Full Circle-Chapter 4

Chapter IV

Framework of the Periodic Table
of Human Cultures

EDWARD HASKELL

PART I: ANTHROPO-SOCIO-HISTORICO-LINGUISTIC
BASES OF THE PERIODIC TABLE.

1. CULTURAL PERIODS, STRATA AND SUB-STRATA

The accumulated data of the bio-psycho-social sciences have the same two major aspects as those of the physical sciences. Namely, the quantitative, scalar aspect and the qualitative, directional aspect. In the second chapter's last part, we discussed the qualitative aspect, and mapped it into the framework of the Periodic coordinate system in Figure II-15. In this chapter we proceed to organize the quantitative, scalar aspect of the accumulated data-social, mental, and genetic--and to do so in terms of levels of organization as we did for abiotic and biotic systems in Chapters I and II.

Our paradigmatic example, Mendeleev's Periodic Table, seems superficially to be constructed in terms of increasing atomic weights or atomic numbers. What this means on the higher level of background theory, however, is increasing control-capability in the nucleus with corresponding increases in the organized complexity of the electron cloud, and of the atom, the system they jointly constitute. So also with the Periodic Table of Human Cultures.

FIGURE IV-1 The kingdom of human cultures: Periods and Strata.

Superficially, this table seems to consist of a growing hierarchy of tools, a growing food hierarchy, an increasing hierarchy of social Strata, of age-grades or Sub-strata within each Stratum, and a growing hierarchy of vocabularies.^l What this means fundamentally, however, is increasing control-capability in each social system's controller, its leading Minority, with corresponding increases of production capability in its work component. These increases are manifested in the number of social Strata which comprise each Period's Majority and Minority, and growth of the dimensions (extensive and intensive) of the vast ecosystem they jointly organize.

In 1869 Mendeleev did not know that protons exist nor, of course, that his classification is actually based on the chemical elements' proton numbers.² He based his Periodic table on those existing data which most closely approximate the atoms' proton numbers; namely, their atomic weights. We, similarly, do not know the psychogenetic structures which underlie our human Periodic Table.

What we know today is, that there are quantum-like discontinuities in our four hierarchies of data--tool, food, social, and linguistic--which occur together; that by postulating a hierarchy of psycho-genetic structures which accord with the principles of genetics, physiology, psychology and sociology, we can account for these data; and that by constructing our Periodic table in terms of this hypothesis, we obtain the same kind of organization of accumulated psycho-social data that Mendeleev obtained with the accumulated chemo-physical data of his time.

I predict that the postulated hierarchy of psycho-genetic human structures will be discovered empirically after our Periodic table's announcement in 1969, as were the atoms' nuclei and electron clouds, and their component particles, after the announcement of Mendeleev's table in 1869.

The two chains of interlocked braces on the left-hand side of Figure IV-1 represent the tool hierarchy and food hierarchy. The first Period's brace includes tools ranging from stone hand-axes to wooden boomerangs and spear-throwing sticks. And the foods are wild plants and wild animals, including insects. A few dogs help in hunting and in protection, and often also serve as food.^3,4 The society is a small band or horde, and consists of just one social Stratum, represented in the middle column. The work-component or Majority of the band is made up of the younger men and women, and the children; the controller or Minority is the council of old people; that is, people usually in their thirties. (Controller and work component are thus composed of Sub-Strata.) And there is just one vocabulary, in the sense which I will presently define.

This explanatory hypothesis is outlined in the psycho-genetic diagram, Figure IV-2. The first human Period is represented by a single characteristic number, as is the first Period in each of the other Periodic tables. The kingdom of man--which emerged from the natural empire of animal ecosystems, Major Period 6--is Major Stratum 7. Accordingly, its first Period has 1 Stratum and 1 Sub-stratum.

FIGURE IV-2 Phylogeny and ontogeny of human cultures.

Note well that the Sub-strata or ontogenetic stages shown here are human abstraction levels. They include--and, in fact, presuppose--the mental levels of the highest animal Periods. Human Period 1, for instance, is shown to have a single Sub-stratum; but that is in addition to all of the highest animals' Sub-strata. This basic and strategic truth is recognized by all the great religions, but was deplorably ignored by Charles Darwin and most biologists since Darwin. It is officially ignored by Dialectical Materialists, who base their claim to being "scientific" on this and similar aberrations of the one-field specialists. In practice, however, human abstraction ceilings are carefully observed and utilized by Dialectical Materialists, as shown in their strategically graded levels of communication: agitation, propaganda, officia1 theory (for intellectuals), and secret theory (for high Party leaders). It is by means of agitation, on the lowest level of human abstraction, that they incite what they call the masses against courageous, conscientious testers of intelligence. (See Chapters II and V.)

Turning back now to Figure IV-l, the second Period has two inter-locked braces: the lower one includes most first Period tools and foods, though usually somewhat modified; and the upper brace adds new ones: some seeds are planted and grown instead of just eaten; some small animals--such as pigs, sheep, fowls--are tended and bred. New kinds of equipment for this agriculture are represented by the upper brace. The society consists of a few nomadic villages, and two social Strata.

Genetic Basis of Human Straticatifion.

Turning again to Figure IV-2, our explanation of how this came about is this: The first Stratum consists of the unmutated descendants of Period 1 people--though somewhat modified by the new foods and technology. (Unmutated descent is symbolized by the solid leftward arrows.) The much smaller upper Stratum, however, consists of a few descendants who have undergone a complex of so-called pleiotropic mutations, producing the psycho-physiological capability of conceptualizing and executing the new and more complex relations which we call Lower Agriculture and Higher Hunting. It also produces the capability of helping the unmutated relatives and neighbors, the Majority, to participate in, rather than to sabotage, these slow, difhcult and often tedious operations. This new psycho-genetic set of capabilities is summed up and called (for now) a higher level of abstraction, though other factors are involved besides abstraction.¹

This second human abstraction level appears phenotypically by way of an additional ontogenetic stage, and is symptomatized by what Johnson O'Connor calls a higher vocabulary ceiling, presently to be described.⁵ (Mutated descent is symbolized in our figure by dotted rightward arrows.) Period 2 thus consists of two social Strata: the big, ancient, unmutated yet modified Majority, undergoing one human ontogenetic development-stage; and the small mutated Minority, undergoing two development stages. These are the two Sub-strata of Sub-stratum 2, and are labeled 1 and 2 respectively.

The postulated psycho-genetic process characterizing human evolution is now clear: both of the second Period's Strata produce unmutated descendants, represented by the two solid leftward arrows. Both of them also produce mutated descendants: the first Stratum goes on mutating some descendants with the capability of two human abstraction levels. These join the unmutated descendants of Stratum 2 by what is incorrectly called just social mobility, though it is genetico-social mobility: the capability is inborn or genetic; the opportunity of realizing this capability is social, political, and legal.

Meanwhile, the second Stratum is producing its own mutations, Stratum 3 shown by the dotted arrow. This literally new kind of people displays a third human abstraction capability, generated by way of an additional ontogenetic development stage or Sub-stratum.

This new Minority invents the techniques and tools and institutions of Period 3, the Middle Agriculturalists and Lower Pastoralists. It adds these to the traditional tools and techniques, and to the Majority who use them, modifying some and eliminating others in the process. (This mutated innovator is the kind of son who, according to the so-called Oedipus myths, has to kill his father or has to be killed by him.⁶ This psycho-genetic hypothesis makes such myths understandable, on other than sexual grounds.)

This is an extremely simple and straight-forward theory, as Figure IV-2 shows: Each human level of abstraction is characterized by the capacity to conceptualize, reflect upon and organize all preceding levels of thought and action. Abstraction levels are thus quantized, discontinuous jumps of capability. They are postulated to emerge by genetic mutation and to be transmitted genetically. Being genotypes, and thus potentials or capabilities, their phenotypic actualization occurs only in habitats whose highest vocabulary level and behavior level is equal to, or higher than, the genotype's (potential) abstraction ceiling.

Social Strata.

Each person's habitat is centered upon and controlled by his physical family or its cultural equivalent. This controller is surrounded by its friends and neighbors, who tend to display the same abstraction ceiling in their behavior and vocabulary. Collectively, this socio-cultural habitat is called a social Stratum or social class. This habitat displays the same abstraction ceiling as that of its unmutated descendant, the above person in question. Genetic mutations, however, are constantly occurring, as are variations in habitat properties.

The Basis of Social Mobility.

Since some increase and others lower the offspring's abstraction ceilings, these variations produce the usual more or less normal distribution of abilities, with various ranges of spread. The result is an overlapping of Stratum actualities such that the most able members of a given Stratum equal or exceed the average of the next higher Stratum, and that its least able members fall below the next lower Stratum's average. This overlapping results in genetic-social mobility, upward and downward.

It follows that when mobility is blocked long and effectively, it results in anomalous relations between controller and work component, and thus in breakdown or disintegration of the system. It also follows that when mobility is artificially generated, forcing large numbers of unmutated, actually low-potential minds into control positions, the society transmutes down to the corresponding Period.

Stated more simply, each person is a complex key and every social habitat a compound lock. For thousands of years mankind has matched its human locks and keys by the expensive, painful, inconclusive method of theory-less trial and error. The first part of this chapter departs from this method by putting in train the classification of locks and keys. Its second part, by Arthur Jensen, describes the ever more accurate and reliable diagnoses of peoples' inborn genotypic capabilities. To this must then be added the diagnosis of habitat capabilities for transforming the individuals' genetic potentials into phenotypic actualities. Together, these operations will become a technology second to none in importance. (In the section on mapping the web-of-mind, a method is developed for cheap and painless computer simulation of the mutual consequences of placing each of the various kinds of students in any of the various kinds of schools, extant and theoretical. No means and effort should be spared to develop this technology as fast as possible.)

Human Stratification and Periodicity, Figure IV-1, and their development, Figure IV-2, are here, I believe, accounted for in a manner consistent with the data and operations of all the sciences involved: with genetics, psychology, linguistics, history, anthropology, and sociology.⁹ Geometrized political science, briefly presented in the second Chapter which is strongly concerned with the qualitative, directional component of human cultures--accords with all these data and theories.¹ Its detailed presentation, however, like that of the present quantitative (not numerically, but geometrically quantitative) studies, display the same background structure as do the six lower Major Strata (natural kingdoms) and Major Periods (natural empires), conforming to what Heisenberg calls the central order.

The characteristic numbers in Figure IV-2 represent the cultural equivalents of biotic characteristic numbers, Figures II-14 and II-15: In the center position is humankind's kingdom or Major Stratum 7. Above it is the individual's or group's social class or Stratum number; that of its potential abstraction ceiling. At the bottom is their society's Period number, and at the left, the number of the individual's or group's actual, phenotypic abstraction level at the time in question; the number of its Sub-stratum or onto-genetic level.

Implicit in this abstraction hierarchy is the following exceedingly important fact: human beings are by definition unable to grasp abstraction levels higher than their own abstraction ceilings; unable to understand, often even to become aware of, and never to operate on levels of abstraction higher than their own abstraction ceilings. (Hence the loneliness, frustration, impotence, and sometimes martyrdom of great and good men and women throughout human history.) These characteristic numbers and some of their consequences appear below in the Periodic Table of Human Cultures and in our mappings of the web-of-mind.⁸

By postulating three more cumulative "repetitions" of this process, we obtain human Periods 4, 5, and 6 with the correct number of Strata and Sub-strata in each Period; the correct kinds of tools, foods, social positions, and vocabulary levels in each Stratum; the correct kinds and amounts of control; and the correct kinds and amounts of socio-genetic mobility among the Strata Skipping Periods 4 and 5 for lack of space, we come to our own Period 6, Lower Industrialists.

According to the most detailed study made thus far, the -volume Yankee City Series by W. Lloyd Warner and his associates,⁹ each of our Lower Industrial civilization's six Strata displays, among others, the following biological traits:

All these Strata are inter-fertile. Mankind thus constitutes a single species.

Human Strata, however, are highly endogamous. In Yankee City, during the period under study, 91% of all immediate families contained no person of any Stratum other than their own. (Just nine percent contained one or more persons of some other Stratum.) Such a degree of endogamy is characteristic of true sub-species. Each Period, after the first, thus constitutes an ^ecocline. This appears graphically in Figure IV-2 as increasing Period span.

The following data confirm this conclusion: longevity is directly correlated with Stratum number, and thus with the number of each Stratum's ontogenetic stages.⁹ The higher the Stratum, the more development stages it has to undergo, and the longer it has to live to do so. And it does so.

Reproduction, and thus population-size, is inversely correlated with Stratum number, as is the age of marriage, and thus with the greater speed of maturation.⁹ The older and lower the Stratum, the more it relies upon the older biological process of physical reproduction, and the faster it maturates physically.

Johnson O'Connor and his associates, moreover, have discovered and thoroughly verified the existence of five distinct vocabulary levels in American communities. "The rate of vocabulary acquisition describes a hyperbolic curve [Figure IV-3] and each level of functioning is a separate curve, limited by its own horizontal asymptote. Statistically, these curves are not broken. The individual is `locked-in' to the pattern begun when he was a child."⁵ There is, however, about as large a number of exceptions as mutation genetics would lead one to expect.

I predict that investigation will disclose a high correlation between these five vocabulary levels and the five lower socio-genetic Strata described by Warner and associates. This correlation is represented in Figure IV-1's upper right-hand corner by a series of interlocking braces. These indicate that the community displays a linguistic System-hierarchy; a linguacline. (This holds not just for Period 6 but for all human Periods except the first; but in ever lesser degrees.) This concept should greatly facilitate the very important study of linguistics, and be improved by it in turn.Since some increase and others lower the offspring's abstraction ceilings, these variations produce the usual more or less normal distribution of abilities, with various ranges of spread. The result is an overlapping of Stratum actualities such that the most able members of a given Stratum equal or exceed the average of the next higher Stratum, and that its least able members fall below the next lower Stratum's average. This overlapping results in genetic-social mobility, upward and downward.

All these Strata are inter-fertile. Mankind thus constitutes a single species.

