asdfasdfadsfs asdf sdf asd fas dfasd fasdkf asdfjal;sdjf;lasjdflasjdfl;ajsd;lfjas;lkdfj;lkasdjflkj aksd;fja;lsdkja sdfkl;asdf aklsdjf  asdk;lja;lsdfj asdf askdfj;alsdjf as fajsdlkfjasd f asdlkfj asdklf asd;f alsk;df asdjf ;laskdf akkdsf alsdf aklsd f asdkfj as dfa...
SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
In dialectical terms, social development can be described first as the move away from the general direction of the Intent and then back towards it. The thesis (an unconscious alignment) would correspond to the physical stage; the antithesis (separation – the process of individuation and increasing independence) includes the move from the physical stage and, via the conventional stage, reaches its peak at the individual stage; the synthesis (a conscious re-alignment with the direction of the Intent) is represented by the transcendent stage.
This is a very simple diagram of the process:
The curve should be imagined as a spiral around the central axis (the length of its segments do not correspond to physical time, but to an approximate amount of change that took place). Moreover, the spiral is not a simple line. A smaller spiral going around it, as drawn between the physical and the conventional stages (and other spirals around that one) would be a better representation. But, why spirals at all? Is there any justification for that?
In the introduction to History & Mathematics, Trends and Cycles, Leonid Grinin and Andrey Korotayev write:
Already ancient historians… described rather well the cyclical component of historical dynamics, whereas new interesting analyses of such dynamics also appeared in the Medieval and Early Modern periods… This is not surprising as the cyclical dynamics was dominant in the agrarian social systems. With modernization, the trend dynamics became much more pronounced… The trend and cycle components of historical dynamics turn out to be of equal importance.
​The long-term interaction of macrotrends of the world system development and shorter-term cyclical dynamics is best represented by a spiral dynamic. This is not something new. The curve reflects a well-known symbol from ancient times, depicted with two intertwined serpents around God’s staff, called the caduceus (still used nowadays as a medical emblem). It is, perhaps, not a coincidence that this symbol resembles the double helix of DNA. In esoteric tradition, the two serpents of the caduceus represent the process of evolution[1]: ‘spirit descending into matter and rising again enlightened into spirit’ (Watson, 1991, p.307). The serpent has traditionally symbolised knowledge, enlightenment and wisdom (the Western association with evil is relatively recent and atypical). From this perspective, the myth of the serpent inviting Adam and Eve to eat of the tree of knowledge can be interpreted as the start of a new phase of the evolutionary process, ‘a liberation from unconscious
SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
We propose that societies develop through stages akin to those of individual development. After all, any society consists of individuals (although, of course, it cannot be reduced to them), so some parallels can be expected.
The concept of stages has lost traction though, not so much because of empirical data (that are open to various interpretations), but mainly because of two concerns: determinism and inequality. So, we should address them first.
Determinism – until the early 20th century, social determinism was popular among both idealists (e.g. Hegel) and materialists (e.g. Marx). Later on, however, the idea that there is a particular trajectory of social development was largely abandoned (with the notable exception of Teilhard de Chardin). One reason for this was a teleological overtone of those theories that was a mismatch for the dominant zeitgeist. The other more important reason was that social determinism didn’t go very well with human freedom. If global social processes were determined, this could mean that historical events and even individuals themselves are also determined – not leaving much room for choice and free will (the basis of political and legal systems in most of the world). This concern is not warranted though. Recognising that there is a particular trajectory of social development (at least up to a point, which will be clarified below) does not imply inevitability of any social event and can be compatible with individual choices. It only means that a society and humankind as a whole may sooner or later, in one way or another, reach a certain stage of development (that is, if that society or humankind does not perish beforehand). To repeat the above analogy, the fact that every person (who lives long enough) goes
SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
Quantitative social development refers to an increase or improvement of similar competences and capacities that typify this kind of personal development, although different examples naturally apply:
These capacities are manifested through social practices that affect all three dimensions of development:
PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT
The importance of social connections is well known and well documented. Here, we will examine this topic specifically in relation to personal development and the life’s purpose.
PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT
We argued previously that humans (and other life forms) have material and non-material aspects that interact. But what happens when the former is not capable of that interaction anymore? This is what we will address here.
All four methods described in the first part (phenomenological, inductive-deductive, transpersonal and reasoning) can contribute to this topic:
Each of these methods is clearly insufficient on its own, so what follows is an attempt to combine them to various degrees.
