Dominant dynamics of human action vol 1 abstract by Stefano Delli Poggi

Stefano Delli Poggi

Dominant Dynamics of Human action Analytic and Theoretical Sociology to Economy and Society

Essays of Sociology and Economy (vol. I)

Key words Essays I and II Social systems, Theory of Values for Social Action (Teoria dei Valori), Economic actions. Organizations, Group, Groupship, Membership, Leadership, Working group, Freedom Essays III and IV Debt, Money, Globalization, Fundamental Dialectic, Historical Materialism, Collapse of Capitalism or Zusammenbruch

© 2017 – Autori Associati info@cddassociati.it ISBN: 979-12-200-1433-5 Research, additional files and developments are registered in PADIS «Sapienza – Università di Roma» until July 2015 Published in Kindle-Amazon, January, 2017 All rights reserved

Index

Foreword

p. 2

I. (1) – Human action: how men move their behavior

p. 4

II. (2) – The impossibility of Freedom

p. 26

III. (3) – An Abduction in the modern individualism

p. 39

IV. (4) – The Capitalistic Zusammenbruch

p. 54

Bibliography

p. 69

Foreword These essays are the result of sociological and economic research between 2005 and 2016. They are the synthesis, research and additional developments of studies on the social action (behavior) like dynamic system of the social interactions1. The present work is the final and updates results of the research until today and the forthcoming published of «Prædator – Solutions of profit, exploitation and inequality in the capitalist system». The former ones (first and second essay) can it be called as Analytic Sociology, and the others (third and fourth) as Theoretical Sociology that by definition is a speculative study, not applied at soon. In the interest of these studies the types of definitions that exists in the social sciences universe, are not important because they are really too much. Often they are just different ways to study the identical object: the human society. For us, these studies have an approach of complexity and chaos. The purpose of this work is just to get publishable and applicable the results. Readers can find the applicability with own solutions in many areas of social life, politics, organizations, in business or any others. In these works, more specifically, we refer to the chaos theory as dynamics of complex systems, with a multitude of variables that can influence each other in a non-chaotic and chaotic mode. In non-chaotic mode, small variations in output result from small variations in input, or large variations from large too. In chaotic mode, large variations come from minimum variations. In this second sense, the system enters in a chaotic state under the effect of non-linear functions, giving back an unexpected and/or unpredictable behavior. When we are in front of an unexpected behavior and/or unpredictable of the scientific object of Sociology (in some cases on probabilistic predictable) we are in front of the object homo and his acts. The ancient concepts of philosophy are also included: the χάος, mainly as a container and generator of variables, the κόσμος, such as any spontaneous ordering of χάος, determined by the dynamics of the system under control, and the τάξις such as artificial order κόσμος essentially made by the scientist in his analysis, as well as a mathematical matrix. It is the chaos so imagined as universe shapeless, irregular and unpredictable. “To some physicists chaos is a science of process rather than state, of becoming rather being. (…) Chaos as become not just theory but also method, not just a canon of beliefs but also a way of doing science.”2 1

For this topics, all my books are currently in Italian: 1) Dinamiche dominanti dell’agire e dell’agire sociale. Per una Teoria dei valori, voll. 1, 2 e Poscritto 2012 (PADIS «Sapienza», 2011-2012). 2) CCRC (Copia Riveduta), Trattato sulle dinamiche dominanti dell’agire e dell’agire sociale, voll. 1, 2 e Poscritto elaborati dall’edizione digitale e depositata presso la Biblioteca Statale «A. Baldini» di Roma (2012). 3) Teoria dei Valori. Prima congettura e dinamiche dominanti dell’agire e dell’agire sociale, (EAI, 2013). 4) Scritti di Sociologia, volume I. Analisi e Teoresi. Economia e Società (EAI, 2015). 5) Prædator – Scritti di Sociologia, volume II (Anicia, Kindle e-book, 2016). 2 J. Gleick, Chaos: Making a New Science, Viking Press Penguin, New York (NY), USA, 1987.