FIGURE IV-3 Stratification of English Vocabularies in the United States. By courtesy of Johnson O'Connor.⁵

As the braces in Figure IV-1 imply, I further predict discovery of a vocabulary level in the position and shape indicated by the dotted line I have drawn into Figure IV-3. This level will be displayed by the highest socio-genetic Stratum in Period 6. I also predict that at least one still higher level will be discovered. And finally that the new words which characterize each higher vocabulary level will be found to lie one level of abstraction higher than the highest of the preceding vocabulary ceiling. It follows th~.t the communities of every human Period after the first will be found to constitute what I propose to call a linguacline; and that the human Periods' top Strata form one too.

Space limitation permits mention of just one more item in the enormous array of evidence supporting our assembly of these data. Each Stratum's number is directly correlated with the economic value of its locality or neighborhood; and that, with its desireability in the eyes of the community.⁹ The geographic distribution of the socio-genetic Strata thus constitutes a geocline.

Conclusions thus far

The Kingdom of Man is a single, inter-fertile species. This species displays six major psychogenetic Strata or sub-species, divided into at least twenty-one phenotypically distinct forms, a different set of forms for each Stratum in each of the 6 Periods in which it occurs. Each of these six Strata or sub-species is characterized by a series of ontogenetic stages or Sub-strata, numerically equal to the number of the Stratum in which they occur. Each Stratum is characterized by a genetically determined abstraction ceiling which no amount of training can exceed, but which is displayed phenotypically only through habitat-supplied training and education, at least equalling the abstraction ceiling in question. Each level of abstraction attained by an individual is expressed by the correct use of a distinctive vocabulary level and by the capacity to understand and control verbal behavior on all levels lower than its own.

The human psycho-genetic tree displays the distinctive form of a network or reticulum, Figure IV-2: the reason is that some descendents of older human sub-species regularly mutate into higher psycho-genetic sub-species. Such complete convergence happens rarely, if ever, in animals or plants. The reason is, of course, that we are discussing a single trait-complex, the one summed up under the heading levels of abstraction, but including levels of patience, tenacity, and the capacity to relate theory and practice to each other. Each Period's hierarchy of trait complexes is transmitted and altered genetically as a pleiotropic gene-complex. It is expressed phenotypically by a corresponding hierarchy of habitats (called social Strata), controlled by persons of an equal or higher psychogenetic organization. Mutations occur in all Strata and result in upward and downward social mobility.

Human Strata behave like, and have to be classed as, true, highly dynamic sub-species. Their enormous mutation rates disrupt rigid caste systems, shattering the control structures of societies that do not admit their ever-emerging natural aristocracies to control positions. On the other hand, societies which do accomodate their ever-renewed natural aristocracies transmute themselves into higher and higher human Periods, each displaying a higher controlling socio-genetic Stratum.

These genetico-bio-psycho-socio-econo-political data arrange themselves as the Periodic Table of Human Cultures, whose framework is shown in Figure IV-4.

FIGURE IV-4 The Periodic Table of Human Cultures.
CLICK ON IMAGE FOR ENLARGEMENT

This framework is obtained by orienting Man's psychogenetic tree (Figure IV-2) upward, so that the progression proceeds from bottom to top, as in the preceding tables, and adding the nine Groups in their traditional positions. These Groups represent the nine possible coactions between any given culture's controlling Minority and its much bigger Majority. Following Ethel Albert, each culture's principal coaction is called its dominant value-premise, the others being deviant. It is this dominant coaction between work-component and controller which determines the major properties of any system, whether abiotic, biotic or cultural.

Two basic conclusions follow: There has never been, there is not now, and there never will be, a classless society.11 And of all the possible coactions between psycho-genetic classes, the most creative and beneficent is the coaction displayed in Group IV: class cooperation, ( + , + ); the more the negative coactions occur, the more the culture disintegrates.

Since this Periodic table essentially restates what has been shown in Figures IV-1 through IV-3, further discussion of it does not seem necessary here. (See Appendix II at rear.) We turn therefore to a demonstration of its appicatlion in practical affairs.

Leibniz predicted (as already mentioned in Chapter II) that when his Universal Characteristic would be discovered then "If anyone were to disagree with me, I should say to him, `Sir, let us calculate.' And, by taking to pen and ink, we would settle the question".¹² This table--which is little more than a traditional arrangement of these data, mapped into the Periodic coordinate system--is clearly a model of his General Characteristic: my students have used the coordinate system in what were once unresolvable political polemics. And we have found that, by taking to the blackboard, we could settle them as predicted. We therefore envisage an ever widening movement from the barricades to the blackboards; from the multi-versity to the new and higher university, and from break-down of our Period 6 culture to its transmutation into Period 7, Higher Industrialist. To see whether we now know how to go about it, consider the following mapping of a web-of-mind.

2. WEBS-OF-MIND: THEIR MAPPING AND SIMULATION¹³

A small web-of-life was mapped in Figure II-14. We progress now to map part of the similar, but higher and more subtile web-of-mind.

The first step is to map famous and familiar territory: the cybernetic structure of a stable and growing human ecosystem, translating its traditional terms into Unified Science's general and orderable terms, and setting our course by what Heisenberg calls our compass: our relationship with the central order.

This order, abstracted from the whole System-hierarchy, is System-theoretic in nature. It is thus, as Northrop advocates, deductively formulated and operationally verifiable. The second step will then be to map a previously bewildering detail within the bigger map. Namely, the exploratory "voyages" being made by some American colleges and universities whose destinations, this map and compass predict, will prove disastrous. By such prediction--and by computer simulation which this mapping permits and which, if opportunity to do so were provided, would be faster and cheaper--we might prevent irreversible destruction.

The big map represents the territory described by three explorers whose discoveries supplement each other and coincide with the central order described in Chapter II. Arnold Toynbee's Study of History,⁷ Digby Baltzell's "Protestant Establishment--Aristocracy and Caste in America",¹⁵ and Lloyd Warner and associates Yankee City Series.⁹ Using the characteristic numbers set forth in the Periodic Table of Human Cultures, the following map outlines the cybernetic structure of human cultures.

Its principles are precisely the same as those displayed by the preceding members of the Systems-hierarchy. (That is why we say that the universe is deeply simple.) Yet their human manifestation has important new characteristics. (That's why we say that the universe is richly strange.)

The strategic principle of all cybernetic systems is that the structure of the controller must correspond to the structure of the work component on one hand, and to the system's environment, structure on the other, relating them to each other in such ways that the system survives.

Nobody, as a rule, disputes this statement. But when I point out the implication--to survive, its controlling Minority must see the world as a Systems-hierarchy and think in terms of Unified Science--someone usually retorts that no Minority in the world sees and thinks in these terms. This springs the trap: someone else then points out that this is true, and that consequently every industrial culture in the world is breaking down and disintegrating! If anyone objects, a few well known statistics clinch the point.

Would-be controllers and navigators are then ready to pay real attention to the new map. I admit that it is imperfect, but point out that with computer help it is perfectible. And what is the alternative? To go on muddling to the bitter end.^l6

This map represents the two main components of all lower Industrial nations, Period 6. It does so regardless of whether they are capitalist, socialist, communist, or fascist; and regardless whether they are Caucasoid, Mongoloid, or Negroid.

FIGURE IV-5 Work component and controller of human Cultures: Period 6, Lower Industrialists.

The center of this map represents this system's Minority or controller; its two outer parts represent the system's Majority or work component. According to the best data currently available (those in the Yankee City Series) the Minority is estimated to consist of the two highest Strata: Lower Upper and Upper Upper-about 3% of the population. The Internal Majority (on the left) is estimated to consist of the four lower Strata: Lower Lower (about 22%), Upper Lower (about 31%), Lower Middle (about 33%), and Upper Middle (about 10%). (This last is problematical: some of its members belong to the Minority.) The Majority (on the right) consists of human Periods 1 through 5; the highest of these, however, may contain six genotypic or potential Strata. For when their �lites are educated in Lower Industrial countries, some of them sometimes display what appear to be Stratum 6 phenotypes. They belong, however (as yet) to the controllers of countries with fewer than six Strata--intellectual, social, and material--as these are defined in Figure IV-l.

This situation might appear anomalous to one-field specialists. Unified Science seems, however, to make it comprehensible. The following semantic glossary should make it more so:

Toynbee's famous terms Minority and Majority are obviously here in use. When their coactions are predominantly negative, he distinguishes the two kinds of Majority as Internal Proletariat and External Proletariat. When their coactions with the Minority are positive, he still recognizes these categories, but calls the External Proletariat by relatively neutral names such as (for ancient Greece and Rome) Barbarians. Yet I think he would recognize and approve of the set I have called External Majority.¹⁷

Baltzell fully recognizes the Minority, which he calls the Establishment. He calls it Aristocracy when it is coacting positively, and Caste when coacting negatively with the Majority. He distinguishes both of the necessary kinds of cybernetic relations: the authoritative, which maintains the Minority's control; and the liberal-democratic which keeps open its communication with the Majority. Baltzell also recognizes the Majority. He constantly shows important distinctions between the Inner Majority (those belonging to the same race and nationality as the Minority) and the External Majority (those belonging to nationalities and races difl'erent from Minority's). Though he does not name the latter as a set, I am persuaded that he would probably agree to the validity of this recognition.^l8

Continuing, now, to discuss our map, Lloyd Warner recognized the leadership and control function of the two highest Strata of Yankee City; also, several work and followership functions of the first four Strata. He showed that the control and leadership function had been unequivocal one and two generations before the study was made, as Baltzell shows it to have been throughout the United States-not as clear as it had been under America's Founding Fathers, but still indisputable. Warner showed two different changes going on simultaneously: decline of control itself, and negativization of coaction between controller and work component.

Control itself had deteriorated at the time Yankee City was studied: the public philosophy, as Walter Lippmann defined it, had widely broken down.^l9 The Industrial Period was developing its own form of the old misery which Toynbee diagnosed in each of the disintegrating Literate civilizations and called schizm of the soul. (This condition can, as you will see, be corrected by the application of anthropology and Unified Science to Higher Industrial civilization, Period 7.²⁰

"We are," George L. Williams points out, "trying to live in a scientific culture and enjoy the material benefits which applied science has showered down among us, yet not trouble ourselves deeply enough to become familiar with even the general root material of science. Few of us really want to know anything even approaching the whole truth about the world. Our external environment is modern; our minds are still medieval. As Mr. [H. G.] Wells wrote: `Most of us prefer to float half-hidden even from ourselves, in a rich, warm, buoyant, juicy mass of familiar make-believe.'"²¹

Controlling Strata hide this schizm of the soul from themselves because its recognition puts creative leadership out of the question, and they don't want to know it. They try to hide it from the Majority by means of the second change disclosed by Warner's studys: they increase the social distance between them and the Majority. Thereby, however, they transform their aristocracy into caste, and change their coaction from creative leadership ( + , + ) into predation ( - , +). With this, the society's "rhythm of disintegration"⁷ gets under way. See Yankee City, Volume IV, The Strike.²²

The point is this: the breakdown of Yankee City's cybernetic structure--the decline of clear distinctions between work component and controller--is not a peculiarity of the United States, but a well known symptom of systemic breakdown generally. The basic and essential distinction between controller and work component had been clear under the nation's Founders;²³ its breakdown had been foreseen by de Tocqueville early in the l9th century;²⁴ and his prediction had reached a fairly advanced state of fulfilment when Warner and his associates studied Yankee City, and Baltzell studied America. I firmly believe Lloyd Warner would, if he were living, concur with this diagnosis.²⁵

As for the External Majority, Warner and Lunt discussed a part of it in their chapter on "The Ethnic Minorities of Yankee City".⁹ Moreover, the entire Volume V of the Series is devoted to this part of the External Majority.²⁶ Beyond this, however, Warner was a traditional anthropologist: he studied Period I peoples (Lower Hunters) and other sub-literate peoples in isolation from the Lower Industrial system, rather than as its External Majority. (He had to do this because these essential data were vanishing fast, and could never be retrieved, once they were gone!) He would though, I believe, have assented readily to this concept, which grows more obvious with each passing year.²⁷

Formulation of Effective University Social Structure.

When a complex mechanism has complexly deteriorated and broken down, the first thing the repair engineer needs to see is the blueprint of the system when it was new, and working correctly. For, as Abraham Lincoln said of the damaged social system whose controller he was trying to restore, "If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could better judge what to do, and how to do it." A breakdown can be made only relative to the condition of "normality." Figure IV-5 gives us this "base line" for Lower Industrial civilization, formulated deductively. Relative to this "blue print" of the normal Lower Industrial system, we can now map the structure of the "normal," "correctly" (cybernetically) working university.

The structure of the university's widespread current breakdown, actively engineered by social technologists who have misconstrued human kind's genetico-psycho-social structure, can then be understood much better. It is, of course, widely sensed without the benefit of maps. Sensing, however, is what the patient does. Curing is quite another thing: it begins with understanding of "where we are, and whither we are tending;" from there it sets its course.

The following map represents an ideal which administrations and trustees of top colleges in Britain, the United States and the U.S.S.R. have striven to approximate. When a complex mechanism has complexly deteriorated and broken down, the first thing the repair engineer needs to see is the blueprint of the system when it was new, and working correctly. For, as Abraham Lincoln said of the damaged social system whose controller he was trying to restore, "If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could better judge what to do, and how to do it." A breakdown can be made only relative to the condition of "normality." Figure IV-5 gives us this "base line" for Lower Industrial civilization, formulated deductively. Relative to this "blue print" of the normal Lower Industrial system, we can now map the structure of the "normal," "correctly" (cybernetically) working university.

The following map represents an ideal which administrations and trustees of top colleges in Britain, the United States and the U.S.S.R. have striven to approximate.

FIGURE IV-6 A web-of-mind: Academic institution for the transformation of top genotypic potentials into phenotypic actualities.

This university's objective is to train the highest possible proportion of the innately ablest young people for the most responsible positions, and to weld them into the efl'ectively operating (cybernetic) controller of the nation's, and thereby to some extent the world's destiny. All of its faculty therefore belong to the Lower Industrial civilization (Period 6 at the base of their characteristic number); they all have the highest inborn (genotypic) potential (6 at the top).

