integrative - Holiness)
But then, as I have mentioned before, the study of temperamental types is a neglected chapter in social science. When social scientists catch up, they'll probably say that they have recognised all along that evolution has distributed skills and intellectual potential unevenly over the members of the human race, in order that every individual can develop to the best of his own abilities and can find a place in society that suits him.
The germ-layer theory explains the biological motive that underlies diversity. The advantages for society of individual diversity may turn to a disadvantage for some individuals in whom specialisation is carried through too far. These individuals suffer from an unequal and unharmonious distribution of physical and temperamental features. The question to be asked then is: are they, by their special hereditary disposition, exposed to extra risks regarding their physical health and their mental stability? The answer is yes, specialisation comes at a cost. Inner harmony and social adjustment fall short when
the viscerotonic is too dependent on his environment, and becomes susceptible to cyclic mental depression and intemperate activation (cyclothymia)
the somatotonic entirely lacks rational and emotional reflection, and is inclined to violence
the cerebrotonic indulges too much in detachment, and withdraws into autism.
On the other hand a personality in which one of the three drive-sources is scarcely apparent will be at risk too. These individuals pay the price for the specialisation that, for humanity as a whole, is a positive asset. Fortunately however, society will assist the unbalanced individual, who can be valued as a person because of some outstanding quality, although generally deemed eccentric. Eccentricity is tolerated far more at the individual level than at the common cultural level of any human community. A severe imbalance of drive-sources can be particularly crippling, as may be deducted from the following examples.
when rationality and detachment (factor 3), combined with dominance (2), are not regulated by solidarity and love (1)
when collectivity (1) is forcefully inflicted (2) upon the group with exclusion of any form of detachment (3)
In a well functioning democracy the three sources should be equally balanced. Plato, although he failed to realise this in the politics of his day, at least expressed it in his teachings.
Final note
It strikes me that health care professionals, who confess to "holistic medicine", often turn to metaphors from antiquity. S.R.Savithri (J.Communication Disorders vol. 21, p 271) has reviewed Sanskrit literature and remarks that there are three Dosa's or life sustaining principles.
Pitta fuels the functions of food-digestion and metabolism,
Kapha resides in the bones and muscles and
Vata is the spirit of the senses, the nervous system, and handles verbal communication.
Issuing from the Chakra's (nodes of energy located in the trunk) the Dosa's exert their influence all through the organism.
I respect the intuition of the ancient thinkers and acknowledge that comprehensive models are relevant to diagnosis and therapy. At the same time I would strongly urge the advocates of age-old thoughts to go beyond ancient notions and to include in their thinking the comprehensive models of the present day. Sheldon's theory, even considering some methodological flaws, is well founded and has great merits. Here is the opportunity to reconsider the ancient metaphors and to give them a firm biological foundation. We plant our feet firmly on the earth, as opposed to floating around in a disconnected way: "Grounding" as it is called in therapy, is important as a strategy for survival, as a remedy for ruptured social structures, and as a foundation for scientific thinking.
7.9 Variety of values. A two-way hierarchy of moral judgment.