Chaos is the set of all possible variables that are related or correlated in every way. Here all the different cosmos that you can order are contained in potentia. Each cosmos isn’t necessarily complementary or definitely compatible. They are chaos’s expressions. Each of them functional in itself, but their variables cannot be totally and permanently expunged from the rest of chaos. Each cosmos is a temporary order (disposition or layout) in the chaos. Some variables which are in the cosmos (A) could be (alone or with other ones) in the cosmos (B). Two orderly cosmos extracts from chaos could return in messy condition when they are put in connection, so that their variables affect each other at any level. All systems are in dynamic movement: the greatest Universe and the smallest human action. The only thing that is different and changes is the point of view and the relativity between the system itself and its observer. So as for the smallest human action versus the greatest of those. The disorganization of the Cosmos (the multidimensional Universe) in the Chaos is so important for Humans such as the World War Two for an ant. This is the scientific model for the present analysis. We invite the reader to consider: - The results are presented in strictly synthetic form because their logical and philosophical dissertation, namely scientific elaboration, was done in others contexts. A summary of sociological science for individual and social action which we have given name of “Teoria dei Valori” (Theory of Values). - In Sociology exists the problem of verbosity and confusion of terms, often use those of the common language are used (group, role, ideology, institution etc.), and there is also the difficulties of translation from Italian to English or any other languages (especially in regard to syntactic problems). Here we use same Latin terms, with an explanation for each of them. These Latin words are our specific terms of this science. - English translation will suffer from the Italian syntax, and so the mathematical forms will increase the comprehension. - This paper takes also a short extract of Scritti di Sociologia, volume I; for this reason we’ll limit any discussion, and much of the processing will be given as affirmations from the analysis and synthesis of research. In particular, this work presents paragraphs (§§) which exhibit axioms, postulations and asserts, or logical points of inference. For the Traditional Logic: AXIOM is a certain principle, undeniable, evident for itself; an immediate evidence that is the starting point for further research. POSTULATION is a proposition which requires acceptance without being obvious or proved and takes for demonstration or a theory. ASSERT is an affirmation given as sure.

(1) – Human action: how men move their behavior

The “Teoria dei Valori”: a theory of social action

§-1. The first basic hypothesis of “Teoria dei Valori”3 (TdV) affirms: the individual action and social action are the result of a process of assessment rational and «economic-convenient» oriented to values. §-2. Axiom I – The individual (single person) is one and only one. The perfect unity of purpose between individuals is an illusion (Arrow, 1951, Impossibility theorem). The absolute universitas (universality) between Ego and Alter doesn’t exist. That’s so just in the social atom ( and ; ). Ego sum (I am), is the first subject social actor (for us: He is). Alter sunt (They are), is the second subject social actor (for us: He is or They are). This is a set (mathematic sense) composed of every other Ego present (real or virtual mode) in the social field of interaction with Ego sum. The symbol is and its value is inclusive between and . is the natural integers, limited at all the humans alive in the Earth. Minimal value of . Ego and Alter may have the same goal, but their motivation, their set of dimensions, like the economic function of preference, is always different. §-3. Axiom II – Every man is different from any other man in the past, present and future. Material and cultural absolute identity doesn’t exist between two men as Ego and Alter. The same is for the material identity, but also for the cultural identity. Two cultural men are the expression and the product of their own life, experiences and elaborations. The perfect cultural coincidence would implicate the absolute identity with any other man present in their social field. This fact would require infinite regression of all identities (all the humans existed in the Earth). §-4. Axiom III – Society doesn’t exists like a material ente, but only like an immaterial ente4. Society is the set of the individuals that form it.

Theory of Values is the specific name of this theory. We will maintain the Italian name (Teoria dei Valori) or its acronym TdV. 4 Ente means (not derived from the classic Latin) in philosophical sense: Being. Who or What that exists. It’s similar to entity.

It is an immaterial ente producing material effects on individuals and also it is the immaterial product of materials ente (the individuals). Society produces an external and coercive strength on the individual that also represents an orientation and a proposal for the same individual if he shares it. (Durkheim 1894-1895, Les Règles de la méthode sociologique). Society can only act in an immaterial mode (then this is not an act). When society materially acts on men this can be done only in an indirect manner: 1) from society to individual and/or group, through norma5, and 2) from individual and/or group to individual and/or group. This dynamic is expressed by the form Societas = Socius ↔ Socii6. §-5. Postulation I – Each man is similar to any other man in the past, in the present and in the future. Material men (like genus Homo: Erectus, Ergaster, Habilis and Sapiens) have got identical structure, physics and chemical, but they haven’t identical specificities (cellular development, genetic etc.); they are identical and different (§-3) at the same time and so they are similar. §-6. Postulation II – The individual and social action must be understood in their specific sense. The acts are not historically repeatable (content – why), but they have a repetitive dynamic (container – how). To make predictions is important in order to study the container and the content (together) of the social action. Sociology must explain how and why X does or will do Y. §-7. Postulation III – Actio-agere7 is the inclusion of the project and the execution of the act (action). It is action if it has sense, and the fundamental sense is individual (Weber, 1922, vol. I). §-8. Postulation IV – The Rationality is the power of each brain to calculate. In this sense, rationality does not mean accuracy. Every actio-agere is the result of a rationalization. Therefore any input in a black box (the human brain) gives all possible output. 5

It is the average in the normal distribution (Gaussian). The norma (it was the square ruler as instrument of precision work) is the use and the rule of the social live. All the different forms, like the law, the code, the regulation, the moral and also Mores (decorum, morality, habit) born from the norma. 6 Societas, Socius and Socii, are Latin terms for sociology. They are the individuals into a social field, with action, interaction, interrelation, often interdependent. Socius is «Who shares». 7 Here we use also Latin terms really to define that concepts that could confuse in the different languages. Actio-agere is a specific concept of . Actio is the project that also contains the intentionality act in the common sense of the wish, but especially in the sense of the Scholasticism, up to Brentano, Husserl and Schütz. The agere is the execution of the project, but that it is not able to be identical for the impossibility of the man to act in perfect congruence with its thought and the consequent rationalization in itinere of the same execution. The perfect congruence between Actio and Agere is the «perfect action». The perfect action is and it is a philosophical attribute of the Divinity or God.