The main student body (85%) have the same Period and Stratum as the faculty. Only their ontogenetic development stages are different: Sub-strata 3 and 4. This faculty develops these students optimally; and these students' consequent creative performance--especially when they have become part of society's controlling structure--raises faculty success, increases this faculty's reputation and rewards. Their coaction is thus strongly symbiotic ( +, + ) .

About 10% of the student body (left-hand entry) has the inborn abstraction ceiling of Stratum 5. But it has outstanding capabilities in other respects--say in various forms of art, athletics, or leadership. The roughly 5% of the student body from sub-Literate and Literate societies (right-hand entry) resemble the 10% in psycho-genetic ways, but differ from, and can thus contribute to, all of the other students ethnically.

Under the guidance of the Minority faculty and main student body, the Majority's students, Internal and External are strongly benefitted by them and by each other; and they in turn strongly benefit the two Minority groups. This is indicated by the five coaction symbols between these representatives of the Majority and Minority. This will now be demonstrated.

Discussion.

This map represents just the nucleus of education, and only during a civilization's genesis; its ectropic phase. What it omits is the control relations which develop outside academe. The following are examples of such developments: American, English, and Soviet Russian.

The first two relations are illustrated by a dinner conversation I once had in Geneva, Switzerland, in the Thirties with two English officials of the International Labor Office. We had been telling each other how students in our countries spend their summer vacations. Their vacations, it appeared, consisted of trips on the European Continent, largely among Upper Middle and Upper class people and in their surroundings. Ours consisted, by contrast, in any kind of work we could get, bar none. (I, for example, had worked as mess boy on two freighters, counselor in a childrens' camp, farm hand, tray washer in an employees' cafeteria, mountain guide in a resort, spool winder in a textile plant, and as attendant in a U.S. Veterans' hospital, predominantly for mental patients.)

The Englishmen were very pleased. They declared these summer jobs the most important part of my and my friends' education. This, they said, is the best way students can come to understand working people; their lives, their problems. They condemned their own kind of vacations as sheer waste, and held that in the long run it endangers the State.

Why these American students' summer jobs are important appears in the following little map of our school of hard knocks, the so-called "real" world. (Actually, of course, the academic world is just as real.)

The students learn the Majority's languages, idioms, and ways of thinking; enormously important things that even top-notch college professors rarely know, and which they could not teach, even if they did. The students learn the meaning of grinding physical work, of physical working conditions, of occupational hazards, brutality, hopelessness as no books, films, or courses can teach them. The foremen and workers among, and under, whom these students labor spot them and educate their characters in ways that can't be read; that have to be experienced. How to talk, to respond, to be respectful to people who expertly control plants, animals, things.--The university must be academic in order to think clearly and disinterestedly, as George Pake points out in "Whither United States Universities?"¹⁴

FIGURE IV-7 A web-of-mind: Non-academic institution for the transformation of top genotypic potentials into phenotypic actualities. The "real" world: a school of hard knocks.

Its education must therefore be constantly brought "down from the gallery of spectators and analysts into the arena with the contenders." This education is essential training for the exacting, hard-nosed task of governing a country. Many of America's Founders combined the two kinds of education mapped in Figures IV-6 and IV-7. As a result, they ran the country in a cybernetically feasible way.²³ Few modern American students, on the other hand, now get either kind of education. As a result "there has developed in this country," as Walter Lipmann pointed out long ago, "a functional derangement of the relationship between the mass of the people and the government".¹⁹ This derangement will presently be specified and mapped.

But first, a report on the combination of these two complementary aspects of a Minority's education by the Soviet Government. This report was made in 1967 to the New York Chapter of the Society for General Research by a well known personage who had just returned from an extremely friendly visit to the U.S.S.R. The meeting was held at the New York Academy of Sciences under my chairmanship, and I paraphrase my notes.

There are in the U.S.S.R. certain unpublicized schools whose object it is to train the country's most responsible future leaders and controllers. The most outstanding children are sought out by means of the best available tests and observations. (The youngest ones enter the school when about eighteen months old.) Absolutely no expense or effort is spared.

At first the ratio of children to teachers is 1:1; later it becomes 2:1 and higher. Every effort is made to assemble the kind of faculty and students mapped in the center of Figure IV-6. As these students grow older, individuals are sent periodically to work in carefully chosen factories, collective farms, research centers, army units, and so forth. This gives them the training mapped in Figure IV-7. (Soviet administrators refer to these superlative institutions--half jokingly, of course--as their schools for "philosopher kings.") From time to time individual students take courses in various gymnasia and universities open to all who pass public examinations. This serves to give the future leaders connections in, and understanding of such institutions.

This is as far as I paraphrase my notes. It should, however, be pointed out parenthetically that these students' sporadic attendance at public institutions also serves the important function of veiling their strategic schools' existence. This veiling is not arbitrary: the Majority people--as Figures IV-2, IV-3, and IV-4 indicate--having lower abstraction ceilings, are more or less aphasic and agnosic to the Minority's highest and most important levels of abstraction. They do not clearly understand the culture's need for such exclusive schools. So, if they knew of these schools' existence, they would demand open admission to them, breaking them down to the Majority's lower ceilings, as diagrammed below. This would, in time, bring to the Soviet Union what Lippmann calls the "functional derangement between the mass of the people [Majority] and the government [Minority] ."

To prevent this, and yet maintain such special schooling openly, the authorities would be obliged to explain and massively advocate the cybernetically efFective relation between Majority and Minority. But this would seriously hamper their currently successful disorganization of education abroad, not to mention openly contradicting their promise of "classless" society some day in the Soviet Union. Both of these unacceptable alternatives have been avoided by keeping secret the existence of Soviet schools for Philosopher Kings.

How, then, could the public disclosure of them in the present book be countered? Two ways present themselves: these schools' existence could be denied, and this description be denounced as fabrication. That would however be quite useless since, as the authorities know, this disclosure can be backed by much more detailed evidence, including first hand accounts.

The other alternative would be to present these extraordinary institutions as a great Soviet achievement, and as an advance toward the endlessly promised "classless" society.

How could this claim be supported?--By showing, with detailed evidence, that the students are not drawn exclusively from the "New Class," the Soviet Minority (the controlling part of its hierarchy), but that they come from the entire population and are chosen on the basis of fair and objective tests of ability and character.

Whether this is in fact the case could, of course, be established only by an investigation of the Stratum position of every student and alumnus, and by analysis of the Soviet tests. (The shoe would then be on the other foot, putting Dr. Jensen's critics in a position which would help separate demagogic agitators from serious and fearless scientists.)

To clarify the issue, 1et us make the improbable assumption that the Soviet authorities made this second claim and that, with their full cooperation, it was demonstrated by outside investigators to be accurate. The first conclusion would then be that the Soviet Union is moving toward realization of Thomas Jefferson's model of government: government by what he called the natural aristocracy. "I agree", he wrote to John Adams, "that there is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents . . . The natural aristocracy I consider as the most precious gift of nature for the instruction, the trusts, and the government of society."²⁸ (If Communists were now to claim that by ^{classless society} they mean government by the natural aristocracy we would, by taking to pen and ink, have started to settle the question.)

The second conclusion would be the one predicted by Unified Science: The fairest and most objective tests will show virtue to be quite evenly distributed among all social Strata. But they will show a great skewing of talent-distribution, where talent is predominantly identified with abstraction ceilings. (This skewing occurs both empirically and ex hypothesi: in Unified Science the distribution of social Strata is based upon the distribution of abstraction ceilings, as shown in Figures IV-2 and IV-4.)

The third conclusion follows inexorably: the use of fair and objective tests results in a vast preponderance of high Stratum (Minority) students in those schools and universities which are designed to train young people for "the government of society." It is therefore natural that the Stratum representation in such schools should approximate the ones shown in Figures IV-6 and IV-7, beginning to settle that question too.²⁹

The Opposite Derangements of Government.

Our model of Leibniz's Universal Characteristic can now be applied to rational settlement of the major reciprocal political questions of our century: the breakdown of working democracies, on one hand by egalitarian democracy, and on the other hand by dictatorial autocracy. Walter Lippmann has analysed what has been happening quite effectively; that is to say, cybernetically. A few short excerpts from his famous book, with the appropriate interpolations, will complete the large and dynamic map of Industrial civilization outlined above. The consequences of open (blind) university admission policy on one hand and of the development of well matched key-lock colleges, universities, trade-schools etc. on the other hand will then become much clearer than before, making prediction possible. We will conclude by verifying our prediction in terms of a concrete case: New York's City College.

"The more I have brooded upon the events which I have lived through myself," Lippmann wrote in 1955, "the more astounding and significant does it seem that the decline of power and influence and self confidence of Western democracies has been so steep and so sudden. [It has been steeper yet in the years since he wrote this presage.] We have fallen far in a short space of time... What we have seen is not only decay--though much of the old structure was dissolving--but something which can be called an historic catastrophe."^19,30 p.15.

And what is this catastrophe? "In the effort to understand the malady of democratic government," Lippmann replies some forty pages later on, "I have dwelt upon the underlying duality of functions: governing, that is, the administration of the laws [which cyberneticians call control] and representing the living persons who are governed, who must pay, who must work and, it may be, die for the acts of the government (which we call feedback to the controller from the output of the work component]. I attribute the democratic disaster of the twentieth century to the derangement of these primary (cybernetic] functions.

"The power of the executive [the controller) has been enfeebled, often to the verge of impotence, by the pressures of the representative assembly and of mass opinions [the work component). This derangement of the governing power has forced the democratic states to commit disastrous and, it could be, fatal mistakes. It has also transformed the assemblies in most, perhaps not in all, democratic states from defenders of local and personal rights (of the two components) into boss-ridden oligarchies [lower level, predatory controllers], threatening the security, the solvency, and the liberties of the state [the social system as a whole]."¹⁹ pp. 54-55.

Lippmann now states the systems-theoretic meaning of democratic constitutions: "In the traditions of Western society, civilized government is founded on the assumption that the two powers [controller and work component] exercising the two [cybernetic] functions will be in balance-that they will check, restrain, compensate; complement, inform and vitalize each other."

His diagnosis, stated in the same non-scientific language is, that "In this century, the balance of the two powers has been seriously upset. Two great streams of evolution have converged upon the modern democracies to devitalize, to enfeeble, and to eviscerate the executive [control] power."

There is another stream which Lippmann discusses later on, but which precedes and underlies the ones he describes here: the stream of specializations which has eroded the West's awareness of the cybernetic nature and operation of their psycho-political systems, making its statesmen and political scientists helpless to understand the catastrophe, and prone to increase it by their very efforts at correction.

"One [great stream]," Lippmann continues, "is the enormous expansion of public expenditure, chiefly for war and reconstruction; this has augmented the power of the assemblies [representing the work component] which vote the appropriations on which the executive depends. The other development which has acted to enfeeble the executive power [controller] is the growing incapacity of the large majority of the democratic peoples to believe in intangible realities. This has stripped the government of that imponderable authority which is derived from traditional, immemorial usage, consecration, veneration, prescription, prestige, heredity, hierarchy."¹⁹ pp. 54-56.

The plight of the governments of what was once the Creative Center (Figure II-16b) is herewith affirmed to consist significantly in the disorganization of the controller (the executive branch), and the unorganized, chaotic over-growth of the work component (the electorate and its representatives). Exactly the converse, Lippmann affirms, is the defect of the totalitarian ideologists: the governments of Extreme Left and Extreme Right, mapped in the same Figure.

"In the reaction against the practical failure of the democratic states," he goes on, "we find always that the electoral process is shut down . . . and that the executive function is taken over--more often than not with popular assent--by men with a special training and a special personal commitment to the business of ruling the state. In the enfeebled democracies the politicians have with rare exceptions been men without sure tenure of office. Many of the most important are novices, improvisers, and amateurs. After a counter-revolution has brought them down, their successors are almost certain to be the elite of the new revolutionary party, or an elite drawn from predemocratic institutions like the army, the church, and the bureaucracy. . . The post-democratic rulers are men set apart from the masses of the people. They are not set apart only because they have [and use] the power to arrest others and to shoot them. They would not long hold on to that kind of power [by itselfJ. They have also an aura of majesty, which causes them to be obeyed. That aura emanates from the popular belief [and often the fact] that they have subjected themselves to a code and are under a discipline by which they are dedicated to [and seem able to achieve] ends that transcend their personal desires and their own private lives" pp.59-60.¹⁹

These insights, being correct, permit us to complete and sharpen Lippmann's diagnosis: the breakdown of the democracies--their executives' loss of self confidence, authority and power, and their electorates' loss of equally important power to believe in and follow the executives--is due to the break-up of what Lippman calls the public philosophy, and what poets more powerfully call the Circle.

"The Circle of Perfection," says Marjorie Nicholson, "from which men had long deduced their metaphysics, ethics and aesthetics, was broken during the seventeenth century. `Correspondence' between macrocosm (the universe] and microcosm [the human mind], which man had accepted as basic to faith, was no longer valid in [his incorrect and unintegrated picture of] a new mechanical universe and mechanical world."³¹

The unity of mind and feeling, the Circle of Perfection created by medieval mystics and scholastics, was shattered by the apostle of empiricism, Francis Bacon, and the parts were dispersed by his fellow empiricists, each of whose strong but little knowledge became ever more clearly a deadly dangerous thing.

"To Bacon [and to empirical one-field specialists ever since]," Nicholson goes on, "the Circle of Perfection was no more than a `fiction', and the tendency of man to find it everywhere on earth and in the heavens one more indication of the dangerous haziness of thinking he called an `Idol of the Tribe': `The human understanding', he said, `is of its own nature prone to suppose the existence of more order and regularity in the world than it finds'".³¹ Thus, being human, Bacon displayed and worshiped the idol of his own new Tribe: the tribe of empirical one-field scientists who, by their nature, see individual parts of the universe, but not their structural correspondence and assembly.

Sir Francis Bacon and his disciples were correct in shattering the spurious seventeenth century Circle, for many of the parts comprising that assembly of knowledge have proved demonstrably wrong. The scientists were also correct in patiently and tenaciously discovering the future Circle's empirically valid component parts, one by one, in spite of the deadly, excruciating irrelevance and meaninglessness of the resulting storehouse of unassembled parts, the multiversity.

