Simplicia: Different countries, different mentalities? That’s well known, and has been for a very long time. Blaise Pascal said something related, a baby version: truth forward of the Pyrennes, error beyond them.
Tyranosopher: But that’s just comparing data points. Pascal said that ideas differ, depending on geography, not really shattering news. One can gather this in many texts of Greco-Roman antiquity, or even in Caesar’s war memoirs (Caesar had a keen eye for different ways and means, because it had dramatic military consequences). Nothing new. I will say more. How people learn, and what they want to learn differ, according to the society they live(d) in. Superiority in learning wins battles and that military supremacy is the secret of the superiority of the best of Greco-Roman antiquity (and that was mostly before the so-called “Hellenistic regimes”, that is prior to parasitic dictatorships, civilizational cancers, crowned by the Roman military monarchy, which, thanks to their increasing mental fascism imploded Greco-Roman civilization).
Simplicia: I mentioned mentalities. A mentality is more general.
Tyranosopher: How are mentalities established? By one’s society and, in particular, by that society’s Theory Of Knowledge.
Simplicia: Is a Theory Of Knowledge more important than a mentality?
Tyranosopher: Theory Of Knowledge, TOK, gives birth to civilizational mentalities. TOK drives minds, and attitudes to TOKs differ in history and geography, according to deep traditions. One can see this in China, with the apparent return of an emperor, Xi, along lines similar to the founding of, say, the Han dynasty, 22 centuries ago.
A more Western example: if the society imposes that some particular divinity or principle decides everything, including all values. Some civilizations strongly feel that a Theory Of Knowledge is not imaginable: knowledge is clear and evident, authorities, be they political or divine, and often both at the same time, have provided what is known, and to be known and desired and how. Such a TOK will build a restricted, restrictive and restricting mentality, what I call mental fascism. Mental fascism is why in Middle Ages Europe, one couldn’t ask some questions. “God” had given everything, including all the answers, so there better not be too many questions.
Simplicia: This is vague. Can you measure intellectual fascism?
Tyranosopher: Yes, the equivalent of the Gini coefficient exists for mental fascism. It’s even simpler.
Simplicia: Gini coefficient, what’s that?
Tyranosopher: An Italian named Gini showed a computation which, given a society, produces one number that is one measure of inequality of wealth, and one number which is a measure of inequality of income. It’s a difference of two integrals, one the strict equality law, the other the wealth (or income) distribution law one observes in practice. It’s actually very simple for anyone with a modicum of the most basic calculus.
Simplicia: Are we supposed to know calculus?
Tyranosopher: No. Computing area using an infinitesimal method was initiated by Archimedes 23 centuries ago, and then forgotten. Calculus, using Descartes’ algebraic geometry, was launched in full by Fermat before Newton’s birth. Fermat proved the basic theorem: integration and differentiation are inverse operations. Not knowing basic calculus means missing out on a major revolution of four centuries ago. But the equivalent of the Gini for mental fascism doesn’t require calculus.
Simplicia: So how do you measure mental fascism?
Tyranosopher: You count how many axioms a mental system uses to explain the world. For example Christians and Muslims have one axiom: “God”. “God” explains everything, dog explains nothing. In truth, it’s the opposite, hahaha [1].
Simplicia: Not really, the Qur’an doesn’t just have Allaah, it also has Satan, angels, and there are even have Djinns…
Tyranosopher: These are details. Allah himself in the Qur’an enjoins believers not to worry about His relationship with Satan and Djinn, because “these things are too difficult to understand” for simple humans.
So I just count the fundamental axioms, and invert that number, that’s the mental fascism index. A believer who has as fundamental behavioral guidance a single axiom “God”, “Allah”, “Hitler”, or Putin, has just a fascist index of one, which is maximum. In contrast I am basically zero, no fascism.
Simplicia: How?
Tyranosopher: Well I have all the ethological axioms of humanity , the so-called “instincts”, all the axioms of science (god knows how many that is). And so on. So my mental fascism index is very low, that’s the beauty of secularism. The Politburo in Beijing is not ruling my behavior, either: that would be one axiom, the Politburo has to be obeyed. Nor do I obey or admire Biden, Macron, etc.
Simplicia: But you obey the West imperial system masquerading as “democracy”.
Tyranosopher: Well, I have to obey the law. But frankly the present leadership system is so flawed that those taking part in it outside of Switzerland, are to be condemned verbally and vilified.
Simplicia: Somebody has to do it.
Tyranospher: What we have to do is get out of the present REPRESENTATIVE OLIGARCHY system… And get a more DIRECT DEMOCRACY. I don’t see present political leaders doing this. They are exploiting the system and fostering it, not changing it. They could try harder: Zelinskyi in Ukraine has kept the democracy and republic functioning, while at war: martial law was passed by the democratic representatives. Zelinskyi is working hard for democracy, our leaders much less so. One should push towards real people-power.
Simplicia: But in California, the direct voting system has been corrupted by the oligarchy. See the infamous Prop 13 property tax and its misuse by corporations.
Tyranosopher: Right, but irrelevant. Prop 13 can be fixed by another popular vote. It is just one referendum out of hundreds. In Switzerland too, not every referendum rules. There are checks and balances, and a proposition can be found unconstitutional, and there is a process of legislation. One can’t propose to make cannibalism legal; that would be blocked by the legal system and the constitution.
Simplicia: We are far from the Theory Of Knowledge and how it varies from place to place.
Tyranosopher: Not at all. Californians and Swiss, because they can vote directly on their laws, are, and have to be more cognizant, at least on the laws in their backyard. So they have to advance that particular, political and legislative, dimension of TOK.
Simplicia: And then?
Tyranosopher: They get prosperous. Interestingly, the latest numbers, from 2021, in California and Switzerland, show a GDP per head of 93,000 dollars, roughly twice that of the leading West European nations (UK, France, Germany). Actually California now has the world’s fourth largest GDP, even bigger than Germany, a country twice the size in population. This is a direct consequence of direct democracy.
Simplicia: Are you saying that having the best TOK is eminently practical?
Tyranosopher: The International Baccalaureate, a metric of education used by 5,000 high schools around the planet, gives a central place to the TOK, and rightly so. Civilization enables superior intelligence, in part from superior culture, and having a superior TOK is essential. All of this advancement of cognition is at the core of the human condition, and thus eminently practical. We can’t stand in place, because yesterday’s place is deteriorating, fast. Countries rife with mental fascism and inferior Theories Of Knowledge are not just heading towards gloom and doom, but also, considering the reduced size of spaceship Earth, they are a threat to the rest of the crew. A beautiful demonstration is offered by the cultural retards in the Kremlin.
Patrice Ayme
One axioms or a few, for all of one’s fundamental behavior: Mental Fascism. Many axioms: Open Mind (a product of the open society).
[1]: One would have, for a bit more precision in computing the fascist index, to introduce the notion of “effective axiomatics”, namely the axioms which most directly impact life. For example the axioms of Islam, as considered by the Ottomans, made it so that printing had to be outlawed: that was effective axiomatics, and made the Ottoman empire idiotic (I doubt that the Prophet would have outlawed printing…)
Patrice Ayme's Thoughts 