If the Rationality is the calculable, the Irrationality is the not-calculable and it includes the unanticipated consequences of the action (Merton, 1936, The Unanticipated Consequences of Purposive Social Action; Boudon, 1977, Effets pervers et ordre social). For deduction, Not-Rationality is all variables that Ego doesn’t want calculate. It is the voluntary stop of choice and selection of variables in the rational calculation or their elaboration, like the “Bounded Rationality” of Herbert A. Simon, the “Self-deception” and the “Imperfect Rationality” of Jon Elster, the “azioni logiche-non-logiche” of Vilfredo Damaso Pareto, the “bonnes raisons” of Raymond Boudon. Not-rationality is included in the rationality sphere (geometrical). §-9. Assert I – It is the same hypothesis. Man considers a material and/or immaterial ente as an intentional object. He goes to this ente for its value. It is the action plan. This ente (ε) is considered valuable because it assumes a value. Everything could become a value (ε) if it is cognizable by the Ego. Each ente can be a value that has a value. So each universe contains infinities physical and mental ente (like the «polytheism of values» of Weber’s theory). They are the values (VV) of the Theory of Values (TdV). The possibility of considering (VV) appears to increase with increasing knowledge of man because he increases his cognizability. The dynamic of the process is: 1. Ego looks (considers) an ente of value (ε) in a social field. 2. He gives a subjective value. 3. He combines this value with the values of Alter (within the same social field). 4. So he obtains the value of direction (vector) and the value of intensity (with the «intentionality» of Brentano’s theory). 5. This is the value of possibility that he acts this action. The actio-agere of the “Teoria dei Valori” is a whole of «project and execution» (like «Phenomenology» of Schütz) and it proceeds at the thought’s speed. It proceeds in «ACTIO→AGERE→ACTIO …». It is a continuous assessment as “the Provinces of meaning” in the Schütz’s theory. §.10 Assert II - The TdV shifts the focus of the value to be estimated from the subject to the object, even if the subject remains the only maker of the production of that value. The personality and consistency of Ego occurs (measure) on the value he gives to ente in the time of his life, in later evaluations. In the times we will have got: if they are two different ente at the same time or if the same ente at different times. Evidently, the result would always be the same and be determined with certainty (predictability of the action) from the same ente if and only if the (iff) Ego has the Absolutus (absolute, total and unchangeable value of ente). 6

But the Absolutus (and the Absoluti too) is impossible for Humans, and so the stability and consistency of Ego (also his personality) are measured by the difference in value gives in time to the same ente of value, under more or less similar conditions. The value gives by Ego to ente is the value y in act more or less equal.

This affirmation implies our responsibility around the predictability of the action in the First conjecture. Also, this process fails if the data entered are not extremely approximated to the actual value of y that Ego gives to the ente (Îľ). In the value of the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Theory of Valuesâ&#x20AC;? the answer to the consistency of action lies therefore in the object and its valuation by the subject:

… §-27. The logical structure of function is

§-28. Synthesis of this process is the value y of The First Conjecture, whose form is given from the basic formula:

§-29. The ente (ε) for the value y is the result of mathematical product between the individual values of Ego and Alter and . §-30. The dominant dynamic of the human action is a vector with direction and intensity as y. This fact gives the intention of Ego to do an act, then the predictability or possibility to do it.

III (3) The impossibility of Freedom … 4. The formal model Leaving the obvious aside, the concept of Freedom can be expressed with a formal model. Starting from the social atom as the minimal society, we have: -

Full Freedom (FF) is , expression of full will1; such is Zero Freedom (ZF) is , it is . Minima Freedom, . Reducible Freedom, . Social Atom, . Social field of interaction, . Maximum Freedom of Ego, . Maximum Freedom of Alter, . Unit Conditions of Full Freedom (CU), is Maximum Unit Conditions,

The (immediately) logic deduction of impossibility of ous for ( and , such as: - Freedom is represented by equation - Otherwise by function

. .