In overcoming the dangerous medieval haziness of thinking--in carrying out the 18th century's response to that challenge, fatuously called the Enlightenment--these scientists created the twentieth century's far more dangerous challenge: our deep Ensombrement, which Lippmann calls The Eclipse of the Public Philosophy¹⁹ (Chapter VIII). This was not due to viciousness or stupidity, but to the structure of evolution, inherent in the Systems-hierarchy, which poets have called the darkness before the dawn.³²

As late as the eighteenth century, men held what Lippmann calls the doctrine of natural law: the certainty that there is law "above the ruler and the sovereign people . . . above the whole community of mortals."³³ But in the twentieth century's Ensombrement there is "a plurality of incompatible faiths"³⁴ and multitudes of agnostic, existentialistic and nihilistic people. And far worse yet, there are millions of ideologists in the totalitarian countries and infiltrated throughout the egalitarian democratic states for whom strong Circles of Perfection had been closed prematurely, and incorrectly, back in the 19th century: namely, Marxists and fascists.

Because of this profound Ensombrement, Lippmann points out,

The democracies of the West became the first great society to treat as a private concern the formative beliefs that shape the character of its citizens.
This has brought a radical change in the meaning of freedom. Originally it was founded on the postulate that there was a universal order on which all reasonable men were agreed: within that agreement of the fundamentals and on the ultimates, it was safe to permit, and it would be desireable to encourage, dissent and dispute. But with the disappearance of the public philosophy and of a consensus on the first and last things--there was opened up a great vacuum in the public mind, yawning to be filled.¹⁹ p. 100.

One thing that can help fill this vacuum is the late twentieth century's Circle of Perfectibility: Unified Science.³⁵ The one-field sciences have now come full circle: their assembly consists of these powerful sciences and technologies; it displays the positive value bias of the most deeply sensed religions; and it corrects the Marxist misinterpretation of history and the fascists' and liberals' opposite misinterpretations of genetics and education.

The parts of Unified Science are mutually illuminating, reciprocally correcting, and Circle expanding. Among these parts is the microcosm: the mentalities of all the human Periods and Strata, from naked Hunters and Gatherers in dry Australian deserts to space-suited, computer-guided astronauts on the airless moon. Unified Science conveys to each of these microcosms, and internalizes within it, the macrocosm's verifiable and compelling natural and moral law.³⁴

In the light of this Full Circle, the above-mapped 19th century American and 20th century Soviet webs-of-mind gain meaning and permit prediction. For in both of these cultures the distinction between controller and work component, Minority and Majority, is clear, and their ordination is cybernetically correct. Each of these systems had, or has, a public philosophy at the time in question which accords with the central order in regard to the superordination of controller over work component. Unified Science permits us to formulate the problem of open and selective admissions and to predict the outcomes of these alternative solutions as follows:

Equalization of Opportunity in Our Stratified Population.

All civilizations equalize the education opportunities they provide for their various age-grades or Sub-strata, from infancy to maturity, by corresponding gradings of the subject matter taught. Equality of opportunity for unequal age-groups is approached by careful provision of a corresponding inequality of educational habitats.

So also in regard to their various psycho-social Strata: equality of opportunity for people with unequal inborn abstraction ceilings is approached by careful provision of corresponding training situations. During the first few years (preceding and up to the attainment of the first human abstraction ceiling) a single institution, Kindergarten, and the first few grades, provides equality of opportunity for all Strata.³⁶ Figure IV-3 shows graphically humankind's initial state of intellectual identity (zero), and its divergence into Strata during ontogeny. As the childrens' creodes separate--as Stratum after Stratum approaches its abstraction ceiling, levels out, and is surpassed by the people with higher inborn abstraction ceilings--each Stratum enters the corresponding set of educational institutions. Namely, the kind of institution designed to provide for it the opportunity to realize its inborn capacities to the fullest degree: apprenticeships, craft schools, trade schools, secretarial schools, high schools, preparatory schools, (European) gymnasia, junior colleges, colleges, institutes of technology, graduate schools, post-doctoral training courses, institutes for advanced study, and so forth.

In Figure IV-2, Period 6 (Lower Industrialists) displays six Strata, each characterized by the corresponding number of Substrata. The highest Sub-stratum in each case (including the first one) is reached by, and only by, utilizing opportunities for continuous, persistent development of inborn capabilities.

Exceptions occur for reasons well known to geneticists, and are often important. Child prodigies appear from time to time, for whom equality of opportunity requires skipping one age-graded school class after another; for instance, Norbert Wiener.³⁷ Stratum prodigies occur, for whom equality of opportunity requires the by-passing of one school-type after another; John Stewart Mill.³⁸ Period prodigies occur, for whom equality of opportunity requires travelling to an Industrial country and studying in its higher schools; for instance, Yomo Kenyatta.³⁹ (These latter two kinds of exception comprise the two Majority groups mapped in Figure IV-6.)

Downward exceptions also occur, especially in the highest and most recently entered Strata. (Geneticists recognize them as "regressions toward the mean."⁴⁰) But downward exceptions occur in all Strata. (Of late those who display them have been euphemistically called "retarded.") For them, equality of opportunity requires repetition of school classes, top Stratum children's apprenticeship in trade or craft schools, and emigration to less developed regions or countries.

Since respectable institutional channels for these adjustments are inadequate or absent, considerable numbers of young people, called Hippies, are improvising equality of opportunity by "dropping out" in all three of these ways. Many emigrate to rural parts of New Mexico, Arizona and similar regions and try unsuccessfully to simulate pre-Industrial life styles.

The term dropping out, however, is also used to denote the opposite non-institutional adjustment. Where formal institutions have broken down and deteriorated--whether actually or apparently--some among their employees who recognize this fact refuse to deteriorate with them, and "drop out," sometimes at great financial sacrifice.--See for example, "Dropping Out in Manhattan" by Colette Dowling.⁴²

This kind of withdrawal has been going on for millennia. The most significant personalities in history, as Arnold Toynbee shows abundantly, have withdrawn ("dropped out") and then, having integrated their minds and personalities, returned and either halted their cultures' downward retreats or contributed to their eventual upward transmutation into higher Periods.⁴³

One of the most important weapons for changing this rout into an advance is a battery of tests for accurately diagnosing each individual's genetic capabilities (keys) and matching them with the corresponding educational and professional habitats (locks) . Among the most strategic people of our time, therefore, are the psychosocial scientists who are developing such "key"-testing methods. Namely, aptitude tests, intelligence tests, personality measurements, and so forth, as described in this chapter's second part by Arthur Jensen. These efforts must be assembled and then extended to the corresponding "locks": to the educational and professional institutions in which these individuals develop their capabilities and then employ them, as outlined in Figures IV-6 and IV-7. We have the necessary components of Period 7 ecosystems. What we now need, in order to assemble them, is practical methods for spotting and finding these many different parts, and putting them together into a viable whole. Success in doing this would make our culture itself "drop out" in the upward sense: if we succeed our culture will drop out of the disintegration Groups of Period 6, and up into Period 7 (Figure IV-4); if not, it will drop down.

What is the main obstacle to this upward development? It is the ideologies of Left and Right, described in Chapter II, whose confrontations our universities and scientific societies--warehouses of unassembled disciplines--are ever less able to resist effectively: See, for instance, "Whither United States Universities" by George E. Pake.^l4

Under persistent attacks of Left-Center liberals--whose genetically ignorant discipline Baltzell calls the Social Gospel and the New Social Science^l5--under the vehement attacks of Far Left, and violent attacks of Extreme Left radicals, the National Academy of Science formally renounced the development and application of intelligence, aptitude and personality tests for a whole year! Being severely hampered by one-field specialization in distinguishing pseudo-science from science in this field, its subsequent reversal of this tangibly anti-scientific position still remains more apparent than real.

Unified Science, however, provides a clear, verifiable hypothesis and model for correcting this fatal defect. According to the theory presented in Chapter II, a strategic aspect of our culture continues to loiter on the threshold of Period 7, Higher Industrialists. Namely the genetico-psycho-socio-econo-political sciences and technologies. This failure to consolidate social science creates in our culture's controller or Minority what Lippmann called "the great vacuum yawning to be filled." That is to say, a lack of coherent understanding, resulting in persistent failures of leadership. Specifically it preserves the Minority's incapacity to diagnose malfunctions, prescribe feasible solutions, prognose the outcomes of alternative prescriptions, and then execute the most promising one effectively.

Into this leadership vacuum rush the ideologists--people such as the totalitarian democrats and various fascistic racists, whose worldviews were prematurely unified in the nineteenth century; unified before the rise of modern physics, chemistry, biology, genetics, or any other modern science; and by non-scientists at that. Their misinterpretations of history, genetics, psychology, and so forth are, however, systematic and mutually reinforcing. This gives them the confidence which our traditional leaders lack, and therewith the power to mislead the Majority disastrously.⁴⁴

How have we found out that they are misleading our education and our culture a In the same way that physical and biological scientists find out when they are misled: by making theoretical models and subjecting them to experimental verification. "The verification of a model such as occurred with Rutherford's nuclear atom can greatly extend the range and scope of the physicist's understanding," say physicists Kendall and Panofsky. "It is through the interplay of observation, prediction, and comparison that the laws of nature are slowly clarified."⁴⁵

Our maps of alternative webs-of-mind are models of -psycho-social systems. Figures IV-6 and IV-8 predict the coactions to be expected in universities containing certain proportions of Minority students and Majority students, Internal and External. These predictions can now be compared with observations of the two corresponding kinds of institutions.

Figure IV-8 is a theoretical model of an open-admissions college, as this term is defined and applied at New York City College, 1970-1971. It will be compared with the earliest available report of the empirical event: "Up the Down Campus--Notes from a Teacher on Open Admissions" by M. Ann Petrie,⁴⁶ a member of the College's English Department who strongly supports this so-called "open" structure.

The only screening used in the admission of new students was a school average of 80 or top-half rating in high school. According to Miss Petrie "850 of the 2,440 freshmen who registered as full-time day students last fall would not have been there had traditional standards been applied." This increases the ratio of Majority to Minority students in the symbiotic model (Figure IV-6) by about 35%, making their proportions roughly equal (50%-50%). According to coaction theory, a model displaying these changed proportions predicts the following change of coactions.

FIGURE IV-8 Open admissions institution for the ostensible "transformation" of medium genetic potentials into top phenotypic actualities. A prediction model.

This model assumes the same faculty, and the same 10% of exceptional, top-capability Internal Majority and 5% of top capability External Majority students as displayed in Figure IV-6. It maintains this grouping in contradiction to the empirical phenomenon with which it is compared: Ann Petrie quotes Alan Fielin, dean of the open admissions program as saying that "Our freshmen do not arrive as two, homogeneous packages-`regular freshmen' (Minority Students) and `open admissions freshmen'. . ." To these "regular freshmen" (Minority Students) it adds roughly 25% of Internal and 10% of External Majority students who "would not have been there had traditional standards been applied," decreasing the proportion of Minority students by the corresponding 35%. (This corresponds quite accurately with Petrie's report.) "At midterm, the dropout rate, less than 11 per cent for City University as a whole, was no worse than it had been in the two previous years. But because of the commitment to keep the open admission students at least three semesters regardless of grades, that's scarcely illuminating." Traditional standards, then, remained unapplied to these 35% of Majority students after, as well as before, open admissions, maintaining roughly these proportions throughout the academic year in question.⁶²

Our theoretical model--based as it is upon the massive data organized in Figures IV-1 through IV-4--predicts the following: In contrast to the Exceptional Majority freshmen, the great majority of the open admission students will rise somewhat above their home habitat in regard to vocabulary level (Figure IV-3). But they will not move to a higher social Stratum. Instead, they will presently revert to little above their previous level of reading, speaking, and writing skills, just as do most of those who, through special training, rise to a higher vocabulary level (Figure IV-3). However, having been left untrained for occupations they could have filled successfully if they had been given actual equal opportunity--that is, if they had been accurately tested and given a chance to fit themselves into the "locks" for which they have the inborn turning capability--they will find themselves in, and put their community in, a desperate position; one which will threaten to wreck the community and them together.

This situation has already begun to appear inside City College. "Some faculty members. . ." says Petrie, "perceive the open admissions students not merely as different from the stereotyped City student, but as inferior to him, and they hate the changes in curriculum and classroom styles that may have come because of the difference." One such professor told a student that "he didn't have time to waste on problems a ninth grader should know the answer to."

What are these changes in curriculum and classroom styles? They involve a lowering of abstraction ceilings and of vocabulary levels; a lowering of the essential training for which the College was established, and which every Industrial civilization's Minority has got to have if their culture is to survive, let alone to advance.

That these changes are hated is natural. And they are hated not just by professors, but by the qualified students of both Minority and Majority, whom they prevent from receiving the high-level training for which they have the inborn capacity, and which they must get if they are to fill the leadership vacuum, correct the system's cybernetic derangement, and halt our society's catastrophic decline.⁴⁷

These "changes in curriculum and classroom style"--this decline in the level of thought and education--will rapidly change this institution's reputation in the same direction. Its academic degrees will decline in competitive value, and the coactions between the majority of open admissions students (mapped at the outer ends of this web-of-mind), and the rest of the students, the faculty, and the community will consequently become objectively negative. They will become so, regardless of what they appear to be subjectively to those who gladly sacrifice time, effort, money and reputation in the hope of benefiting the slightly above average Majority, but who in reality damage far more of them than they help.⁴⁸

Petrie reports a change in objective coactions between those who pass the tests, and most of those who are admitted without it. Since the latter remain, regardless of whether they do the work successfully or not, the former are leaving City College in considerable numbers. If the students with lower potential benefitted, this coaction would be: benefit to the weak, damage to the strong ( + , - ), which is bad enough. But if both kinds of students are damaged, as our model predicts that they are being damaged, their coaction is mutual harm, synnecrosis ( - , - ); social disaster. Among each group's members, however, the coaction will probably be some degree of symbiosis ( + , + ). That will polarize the community and prepare civil war.

"I would be very surprised," said Dean Fielin, "if our open admissions experience did not result in changed views about education for all freshmen, indeed all students."⁴⁶ This model predicts that, if accurate records are kept on all these students for the next ten years, the greatest surprise, and the view that will change the most, will be Dean Fielin's own.

