The content below comes from pages 3 and 4 of the pdf of this issue.
The SIPRI 2018 Year Book reviewed in this issue identifies in some regions and in some subject areas common factors behind murder, mayhem, terrorism, weapons of mass destruction and the like. Causes where common to an issue, such as drug trafficking in central and south America,
differ one from the other. In one example the authors, all specialists and/or experts in their own topic, say there is no identifiable common cause for what they report.
I hypothesize that, in fact, a metanalysis is possible. I am not saying singly or collectively the authors are wrong - that would be impertinent of me, and would be refutable immediately by the simple act of pointing to the footnotes, each relevant to the fact it nails into the texts of analysis and report. Rather I am asking readers to consider the concept of disaffection. I posit investigation of that concept explored and evaluated as an idea independent of its cause might be fruitful for the human race.
Let's say for the sake of argument that disaffection is not a synonym for clinical depression, bore-dom or exclusion from relationships because one has no legal tender for transactions and/or participation in society, misery because one is starving, anger because politics takes your country of nationality in a direction which was not your first choice, disempowerment because your freedom of speech is curtailed or disenfranchisement because you are the wrong gender or
religion or colour for the societal group in which you live.
Instead - for the sake if argument - let us take disaffection as a Universal and question its relation-ship to consciousness and intelligence. Might disaffection be an independent emergent property of consciousness and/or intelligence. Do non-human animals exhibit disaffection? If so how
could this independent possibly emergent property of consciousness and/or intelligence be defined - what attributes of disaffection would make the concept unique and sufficient unto itself?
The point being that if disaffection is a Universal then disentangling that Universal from those actions and analyses which masquerade as disaffection, but actually are not disaffection, could be a valuable exercise for the planet's future. Is disaffection age related, impacted by developmental biology etc...?
If there is such a stand-alone Universal then we might have a new prism through which to analyse and relate to and understand politics, international relations, war, peace, history, geography and both the humanities and science. I would be tempted to leave art out of this quest. Not out of disrespect for arts - be they poetry, contemporary or fine art, dance, music, recital or theatre. But because if disaffection exists I would posit it does not impact motivation or creativity.
Let me propose that a possible attribute of disaffection is a lack of emotional relationship or connectivity to the surrounding world. Such an attribute might exist unconsciously or subconsciously, even though the state of disaffection itself might turn out to be an emergent property of consciousness. Such disaffection would be experienced by an individual irrespective of time, place, status, wealth, educational level, psychological well being, gender, or emotional state, or biology. It would be known, consciously or not, irrespective of perfect neurochemistry or endocrinology. That is it would be an affective state having nothing to do with psychiatry or biology. For that to be possible consciousness as an emergent state would, I would suggest, need to be
separated from the number and complexity of neural connections.
Disaffection of this sort could be misinterpreted within or by an individual or group. It could seem to be unhappiness despite in reality being value neutral. If misinterpreted it could become a demotivator perpetuating an inequitable status quo and making the changeable seem immutable,
or suggest change would be a waste of time.
If disaffection is an attribute of this sort it could vary in degree and extent from one human being to another, or among non-human animals. It could be something neither epigenetic, nor genetic.
How would one recognise disaffection for itself as an inner, value-neutral State emergent from an individual's consciousness, and such that that State could be harnessed effectively, and not in a chaotic or disempowering manner; where the negative without cause impacts the time and place of another human being or other inhabitant of the Earth?
If there is such a metaphysic it really could provide another prism for behavioural analysis.
So, for the sake of argument I posit a value-neutral, stand-alone concept of disaffection, which is independent of biological nature other than as an emergent attribute of consciousness and intelligence. Did you notice the sneaky twist there? I further argue that if understood and harnessed respectfully and lawfully and consensually and independently of gender, politics, religion or - possibly - species then disaffection could be a Universal analytic tool for those who will prepare the 2020 SIPRI Yearbook.
What do the philosophers, social scientists, neuro ethologists and others think?
Design, metatags and SEO by Helen Gavaghan©
HTML and CSS Helen Gavaghan© All rights reserved.