Conclusion.

Unified Science's unequivocal prediction is that open admission not only deprives the Majority of the education that could advance it most, but robs the Minority of equal opportunity to realize its inborn potential, and the community of "nature's gift for the instruction, the trust, and the government of society." These predictions should accelerate the development, expansion, testing and application of culture fair diagnostic tests for individuals ("keys") on one hand; and on the other hand, of complementary tests for all kinds and levels of instruction ("locks").

3. FROM MULTIVERSITY TO UNIVERSITY

These two developments, however, subsume and pre-require the third: assembly of the Lower Industrialists' self destroying mental and spiritual chaos of unassembled and amoral disciplines into the Higher Industrial Circle of Perfectibility.

"I place science within the area of accumulative knowledge " declared James B. Conant in his 1947 address as retiring President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and urged the coordination of its role in our society.⁴⁹ This address opened the door to the sustained effort whose results are here introduced. The uncoordinated accumulation of scientific knowledge in our traditional universities which has brought on the derangement and decline of Western democracy is diagrammed in Figures IV-9 and 10. The result of coordinating this accumulation into the coherent world understanding essential to successful leadership of society will be shown in Figures IV-11 and 12.

FIGURE IV-9 The Multiversity--a parts-making industry with no assembly plant.

At its left, this figure represents the four traditional divisions of the university--those, for instance, which participated in the Interdivisional Committee to whose Chairman this book is dedicated. One of them, the Division of Biological Sciences, is shown in some departmental detail.

Two biology departments, being markedly different from the rest, are underlined: ecology and paleontology. They deal with whole s stems of the most important kind, natural empires. They are outstanding because, as Ulrich Sonnemann points out, A whole [system], whether encountered by the physicist or the social scientist [or the ecologist], is a lawful context which gives significance to each particular part-phenomenon that articulates itself within it; what makes its inner lawfulness understandable, however, is its own overall significance which it derives from the broader [systemic] context in which it is embedded and to which it refers." Sonnemann, who is writing on The Specialist as a Psychological Problem, then goes on to anticipate our discussion of what may be called the organized specialist and the generalist: "The true academician's [the generalist's] subject matter, in principle, becomes the universe: whatever he encounters--and it may lie in exceedingly small sectors of fieldsoccurs to him in such ways as to represent a universal order. Such a universal order, since it already determines the phenomenal structure under the scientist's observation, is inseparable from the structure."

Sonnemann then characterizes the rest of the departments shown and implied in Figures IV-9 and 10 as follows: "To the extent, then, to which it [the whole system] drops out of sight, to the extent to which his [the specialist's] preconceived procedure interferes with the self articulation of any subject under his attack, phenomenal structure will escape, first his eye, ultimately his theories."⁵⁰ These people's departments deal with sections of systems. And, as Sonnemann points out, "Implicit in all sectional science, the arbitrariness of primary determination of subj ect matters which of their own natures are universes [systems] does not, apparently, make a science any more analytical; the typical specialistic approach . . . is characterized at least as much by his blindness for relevant detail as for wholes."

He then sums up as follows: "The loss of the criterion of intrinsic truth [namely, the systems criterion] is inextricably linked with the sectional character of the [non-systematic] sciences themselves..."⁵⁰

At the right, our figure represents the multiversity's product: specialists. That is to say, mental parts which have not been designed for assembly and for which it has no assembly plant. You will, of course, note two exceptions: the products of the departments of ecology and paleontology, who are incipient generalists. They are incipient because they are unassemblable parts; nonetheless, the systems they study do encompass all their colleagues' subject matters. Yet they have no way of assembling them, no ef1'ective assembly plant or technique. And their specialized colleagues, for reasons shortly to appear, have no way of grasping the ecologists' (as also the anthropologists', historians', and atomic physicists') basic differentness. So they see and treat these near generalists simply as somewhat special or peculiar colleagues, and go on as before.

The profound difference between these two groups--between what Sonnemann calls legitimate and illegitimate specialisms--will shortly be diagrammed. "No wrong attaches to any specialization, any concentration on a particular subject matter, or realm of subject matters," he points out, "which, in setting its method of analytic attack, closely follows the given structure of the subject. If the subject happens to be a whole [system], such as the whole subject matter of entomology, or of its self articulated subdivisions [which is ecology], the wholeness of the subject implies at once the universality of good order constituent of nature throughout, and a distinct separateness from other subject matters of nature: a separateness which, in favoring the concentration of the scientists' focus upon it, legitimizes, at the same time, its specialistic restriction.

"It is different," he points out, "for such subject matters of one science as are inseparable from other subject matters lying within a different science which in actuality form one [system] with them. Specialistic narrowing of focus here cannot but fail to perceive the order of the whole and cannot help replacing what it misses by a mechanical order which it imposes on the subject by means of procedure." He then goes on to point out:

Bergson has already stated the [illegitimate] specialist's inclination to conceive of his subject matter in terms of his method rather than the other way around. [But] he had not pointed out in any detail . . . the various slights of hand [read unconscious mistakes) which turn abstractions from processes into factorial [empirical] entities assumed to partake in the process as such. . . Where the statistical method is used, not for its legitimate end of clarifying the structure of large bodies of relevant data but of predicting the structure of human events to come, [illegitimate] specialistic attitudes are characterized by an inclination to reduce events to mere occurrences, focusing on their comparative numbers without questioning the basis of comparison used, remaining blind to the specific event-nature of each, and never inquiring into those elemental processes behind them-revelation of which would invalidate the cherished technique from the start.⁵¹

He then touches upon the heart of the danger in which illegitimate specialists involve our culture; the self perpetuating cybernetic structure displayed in Figure IV-10, which Mr. Stafford Beer has called the meta-threat: "The circularity of the method, a closed system inaccessible to any such observations as would interfere with its own premises..." The specialist's conscious input comes from his own non-systemic field. His detector screens out inputs from the rest of the system of which he is studying a part; and from other functionally related ones. His conscious (subjective] output goes to his own traditional field, though his objective outputs may go disastrously to others as what he calls "side effects." These are, however, screened out by his detector, preventing him from becoming aware of and correcting his mistakes; also, from listening to or understanding those who try to point them out. We shall return to these figures in Chapter V.

FIGURE IV-10 The unorganized specialist--unassemblable product of the multiversity.

This is the suicidal structure of the multiversity's major output, Figure IV-9, most of its graduates. Failure to analyze its own self system-theoretically; failure, in fact, to develop what Sonnemann calls "the criterion of intrinsic truth" results in "the sectional character of the [non-systemic] sciences themselves."⁵⁰

What is to be expected of such a fundamentally mis-designed system as the multiversity? It is structured to commit what the Bible calls the Unforgivable Sin: the kind of sin of which one cannot become aware, which therefore cannot be repented or corrected. The multiversity's expectable output is a cumulative series of disasters. And it is living up to expectations.

"The problem we now confront," says George C. Lodge in Harvard Today--"pollution, population, transportation, education, even perhaps malaise on the assembly line, and alienation and distrust--are not soluble pragmatically." And he puts his finger on the source of trouble: "The traditional sense of the word `science' implies specialization. The transformation in which we find ourselves is `unscientific' in its assertion that specialization, concentration on the parts, is not the way to a useful whole."⁵²

By confining each of our millions of students to one or two of these artifically segregated, meaningless disciplines, with its special vocabulary and background theory, the multiversity produces on one hand what Jere Clark calls the ignorance explosion, and on the other elimination of morality and wisdom. As Lodge puts it, "Paternalism won't work [any more] because there is no father and there are no children."⁵² This implies the collapse of leadership; the catastrophic derangements of both democratic and dictatorial forms of government, and the visible danger to the survival of Man on Earth.

The New University. Stafford Beer affirms that "The fresh design of a meta-system, exerting meta-controls, is the only solution to our problem. The problem is for cybernetics to discover, and to make abundantly clear to the world, what meta-systems truly are. . ." In fact, he says, "We should create a meta-system to handle the meta-threat."^53,54

Our Council has been working hard at this for twenty-odd years, and I a good deal longer. Let's first look at the over-all structure of the New University which we propose; and at its strategic products, the generalist and the organized specialist. Then we can analyze its internal structure, the meta-theory and meta-language which make these products possible.

This is the proposed blue print of the New University; of its structure over-all, Figure IV-11.

FIGURE IV-11 The New University--structure and product.

In the lower left-hand corner, C. P. Snow's Two Cultures, Literary and Scientific, are shown modified and assembled into a new form of what Walter Lippmann has called The Public Philosophy.⁴¹ Namely, the Public Philosophy of our new, emergent culture, Higher Industrial Civilization; Human Period 7 of the Periodic Table of Human Cultures, Figure IV-4.⁵⁵ This Public Philosophy emerges as a result of certain quite precise modifications of our traditional scientific and literary cultures, as also of the conflict-biased Marxist theory and practice, diagrammed in Plain Truth--And Redirection of the Cold War.²³

These changes are already in process of occurring: first because of the new concepts and methods of Unified Science, represented by the three nested braces; and second, because of compatible new concepts emerging in the major components of the Literary culture: one component embodied in the Division of Humanities, the other in the School of Business (or better of Management), and represented by the long parallel braces.

It is because of the unification of the sciences (nested braces), that inter-translatability not only of scientific, but also of literary and managerial background theories and languages can be effected. This inter-translatability is represented by the convergence of the arrows originating in the left-hand brace (government, business, modern agriculture) which are deeply influenced by the Literary culture (the Division of Humanities) through whose brace the arrows pass (art, philosophy, religion). In the New University these non-scientific aspects of mankind are in harmony with Unified Science, whose nested braces govern the arrows' directions: like theirs, the dominant value-premise of all three sub-cultures is positive.

These three (rather than just two) categories are implicit in C. P. Snow's following statement:

I gave the most pointed example of this [traditional] lack of communication in the shape of two groups of people, representing what I have christened `the two cultures.' One of these contained the scientists, whose weight, achievement and influence did not need stressing. The other contained the literary intellectuals. I did not mean that literary intellectuals act as the main decision-makers of the western world. I mean that literary intellectuals represent, vocalize and to some extent shape and predict the mood of the non-scientific culture: they do not make the decisions, but their words seep into the minds of those who do. p. 59.¹⁰

These minds comprise our system's controllers, the management people represented by the long brace farthest left in. Figure IV-11. In the next sentence C. P. Snow returns to his two categories; but he has clearly shown them to be three, with the decision-making managers of industry, government and academe closer to the Literates than to the Scientists, as indicated in our figure: "Between these two groups," Snow concludes, "the [pre-unified] scientists and the literary intellectuals--there is little communication and, instead of fellow-feeling, something like hostility." p. 59.¹⁰ This is, of course, the case in the disintegrating multiversity, Figure IV-9.

A few pages later, however, Snow goes on to "Observe the development of what, in the terms of our formulae, is becoming [in America] something like a third culture" p. 67.¹⁰ This third culture comprizes the center of Figure IV-11, PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY, the actual subject of the present book; far greater than the sum of its parts, shown at the left.

When first accepted for publication, this figure did not include the School of Business or Management. Inclusion of this recent addition to higher education was made possible by the brilliant assembly of old and new constructive trends in managerial thought and practice by Carl H. Madden in his new book, Clash of Culture--The Decade of the Seventies. In this book, Madden has formulated the main problems of our civilization. Figuratively speaking, he has put together the lock for which Unified Science is the constructive key. That is to say, his conceptualization is the factor which permits assembly of the actually Three Cultures into the Public Philosophy.

The Marxists had formulated this problem in an incorrect and thus destructive way long ago. In the Depression I had set myself to reformulate the problem, and have been at it ever since. That's how we came to have the key to Madden's lock, ready at the right time; the time which makes its idea irresistible.

Here is the problem as assembled in Clash of Culture.^56,57 I quote a few typical passages in a coherent, cumulative way, and add to each passage Unified Science's answer.

A power structure unsupported by a choate and accepted system of ideas and values is ultimately self=defeating.

Unified Science permits the assembly of a choate system of ideas and values: the Public Philosophy, shown in Figure IV-11.

The scientific revolution ought to contain within itself the seeds of a grand and radical sense of purpose.

Unified Science contains this seed: the Periodic coordinate system, whose limits are Alpha and Omega, and whose value-bias is positive.

`A new philosophy,' says S. Kristol, `is needed for capitalism to regain its legitimacy. And that philosophy should be based on the world-view of consistency with the humanist and metaphysical truth of the scientific revolution itself.'

That is the nature of the new Public Philosophy. The result, however, is transformation of both capitalism and socialism into a new system, Social Capitalism, coherently developed in Switzerland from 1925 to the present.²³ (See pages 192-195.) This is the system called for by the Public Philosophy of Higher Industrialism. The old capitalism's legitimacy was lost because--this has been mapped geometrically--its dominant value premise changed from positive to neutral, and later to negative, as described in Ch. V. Social Capital's dominant value-premise however is clearly and unequivocally positive. That is what gives it legitimacy. The new philosophy which Kristol and Madden call for is, of course, essential. It is, however, the Public Philosophy of Higher Industrial Civilization which results from the transformation of capitalism and of socialism into Social Capitalism.

"We need a discipline rather than a vision," Madden continues. Unified Science is actually both: it began as a vision-Descartes' dreams, Bacon's Novum Organum, Leibniz' Universal Characteristic^l2; perhaps even the sudden picture of the Periodic coordinate system as I walked on Riverside Drive in New York City. Then it developed into the discipline expounded in this book.

"America has led the first scientific revolution, but failed to take the lead in the second."

Does not Unified Science, developed here for thirty-odd years, constitute leadership precisely in the second? America has not failed. This scientific revolution--which involves not merely one, but all disciplines, scientific, humanistic and technological--is bigger than any of the historic revolutions described by Thomas Kuhn. Its period of what he calls invisibility⁵⁹ (Ch. 11) has therefore been long. Kuhn's analysis of this invisibility's nature, worked out in the United States, permits us now to end this particular invisibility faster than would have been possible otherwise. As this revolution's visibility increases so will America's leadership in this second major scientific revolution.

"Why don't we see the need for simultaneously moving in all fronts which lead to this new [organized] knowledge?"

The creators of Unified Science saw this need decades ago. We are now making what appear as simultaneous moves because three decades of work are presented simultaneously. These now simultaneous moves, called Unisci, permit practical solution of our problem.

We have, it seems, designed and produced an early model of the key which Madden calls policy science. The next step is to develop it further, and to mass produce it. And Madden points out what is needed: "Corporation resources may be needed to develop policy science."

If these resources are granted, not only the solutions above, but those to scores of other problems called for in Clash of Culture will emerge cumulatively, and will transform this culture clash into constructive orientation: in terms of Figure IV-11 it will change the multiversity's ad hoc improvisation into rational assembly of "Compatible background theories, coherently mapped into the Periodic coordinate system," resulting in "A single, dynamic, holistic, evolving discipline: the Public Philosophy. This is, and will become more clearly, the Public Philosophy of the Space Age."³⁴

Figure IV-11 is a detail-less plan at whose center is a merely synoptic indication of the New University's controller, the New University Council. The point however is, as Stafford Beer emphasizes with heavy type, that PLANNING IS HOMOLOGOUS WITH ORGANIZATION.⁵³ It takes a cybernetic system like the New University, conducted by generalists and organized specialists (Figure VI-12 below), to grasp and deal with whole cybernetic systems. To understand cybernetic systems requires systems-theoretically structured minds and institutions of higher learning. (Hence the invisibility of Unified Science to otherwise excellent scientists.)

What Figure IV-11 shows is such an institution's work component (on the left), its controller (in the center), and its output (on the right). Now let us diagram its output in detail: generalists and organized specialists. (The organized specialist differs from the generalist only in this: one of his input channels is strongly emphasized and articulated.) Since the result of the Council's planning, generalists and organized specialists, is isomorphic (Stafford Beer's "homologous") with the Council's structure, it follows that the Council must consist of organized specialists and generalists.⁶⁰

The generalist's input comes from his field too; but that consists of all the sciences--physical, biological, and psycho-socio-political, Systems-hierarchically organized; and all the humanities--the arts, philosophy, and religion--similarly organized; together with the tactics and strategy of decision-making and execution, of practical leadership, currently called management. The latter has been treated in Plain Truth--And Redirection of the Cold War.²³ The humanities will be dealt with to a considerable extent in Chapter V. Let us therefore confine ourselves here to the generalist's cognitive aspect, Unified Science.

The generalist's cognitive controller, which Thomas Kuhn calls his system of paradigms, organizes his many diverse-appearing kinds of data by means of a single background theory. It maps them coherently into his central paradigm, the Periodic coordinate system. The result is Unified Science.--His output goes to all the sciences and is, ex hypothesi, acceptable to them all. We have tested this model for several years in two colleges, two pilot plants, and found it to work as intended. (See Jere Clark's Chapter III.)

FIGURE IV-12 The Generalist and organized specialist: assemblable products of the New University.

The generalist's detector rejects those theories which are incompatible with, and cannot be made compatible with, its paradigms. For instance, it rejects the traditional political spectrum; but when this spectrum is corrected and completed, as shown in Chapter II, it is incorporated into the generalist's body-intellectual and body-spiritual.

Such, very briefly, is the New University and its product.

Paternalism still won't work. But now leadership and its complement, followership, will. For the generalist is structured for leadership of the University Council, and the organized specialists for active membership in it. They share the meta-language of Unified Science, and its background theory.

This is what George C. Lodge calls the new ideology.⁶¹ For it includes ecology, and opens the way to its formulation as part of the universal order. And ecology, as Lodge affirms, "has dramatized as no body of knowledge ever has before [but Unified Science has much better since] that everything is related to everything else. It deals a body blow to the individualistic, atomistic view of man espoused by Hobbes and Locke and compels us to concentrate on man as a part of an organic social system, a community, a circle of interrelated facts and elements which are physical and psychological, rational and irrational, technological and spiritual, a circle which in truth is global in scope."⁵²

Herewith, our Lower Industrial civilization has come full circle to where it transmutes up to the Higher Industrial Period, or dies. The empirical, inductive, pragmatic mode of thought which shattered the Medieval Circle of Perfection gives rise in the New University to a single, coherent background theory: Industrial civilization's Circle of Perfectibility, the Generalists' and Organized Specialists' consensus. Leibniz' prediction that Unified Science would include ethics, politics, and jurisprudence flows inevitably from his prophetic understanding of the world; his vision of it as what now is called a cybernetic system.⁵⁸ For the highest degree of automatization is the highest form of organization: the control of power by values. Lodge calls this "the philosophical transformation about which we have no choice--it is happening and there is no going backward."

Pages 111-156

ARTHUR R. JENSEN

PART II. DIRECT PSYCHOLOGICAL AND GENETIC
EMPIRICAL BASIS OF THE PERIODIC TABLE

Scientific progress is won through an unrelenting battle against ad hoc explanations of natural phenomena. The present attempt to bring the behavioral sciences within the purview of Unified Science is thus a welcome and significant step toward understanding behavioral phenomena in terms of a broad conceptual framework that encompasses and unifies also the physical and biological sciences. The periodic and hierarchic schema which forms the essential structure of Unified Science already has a generally acknowledged empirical basis in the physical and biological sciences. Now we must ask, how appropriate is a hierarchical schema in the behavioral sciences a Is there empirical support for thinking of behavior--individual behavior and group behavior--in terms of the proposed system? Probably the best answer that we can presently give to this question must rest upon an examination of the current status of our empirical knowledge in several relevant lines of behavioral investigation. These lines of evidence can best be summarized by posing a number of questions, the answers to which are fundamental to any hierarchical conceptions of adaptive behavior, including Haskell's present formulation.

Phylogeny of Adaptive Behavior.

Are there qualitative as well as quantitative differences in the behavioral adaptive capabilities of animals at different levels of the phyletic evolutionary sequence? That is to say, are there differences not only in the speed of learning but also in the complexity of what the organism can learn at all, given any amount of time and training? Are there discontinuities as well as continuities in capacities to perceive, to learn, and to manipulate the environment as we ascend the phyletic scale?

The answer to these questions is now empirically quite clear. There are indeed discontinuities and qualitative differences in learning (i.e. behaviorally adaptive) capabilities as we go from one phyletic level to another. Behaviorally, the phylogenetic hierarchy is best characterized in terms of an increasing complexity of adaptive capabilities and an increasing breadth of transfer and generalization of learning, as we move from lower to higher phyla. It is a fact that every animal, at least above the level of worms, has the capacity to learn; that is, to form stimulus-response associations or conditioned responses. But the degree of complexity and abstractness of what can be learned shows distinct "quantum jumps" going from lower to higher phyla. Simpler capacities, and their neural substrate, persist as we move from lower to higher levels, but new adaptive capacities emerge in hierarchical layers as we ascend the phyletic scale. Each phyletic level possesses all the learning capacities (although not necessarily the same sensory and motor capacities) of the levels below itself in addition to new emergent abilities, which can be broadly conceived as an increase in the complexity of information processing. For example, studies by Bitterman (1965) of animals at various levels of the phyletic scale (earthworms, crabs, fishes, turtles, pigeons, rats and monkeys) have clearly demonstrated discontinuities in learning ability among different species and the emergence of more complex abilities corresponding to the phylogenetic hierarchy. In the experimental procedure known as habit reversal, a form of learning-to-learn in which the animal is trained to make a discriminative response to a pair of stimuli and then has to learn the reverse discrimination and the two are alternated repeatedly, a fish does not show any sign of learning-to-learn (i.e. each reversal is like a completely new problem and takes as long to learn as the previous problems), while a rat improves markedly in its speed of learning from one reversal to the next. When portions of the rat's cerebral cortex are removed, thereby reducing the most prominent evolutionary feature of the mammalian brain, the learning ability of the decorticate rat is exactly like that of the turtle, an animal with little cortex, and would probably be like that of the fish, if all of the rat's cortex could be removed. Harlow and Harlow (1962) have noted similar discontinuities at high levels of learning among rhesus monkeys, chimpanzees, and humans. Again, situations that involve some form of learning-to-learn are most sensitive to differences in capacity. No animals below primates have ever learned the so-called oddity--non-oddity problem no matter how much training they are given, and more complex variations of this type of problem similarly differentiate between rhesus monkeys and chimpanzees. The species differences are not just in speed of learning, but in whether the problem can be learned at all, given any amount of training. This is essentially what is meant by a hierarchical conception of learning ability. There is much evidence for this conception, which Jensen (in press) has summarized more extensively elsewhere. The evolution of humans from more primitive forms is now believed to be intimately related to the use of tools and weapons (Ardry, 1961). The mental capabilities involved in the use of implements for gaining ever greater control of the environment, in lieu of sheer physical strength, were just as subject to the evolutionary effects of natural selection as are any genetically mutated organs. More specifically, according to Haskell (1968, p. 475), "What primarily evolves in man is the nerve structure which confers the capacity to invent, to borrow, and to adapt culture traits."

Ontogeny of Human Mental Abilities.

In humans does mental development of the individual occur in qualitatively difl'erent stages that are hierarchically related? Are there ontogenetic discontinuities in mental development just as there are phylogenetic discontinuities?

There is now much evidence, originating in the work of Piaget (1960) and substantiated in numerous experiments by other child psychologists both here and abroad (for reviews see Flavell, 1963; Kohlberg, 1968; and Phillips, 1969), that individual cognitive development proceeds by distinct, qualitatively different stages in children's modes of thinking and problem solving at different ages. Piaget and others have demonstrated that children's thinking is not just a watered-down or inferior approximation to adult thinking; it is radically and qualitatively different. The stages of mental development form an invariant sequence or succession of individual development. Each stage of cognitive development is a structured whole; mental development does not consist of the mere accretion of specific stimulus-response associations. Cognitive stages are hierarchically integrated; higher stages reintegrate the cognitive structures found at lower stages. Also, as Kohlberg (1968, p. 1021) points out "...there is a hierarchical preference within the individual...to prefer a solution of a problem at the highest level available to him." In reviewing the experimental literature on children's learning, Sheldon White (1965) has amassed evidence for two broad stages of mental development, which he labels associative and cognitive. The transition from one to the other occurs for the vast majority of children between five and seven years of age. In the simplest terms, these stages correspond to concrete-associative thinking and abstract-conceptual thinking. The latter does not displace the former in the course of the child's mental development; in older children and adults the two modes co-exist as hierarchical layers.

Ontogeny of Human Mental Abilities.

Are individual differences in the rate and the asymptotic level of mental development genetically conditioned?

Mental development, as indexed by a wide variety of tests, is known to take place at different rates among children, and the final level of ability attained can be viewed as a hierarchical composite of earlier developed abilities, each level of the hierarchy being necessary but not sufficient for development of the next higher level. At maturity individuals differ with respect to the relative prepotence of different modes in the hierarchy of abilities and thus show differential capabilities for different kinds of learning and problem solving. The difficulty level of items in most standard intelligence tests (especially tests of the culture-fair variety, such as Raven's Progressive Matrices and Cattell's Culture-Fair Tests of g) reflects increasing dependence of the problem's solution upon higher level mental processes.

Over the past half century numerous studies (for reviews see Jensen 1967, 1969) based on a wide variety of tests of mental ability administered to persons of varying degrees of genetic and environmental relatedness, sampled from European and North American Caucasian populations, lead to the now generally accepted conclusion that in these populations genetic factors are approximately twice as important as environmental factors in accounting for individual differences in mental ability. This means, among other things, that variation in mental abilities can be, have been, and are subject to selective pressures of the environment and culture and are subject also to change through different systems of selective and assortative mating, just as is true of physical characteristics that display genetic variation.

Subpopulation Differences in Mental Development.

Are there genetically conditioned differences among population groups both in the overall average level of mental development and in the pattern of relative strengths of various mental abilities ? Subgroups of the population which are relatively isolated geographically, culturally, or socially can be regarded as breeding populations to varying degrees (i.e. breeding within groups has a higher occurrence than breeding between groups). To the extent that breeding populations have been subjected to differential selective pressures from the environment, both physically and culturally, differences in gene frequencies can be expected to exist, especially for adaptive characteristics, physical and behavioral, but also for possibly nonadaptive pleiotropic characters (i.e. seemingly unrelated phenotypic effects caused by the same gene). Racial groups and, to a lesser degree, social classes within a society can be regarded as breeding populations.

Social classes as defined largely in terms of educational and occupational status are subject to differential selection for mental abilities. Since these have genetic as well as environmental components, they are transmitted to the offspring, and because of a high degree of assortative mating for mental traits in Western cultures, the gene pools for difFerent social classes will differ in the genetic factors related to ability. The evidence for phenotypic mental ability differences among social classes, along with evidence for genotypic differences, has been reviewed extensively elsewhere (Eckland, 1967; Jensen, 1970). It is now generally accepted by geneticists, psychologists, and sociologists who have reviewed the evidence that social class differences in mental abilities have a substantial genetic component. This genetic component should be expected to increase in an open society that permits and encourages social mobility. Phenotypically, of course, social class differences in patterns of mental ability are firmly established. Jensen (1968) has found that lower-class and middle-class population samples differ much less in abilities that are lower in the ontogenetic hierarchy, such as associative learning and memory span, than in higher cognitive abilities, such as conceptual learning and abstract reasoning. A different pattern of correlations between lower and higher abilities also is found in lower-class and middle-class groups, implying a hierarchical relationship among abilities, such that lower-level abilities are necessary-but-not-sufficient for the development or utilization of higher-level abilities.¹

Scientific knowledge concerning the genetic aspect of ability differences among racial groups, having been generally shunned as a subject of scientific study in modern genetics and psychology, is far more ambiguous and more in dispute than social class differences. The uncertainty in this area will be reduced only through further appropriate research using the most advanced techniques of behavior-genetic analysis. Phenotypically, racial differences in abilities are well established, both with respect to overall average level of performance and to the pattern of relative strengths of various abilities (e.g. Lesser, Fifer, and Clark, 1965). Both social class and racial (Caucasian, Negro, and Oriental) differences have been found in rates of cognitive development as assessed by Piagetian test procedures, such as ability to grasp concepts of conservation of number, quantity, and volume (Tuddenham, 1968): Some indication of the role of genetic factors in the Piagetian indices of levels of cognitive development is shown in a study of Australian aboriginal children, the majority of whom, if full-blooded aborigines, do not show ability for grasping the concepts of conservation of quantity, weight, volume, number, and area, even by the time they have reached adolescence, while the majority of Caucasian children attain this level of mental development by seven years of age. However, aboriginal children having (on the average genetically) one Caucasian grandparent, but reared in the same circumstances as the full-blooded aborigines, performed significantly better (i.e. showed higher levels of cognitive development) than the full-blooded aborigines (De Lemos, 1966).

Personality Correlates of Ability.

Do human behavioral traits other than ability have a genetic component, thereby also being subject to selection, and do such traits become associated, through genetic selection, with intellectual abilities?

Here the evidence is somewhat less well-established than that which was adduced in answer to the previous questions. Eysenck (1967) has amassed extensive evidence for the existence of two broad dimensions or factors of personality, called extraversion-introversion (E-I) and neuroticism (N). The former (E-I) is related to outgoingness and carefreeness; the latter (N) is related to emotional and autonomic instability. Both dimensions have been shown to have physiological correlates and a substantial genetic component, comparable to that found in mental abilities (Eysenck, 1967). Together, these factors, E-I and N, account for most of the individual differences variance in a wide variety of personality assessments. Certain combinations of these traits appear to have socially important consequences. For example, high extraversion combined with high neuroticism is significantly associated with antisocial behavior (Eysenck, 1964).

In a social system such as ours, that tends to sort out people according to their abilities, it seems most likely that those traits of personality and temperament which complement and reinforce the development of intellectual skills requiring persistent application, practice, freedom from emotional distraction, and resistance to mental fatigue and to boredom in the absence of physical activity, should become genetically assorted and segregated, and thereby be correlated, with those mental abilities requiring the most education for their full development--those abilities most highly valued in a technological culture. Thus ability and personality traits will tend to work together in determining individuals' overall capability in; the society. R. B. Cattell (1950, p. 98-99) has, in fact, shown that certain personality variables are correlated to the extent of about 0.3 to 0.5 with a general ability factor. Cattell concludes: "...there is a moderate tendency...for the person gifted with higher general ability, to acquire a more integrated character, somewhat more emotional stability, and a more conscientious outlook. He tends to become `morally intelligent' as well as `abstractly intelligent'"

REFERENCES (Chapter IV, Part II)

Ardrey, R., African Genesis, New York: Delta, 1961.
Bitterman, M. E., "The evolution of intelligence," Scientific American, 1965, 212, 92-100.
Cattell, R. B., Personality, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1950.
DeLemos, M. Murray, The development of the concept of conservation in Australian aboriginal children. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Western Australia, November, 1966.
Eckland, B. K., "Genetics and sociology: A reconsideration," American Soc. Rev., 1967, 32, 173-194.
Eysenck, H. J., Crime and Personality, Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1964.
Eysenck, H. J., The Biological Basis of Personality, Springfield, 111.: Charles C, Thomas, 1967.
Flavell, J., The Developmental Psychology of Jean Piaget, New York: Van Nostrand, 1963.
Harlow, H. F., E. Harlow, Margaret K., "The mind of man," in Yearbook of Science and Technology, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962.
Haskell, E. F., Assembly of the Sciences, l, Scientia Generalis, 1968 (Xerox). Jensen, A. R., "Estimation of the limits of heritability of traits by comparison of monozygotic and dizygotic twins." Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 1967, 58, 149-157.
Jensen, A. R., "Patterns of mental ability and socioeconomic status," Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 1968, 60, 1330-1337. (b)
Jensen, A. R., "How much can we boost IQ and scholastic achievement?" Harvard Educ. Rev., 1969, 39, 1-123.
Jensen, A. R., "A theory of primary and secondary mental retardation." In Ellis, N. R. (Ed.), International Review of Research in Mental Ratardation, IV, New York: Academic Press, 1970.
Jensen, A. R., "Hierarchical theories of mental ability." In B. Dockrell (Ed.), Theories of Intelligence, London: Methuen, in press.
Kohlberg, L., "Early education: A Cognitive-developmental view." Child Development, 1968, 39, 1013-1062.
Lesser, G. S., Fifer, G. and Clark, D. H., "Mental abilities of children from different social-class and cultural groups." Monogr. Soc. for Res. in Child Development, 1965, 30 (4).
Phillips, J. L., Jr., The Origins of Intellect: Piaget's Theory, San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1969.
Piaget, J., "The general problem of the psychobiological developmcnt of the child." In J. M. Tanner and B. Inhelder (Eds.), Discussion on Child Development, 4, New York: International Universities Press, 1960.
Tuddenham, R. D., "Psychometricizing Piaget's Methode Clinique. Paper read at Amer. Educ Res. Assoc., Chicago, February, 1968.
White, S. H., "Evidence for a hierarchical arrangement of learning processes." In L. P. Lipsitt and C. C. Spiker (Eds.), Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 2, New York: Academic Press, 1965.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. Haskell, Edward F., with Preface and a chapter by Harold G. Cassidy. Unified Science--Assembly of the Sciences into a Single Discipline. Xeroxed, IBM Systems Research Inst., 1969.

2. Posin, Daniel Q. Mendeleyev, The Story of a Great Scientist, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1948.

3. Hobhouse, L. C.; G. C. Wheeler; M. Ginsberg, The Material Cultures and Social Institutions of the Simpler Peoples; an Essay in Correlation. Chapman, London, 1915.

4. Murdock, G. P., "Ethnographic Atlas," Ethnology, Jan. 1962-.

5. O'Connor, Johnson, English Vocabulary Builder, Thomas Todd, Boston, 1961.

6. Cambell, J. The Masks of God, Viking/Compass, N. Y. 1968.

7. Toynbee, Arnold J., A Study of History (Somervell Abridgement of Vols. I-VI) Oxford University Press, N.Y. 1947

8. To my knowledge no measurement of this most important criterion of intelligence, abstraction ceilings, has yet been standardized and tested. The reason probably is that intelligence testers become increasingly vulnerable as their data become increasingly incomprehensible to their clients. Note, for example, the violence directed against conscientious testers who publish careful findings which can offend but cannot be demonstrated to sections of the Majority; violence directed by political activists against scientists such as Arthur Jensen and Richard Herrnstein. This crucially important subject will be dealt with in the concluding chapter.

9. Warner, W. Lloyd and Paul Lunt, The Social Life of a Modern Community, Yale Univ. Press, New Haven, 1941.

10. Snow, C. P. The Two Cultures: and a Second Look, New American Library, New York, 1963.

11. Period 1 has one class, not none. Its controller and work-component are Sub-strata: its controller is the age-group of old people; its work-component is the rest of the age groups.

12. Wiener, P. P., editor, Leibniz--Selections, Scribners, New York, 1951.

13. This section has been added since the 1969 symposium, with Dr. Jensen's approval.

14. Pake, George E. "Whither United States Universities?" Science, May 28 1971, 908-916.

15. Baltzell, E. Digby, The Protestant Establishment--Aristocracy and Cast in America, Random House, New York, 1964.

16. That, history shows, is what one muddles to.

17. Early in 1954 when I was in London, I asked Dr. Toynbee telephonically whether he would approve of an attempt on my part to geometrize his basic socio-political categories. He cordially approved and wished me success. I began with Geometric Coding of Political Philosophies, proceeded, in collaboration with H. G. Cassidy, with Plain Truth-And Redirection of the Cold War, (See below, Note 23) and continue in the present work, with others under way. (See: Haskell, Edward F. "Geometric Coding of Political Philosophies," Proceedings of the Second International Congress of the Philosophy of Science, Vol. IV. Philosophy and Science-History of Philosophy. Editions du Griffon, Neuchatel, Switz., 1955.)

18. I am supported in this belief by Dr. Baltzell's strong endorsement of my position during a heated discussion following a lecture I gave in Philadelphia in 1968.

19. Lippmann, Walter, The Public Philosophy-On the Decline and Revival of Western Democracy, Little, Brown, Boston, 1955.

20. Delmos Jones and Steven Polgar conduct a regular feature in Human Organization, the journal of the Society for Applied Anthropology; a feature called Commentary, which could appropriately have been entitled Schizm of the Soul. It provides "a forum for discussion of issues of immediate concern to applied social scientists". Such as, above all, ethical conflicts due to continued failure to codify and internalize psycho-social structure.
(See, Delmos Jones, Steven Polgar, eds., "Commentary" in Human Organization, Journal of the Society for Applied Anthropology. ( 1703 New Hampshire Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20009) Spring, 1971, 95-101.

21. Williams, George F. What's It All About?-A Natural Philosophy for our Times. Exposition Press, New York, 1969, p. 17.

22. Warner, W. Lloyd and J. O. Low, The Social System of the Modern Factory: The Strike, Yankee City Series, Vol. IV, Yale Univ. Press, Oxford Univ. Press, 1947.

23. Haskell, Edward F. and Harold G. Cassidy, Plain Truth-and Redirection of the Cold War. Offset printed, 1961. Haskell, Edward, "Switzerland's Vertical Front," Gottlieb Duttweiler, Speer, Zurich, 1948.

24. Tocqueville, Alexis de, Democracy in America, Knopf, New York. 1945.

25. Lloyd Warner was a member of the University of Chicago's Interdivisional Committee to Supervise the work of Edward Haskell (1940-1943). I had studied under him at Harvard and followed him when, in 1937, he transferred to Chicago. I took two or three courses on Yankee City under him.

26. Warner, W. Lloyd and Leo Srole, The Social Systems of American Ethnic Groups, Yale Univ. Press; Oxford Univ. Press, 1949.

27. The writer was raised in a missionary family which had, for two generations, oscillated back and forth between the U.S.A. and the Black Sea. They had become citizens of the Atlantic Community long before anyone recognized its existence. The diverse value-systems of the Minority, Inner Majority and Outer Majority; of the various social Strata within these; of the ethnic nationalities comprising these cybernetic system-components; and of the social scientists who study them are set forth in Edward Haskell's Lance-A Novel about Multi-Cultural Men (John Day, New York, 1941).

28. Padover, Saul K., ed., Thomas Jefferson on Democracy, New American Library, New York, 1946, p. 82.

29. These tests will of course also show the existence and the size of what Thomas Jefferson called the artficial aristocracy. "There is also an artificial aristocracy," he wrote in the same letter, "founded on wealth and birth, without either virtue or talents."²⁸ We probably can, however, go a great deal deeper: with computer help we probably can show various degrees of talents, and degrees of diverse temperaments. Also significant combinations of these degrees and kinds of innate talent and virtue or viciousness, as the case may be. These we can then match with appropriate schools and other kinds of training.

30. The giant corporations and monopolistic trade unions are fully as disintegrative, intensifying the system's malfunction (see Mintz, Morton, and J. S. Cohen, with a preface by Ralph Nader, "America, Inc.--Who Owns and Operates the United States," Dial Press, New York, 197I.)

31. Nicolson, Marjorie Hope, The Breaking of the Circle--Studies in the E,~"ect of the `New Science' upon Seventeenth Century Poetry. pp. XXI, Northwestern Univ. Press, Evanston, Illinois, I950.

32. "In this Satanic world, the false always appears first and imitates the truth, thus confusing people." Young Oon Kim. (See Kim, Young Oon, Divine Principle and its Application, H.S.A.U.W.C., 1611 Upshur St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20011, 1969.

33. Gierke, Otto von, Political Theories of the Middle Ages (translated by E. F. Maitland), Cambridge Univ. Press, London, I927.

34. Haskell, Edward, "Unified Science: The Public Philosophy of the Space Age," Connecticut Review, Board of Trustees for the Connecticut State Colleges, Hartford, Conn., 1969.

35. People displaying this mentality are called Generalists. See The Moral Society--A Rational Alternative to Death by John David Garcia. ( Julian Press, New York, 1971.)

36. It is true that in feudal societies, royal households, and in Soviet schools for "philosopher kings" not even the first few grades are shared by all Strata. Whether this does or does not further equality of opportunity is a technical question whose answer may require more knowledge than our society yet has.

37. Wiener, Norbert, Ex prodigy: My Childhood and Youth, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1953.

38. Borchard, Ruth, ,John Stewart Mill, the Man, Watts, London, 1957.

39. Kenyatta, Yomo, Facing Mount Kenya: the Tribal Life of the Gikuyu, Secker and Warburg, London, 1959.

40. Spuhler, J. N., editor, Genetic Diversity and Human Behavior, Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology, New York, 1967.

41. Lippmann, Walter, The Public Philosophy--On the Decline and Revival of Western Democracy, Little, Brown, Boston, I955.

42. Dowling, Colette, "Dropping Out in Manhattan," New York (magazine), May I7, 1971.

43. The present unification of the sciences was carried out during a twenty-odd year withdrawal (1948-I969). The symposium whose expanded proceedings are here published initiated the implementation of unified science in an allout attempt to halt the headlong rout of Lower Industrial civilization described by Lippmann, and to transform it into our culture's advance into Period 7, Figure IV-4.

44. Some, of course, do so conseiously. E.g. the Soviet leaders who use abundant tests in screening students for their Minority schools, yet back Americans and Englishmen who denounce the use of tests in similar schools beyond their borders.

45. Kendall, Henry W. and Wolfgang K. H. Panofsky, "The Structure of the Proton and the Neutron," Scientific American, June, 1971.

46. Petrie, M. Ann, "Up the Down Campus-Notes from a teacher, on Open Admissions," New York (magazine), May 17, 1971.

47. Intensified by Max Ways and his friends under the slogan "More Power to Everybody." (See Ways, Max, "More Power to Everybody," Fortune, May, 1970.)

48. Subjective coactions, traditionally distinguished from objective coactions by semi-quotes, are here omitted. Their mapping would not only complicate this figure, but subsume personality concepts which, while touched upon in Chapter II's mapping of political biases, have not been sufficiently elaborated. That occurs elsewhere.

49. Conant, James B. "The Role of Science In Our Unique Society," Science, Jan. 23, 1948, p. 78.

50. Sonnemann, Ulrich "The Specialist as a Psychological Problem," Social Research--An International Quarterly of Political and Social Science, March, 1951, pp. 9-31.

51. Dr. Ulrich Sonnemann has been a member of C.U.R.E., Inc., since the early 1950s. He is a practicing psychotherapist and resides in Munich, West Germany.

52. Lodge, George C. "Change in the Corporations. Needed: A New Consensus." Harvard Today, March, 1972, pp. 6-10.

53. Beer, Stafford, "The Liberty Machine," Futures, Dec. 1971.

54. Stafford Beer has been Head of the Department of Operations Research and Cybernetics, The United Steel Companies Limited. He is now President of the Operational Research Society, and Visiting Professor of Cybernetics at Manchester University. This and following quotations are taken from his keynote address to the Conference on the Environment, American Society for Cybernetics, Washington, D.C., October, 1970.

55. Some people, who have not yet grasped the cumulative nature of the System-hierarchy, call it Post-Industrial, or Post-Technological culture. The term Post, however, implies that in it, industry or technology have ended. This is not, and cannot possibly be the case. Industry must exist, but be controlled, and thus modified, by the new Public Philosophy. Hence the term Higher Industrial Culture.

56. Madden, Carl H., Clash of Culture--The Decade of the Seventies, (preliminary dratt) 1972. Quoted by permission of the author.

57. The following quotations are from a preliminary draft, kindly loaned me by William L. Wallace. The author, who has given his permission, is Senior Economist of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States.

58. Couturat, Louis, La Logique de Liebniz, d'apr�s des documents in�dit�s, G. Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, Hildesheim, W. Germany, 1961, pp. 71,f.

59. Kuhn, Thomas S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, 1962.

60. This is made possible by an apparently anomalous process popularly called pump priming. The New University Council, founded in 1970, consists of a few generalists and organized specialists who had emerged spontaneously half outside the multiversity. Its core is a group of professors in diverse disciplines who had become friends as undergraduates at Oberlin College in the late Twenties. The others are friends recruited over the years here and there.--The First International Conference on Unified Science, New York, 1972, is being organized around this Council.

61. George C. Lodge is a Harvard Professor of Business Administration.

62. At the end of the school year, however, about 40% of the Freshman class dropped out of their own accord. Contrary to the Dean's prediction, the institution thus seems to be behaving homeostatically. To fulfil his prediction, the college would have to be changed into a high school by changing the faculty.

PART II

1. When the top Strata are included, everything said here is strongly supported and intensified.--See, for instance, Lewis M. Terman, Genetic Studies of Genius, Stanford Univ. Press, 1925-59.

Pages 156-168

Chapter V

1.	Haskell, Edward F., with Preface and a chapter by Harold G. Cassidy. Unified Science--Assembly of the Sciences into a Single Discipline. Xeroxed, IBM Systems Research Inst., 1969.
2.	Posin, Daniel Q. Mendeleyev, The Story of a Great Scientist, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1948.
3.	Hobhouse, L. C.; G. C. Wheeler; M. Ginsberg, The Material Cultures and Social Institutions of the Simpler Peoples; an Essay in Correlation. Chapman, London, 1915.
4.	Murdock, G. P., "Ethnographic Atlas," Ethnology, Jan. 1962-.
5.	O'Connor, Johnson, English Vocabulary Builder, Thomas Todd, Boston, 1961.
6.	Cambell, J. The Masks of God, Viking/Compass, N. Y. 1968.
7.	Toynbee, Arnold J., A Study of History (Somervell Abridgement of Vols. I-VI) Oxford University Press, N.Y. 1947
8.	To my knowledge no measurement of this most important criterion of intelligence, abstraction ceilings, has yet been standardized and tested. The reason probably is that intelligence testers become increasingly vulnerable as their data become increasingly incomprehensible to their clients. Note, for example, the violence directed against conscientious testers who publish careful findings which can offend but cannot be demonstrated to sections of the Majority; violence directed by political activists against scientists such as Arthur Jensen and Richard Herrnstein. This crucially important subject will be dealt with in the concluding chapter.
9.	Warner, W. Lloyd and Paul Lunt, The Social Life of a Modern Community, Yale Univ. Press, New Haven, 1941.
10.	Snow, C. P. The Two Cultures: and a Second Look, New American Library, New York, 1963.
11.	Period 1 has one class, not none. Its controller and work-component are Sub-strata: its controller is the age-group of old people; its work-component is the rest of the age groups.
12.	Wiener, P. P., editor, Leibniz--Selections, Scribners, New York, 1951.
13.	This section has been added since the 1969 symposium, with Dr. Jensen's approval.
14.	Pake, George E. "Whither United States Universities?" Science, May 28 1971, 908-916.
15.	Baltzell, E. Digby, The Protestant Establishment--Aristocracy and Cast in America, Random House, New York, 1964.
16.	That, history shows, is what one muddles to.
17.	Early in 1954 when I was in London, I asked Dr. Toynbee telephonically whether he would approve of an attempt on my part to geometrize his basic socio-political categories. He cordially approved and wished me success. I began with Geometric Coding of Political Philosophies, proceeded, in collaboration with H. G. Cassidy, with Plain Truth-And Redirection of the Cold War, (See below, Note 23) and continue in the present work, with others under way. (See: Haskell, Edward F. "Geometric Coding of Political Philosophies," Proceedings of the Second International Congress of the Philosophy of Science, Vol. IV. Philosophy and Science-History of Philosophy. Editions du Griffon, Neuchatel, Switz., 1955.)
18.	I am supported in this belief by Dr. Baltzell's strong endorsement of my position during a heated discussion following a lecture I gave in Philadelphia in 1968.
19.	Lippmann, Walter, The Public Philosophy-On the Decline and Revival of Western Democracy, Little, Brown, Boston, 1955.
20.	Delmos Jones and Steven Polgar conduct a regular feature in Human Organization, the journal of the Society for Applied Anthropology; a feature called Commentary, which could appropriately have been entitled Schizm of the Soul. It provides "a forum for discussion of issues of immediate concern to applied social scientists". Such as, above all, ethical conflicts due to continued failure to codify and internalize psycho-social structure. (See, Delmos Jones, Steven Polgar, eds., "Commentary" in Human Organization, Journal of the Society for Applied Anthropology. ( 1703 New Hampshire Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20009) Spring, 1971, 95-101.
21.	Williams, George F. What's It All About?-A Natural Philosophy for our Times. Exposition Press, New York, 1969, p. 17.
22.	Warner, W. Lloyd and J. O. Low, The Social System of the Modern Factory: The Strike, Yankee City Series, Vol. IV, Yale Univ. Press, Oxford Univ. Press, 1947.
23.	Haskell, Edward F. and Harold G. Cassidy, Plain Truth-and Redirection of the Cold War. Offset printed, 1961. Haskell, Edward, "Switzerland's Vertical Front," Gottlieb Duttweiler, Speer, Zurich, 1948.
24.	Tocqueville, Alexis de, Democracy in America, Knopf, New York. 1945.
25.	Lloyd Warner was a member of the University of Chicago's Interdivisional Committee to Supervise the work of Edward Haskell (1940-1943). I had studied under him at Harvard and followed him when, in 1937, he transferred to Chicago. I took two or three courses on Yankee City under him.
26.	Warner, W. Lloyd and Leo Srole, The Social Systems of American Ethnic Groups, Yale Univ. Press; Oxford Univ. Press, 1949.
27.	The writer was raised in a missionary family which had, for two generations, oscillated back and forth between the U.S.A. and the Black Sea. They had become citizens of the Atlantic Community long before anyone recognized its existence. The diverse value-systems of the Minority, Inner Majority and Outer Majority; of the various social Strata within these; of the ethnic nationalities comprising these cybernetic system-components; and of the social scientists who study them are set forth in Edward Haskell's Lance-A Novel about Multi-Cultural Men (John Day, New York, 1941).
28.	Padover, Saul K., ed., Thomas Jefferson on Democracy, New American Library, New York, 1946, p. 82.
29.	These tests will of course also show the existence and the size of what Thomas Jefferson called the artficial aristocracy. "There is also an artificial aristocracy," he wrote in the same letter, "founded on wealth and birth, without either virtue or talents."²⁸ We probably can, however, go a great deal deeper: with computer help we probably can show various degrees of talents, and degrees of diverse temperaments. Also significant combinations of these degrees and kinds of innate talent and virtue or viciousness, as the case may be. These we can then match with appropriate schools and other kinds of training.
30.	The giant corporations and monopolistic trade unions are fully as disintegrative, intensifying the system's malfunction (see Mintz, Morton, and J. S. Cohen, with a preface by Ralph Nader, "America, Inc.--Who Owns and Operates the United States," Dial Press, New York, 197I.)
31.	Nicolson, Marjorie Hope, The Breaking of the Circle--Studies in the E,~"ect of the `New Science' upon Seventeenth Century Poetry. pp. XXI, Northwestern Univ. Press, Evanston, Illinois, I950.
32.	"In this Satanic world, the false always appears first and imitates the truth, thus confusing people." Young Oon Kim. (See Kim, Young Oon, Divine Principle and its Application, H.S.A.U.W.C., 1611 Upshur St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20011, 1969.
33.	Gierke, Otto von, Political Theories of the Middle Ages (translated by E. F. Maitland), Cambridge Univ. Press, London, I927.
34.	Haskell, Edward, "Unified Science: The Public Philosophy of the Space Age," Connecticut Review, Board of Trustees for the Connecticut State Colleges, Hartford, Conn., 1969.
35.	People displaying this mentality are called Generalists. See The Moral Society--A Rational Alternative to Death by John David Garcia. ( Julian Press, New York, 1971.)
36.	It is true that in feudal societies, royal households, and in Soviet schools for "philosopher kings" not even the first few grades are shared by all Strata. Whether this does or does not further equality of opportunity is a technical question whose answer may require more knowledge than our society yet has.
37.	Wiener, Norbert, Ex prodigy: My Childhood and Youth, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1953.
38.	Borchard, Ruth, ,John Stewart Mill, the Man, Watts, London, 1957.
39.	Kenyatta, Yomo, Facing Mount Kenya: the Tribal Life of the Gikuyu, Secker and Warburg, London, 1959.
40.	Spuhler, J. N., editor, Genetic Diversity and Human Behavior, Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology, New York, 1967.
41.	Lippmann, Walter, The Public Philosophy--On the Decline and Revival of Western Democracy, Little, Brown, Boston, I955.
42.	Dowling, Colette, "Dropping Out in Manhattan," New York (magazine), May I7, 1971.
43.	The present unification of the sciences was carried out during a twenty-odd year withdrawal (1948-I969). The symposium whose expanded proceedings are here published initiated the implementation of unified science in an allout attempt to halt the headlong rout of Lower Industrial civilization described by Lippmann, and to transform it into our culture's advance into Period 7, Figure IV-4.
44.	Some, of course, do so conseiously. E.g. the Soviet leaders who use abundant tests in screening students for their Minority schools, yet back Americans and Englishmen who denounce the use of tests in similar schools beyond their borders.
45.	Kendall, Henry W. and Wolfgang K. H. Panofsky, "The Structure of the Proton and the Neutron," Scientific American, June, 1971.
46.	Petrie, M. Ann, "Up the Down Campus-Notes from a teacher, on Open Admissions," New York (magazine), May 17, 1971.
47.	Intensified by Max Ways and his friends under the slogan "More Power to Everybody." (See Ways, Max, "More Power to Everybody," Fortune, May, 1970.)
48.	Subjective coactions, traditionally distinguished from objective coactions by semi-quotes, are here omitted. Their mapping would not only complicate this figure, but subsume personality concepts which, while touched upon in Chapter II's mapping of political biases, have not been sufficiently elaborated. That occurs elsewhere.
49.	Conant, James B. "The Role of Science In Our Unique Society," Science, Jan. 23, 1948, p. 78.
50.	Sonnemann, Ulrich "The Specialist as a Psychological Problem," Social Research--An International Quarterly of Political and Social Science, March, 1951, pp. 9-31.
51.	Dr. Ulrich Sonnemann has been a member of C.U.R.E., Inc., since the early 1950s. He is a practicing psychotherapist and resides in Munich, West Germany.
52.	Lodge, George C. "Change in the Corporations. Needed: A New Consensus." Harvard Today, March, 1972, pp. 6-10.
53.	Beer, Stafford, "The Liberty Machine," Futures, Dec. 1971.
54.	Stafford Beer has been Head of the Department of Operations Research and Cybernetics, The United Steel Companies Limited. He is now President of the Operational Research Society, and Visiting Professor of Cybernetics at Manchester University. This and following quotations are taken from his keynote address to the Conference on the Environment, American Society for Cybernetics, Washington, D.C., October, 1970.
55.	Some people, who have not yet grasped the cumulative nature of the System-hierarchy, call it Post-Industrial, or Post-Technological culture. The term Post, however, implies that in it, industry or technology have ended. This is not, and cannot possibly be the case. Industry must exist, but be controlled, and thus modified, by the new Public Philosophy. Hence the term Higher Industrial Culture.
56.	Madden, Carl H., Clash of Culture--The Decade of the Seventies, (preliminary dratt) 1972. Quoted by permission of the author.
57.	The following quotations are from a preliminary draft, kindly loaned me by William L. Wallace. The author, who has given his permission, is Senior Economist of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States.
58.	Couturat, Louis, La Logique de Liebniz, d'apr�s des documents in�dit�s, G. Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, Hildesheim, W. Germany, 1961, pp. 71,f.
59.	Kuhn, Thomas S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, 1962.
60.	This is made possible by an apparently anomalous process popularly called pump priming. The New University Council, founded in 1970, consists of a few generalists and organized specialists who had emerged spontaneously half outside the multiversity. Its core is a group of professors in diverse disciplines who had become friends as undergraduates at Oberlin College in the late Twenties. The others are friends recruited over the years here and there.--The First International Conference on Unified Science, New York, 1972, is being organized around this Council.
61.	George C. Lodge is a Harvard Professor of Business Administration.
62.	At the end of the school year, however, about 40% of the Freshman class dropped out of their own accord. Contrary to the Dean's prediction, the institution thus seems to be behaving homeostatically. To fulfil his prediction, the college would have to be changed into a high school by changing the faculty.