simultane-

This because Ego’s Freedom (will) tends to occupy any space not occupied by Alter’s Freedom (will). Such as the air occupies the spatial empty on the earth, the social space cannot be empty: if Ego wants to go where none (or a few) blocks him, then he can do it! On the other hand, if Ego doesn’t want to go into a social space, this means it isn’t his social space. Finally, a banal observation: without another person, a social field doesn’t exist. In these conditions Ego’s Freedom is a function of Alter’s and vice versa. Initial model is the Cartesian two-dimensions diagram, like the economic spending diagram. However, in this model2 the axis coordinates aren’t representing a goods (spending), but each socius (Ego and Alter). The only object to be distributed between Ego and Alter (individual or groups) is «Full Freedom» (FF); . So we have: - value should be distributed on x and e y ; - under the condition e 1

Excluded the relationship with the Natural forces. Other models could be Edgeworth box and similar. Furthermore, the concept could be represented by fuzzy logic. 2

- in the function The diagram is this: a linear function. Numbers are only some examples of distribution points on the straight line. x y L

1 0 1

3/4 1/4 1

5/7 2/7 1

0,5 0,5 1

1/4 3/4 1

0 1 1

Quantity of L for E

5/7

3/4

Social Utopia Space (grey)

0,5 2/7 1/4

1/4 2/7

0,5

3/4 5/7

Quantity of L for A

The necessary Freedom (FF) for two individuals is a double social space which they haven’t available. In fact they should have . And this is exactly what they don’t have. An inexistent social space; a social utopia, where is the ideology’s kingdom. Model can be extended in , where for each Alter increased in one dimension too. The mathematic sum of each for each socius becomes the real condition where is Freedom in the social space considered. In this space each men have only a part of . So we have:

This is true because people determines what is right or wrong, good or bad, only through cultural and ideological sanctions and not by the actual dynamics of human behavior. So, if we suppose , we will have a social space and so forth. Obviously, by reason they are unique, live and indivisible individuals, we will always have . For case, we have: - Maximum vectors: - Any combination for For example: -

by origin

or and so forth.

The diagram of the function is:

(0 ; 0 ; 1)

(1 ; 1 ; 1)

(0 ; 1 ; 0) (0 ; 0 ; 0)

(1 ; 0 ; 0)

In case any distribution of Freedom results a point in the area of equilateral triangle ABC, where represents the dead line of each Ego when the system come back in . This â&#x20AC;&#x153;condition deathâ&#x20AC;? is not far from reality because whenever Freedom is canceled (totally), namely a man dies (or canceled), there is produced social space that can be occupied by others. 32

III. (3) – An Abduction in the modern individualism 1.

The Capitalistic production mode or Capitalism

What is the Capitalism? A lot of definitions are available. For example, one of this, we can see in “Die protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus” by Max Weber. Here, we adopt the simple and primitive definition of Karl Marx. Before this enunciation it is necessary to escape the first trap, and to remember that Marx never call the system “Capitalism” but “Capitalistic production mode” or simply “Capitalistic mode”, because the system is the “Capital” (such is the maximum Opera “Das Kapital”). And here there is the second trap: “production mode”, before than the activity for produce the goods (commodities, wares etc.), is the activity to produce and reproduce the life. Any act which is orientated to reproduce each aspect of life is included in “mode”. So we have the “Capitalistic production and reproduction mode of life”. In this sense the Marxian definition for Capital is “a social relation”, a rapport to produce and reproduce men’s life. Edward Gibbon Wakefield (Minister for the enterprise of Britain in the Australian colonization) was “the first” who had this “revelation” (so writes ironically Marx). Because it was very difficult to put men to work if they had other “means of production”1. So in the past there was Free and Slave (in the Ancient world), Lord and Serf (in the Feudal world) and now is Capitalist (Bourgeois) and Salaried (in the Capitalistic world). In this last world (“production mode”), everybody sells. Each man who wants produce and reproduce its life in the capitalistic system must sell. The logic is simple: selling for buying. That’s all. Nobody, in the Capitalism system, can live if doesn’t go at market to sell and to buy: the market is total. In our system (in mass) people cannot have a well with water, cannot have fields for grain or fruit, cannot have forest for firewood and so on and so forth. No! In Capitalism world everybody must to go to the market. Any kind of markets. Capitalist sells goods (commodities, wares etc.) and salaried sells “labor force”. Those are the only two large classes in the Marxian theory. For Marx other classes exist too, but each of them could be brought back to the two greater. The “possession-not-possession” of means of production is the element which definitely determines those classes.

K. Marx, The Capital, Book I, section VII, Chapter 25.

“È proprio tale separazione tra gli strumenti di lavoro da un lato e i produttori da un altro, che costituisce il concetto di capitale”2. This is the deep sense of Capital or Capitalism where men live. Capitalist and Salaried: they do this respectively two process for any cycle of production: ’ (Money – Commodities – Money plus) for capitalist, and for salaried (where is “labor force”, namely the unique “goods of the salaried”). This is the simple relation. All of them sell and all of them are happy. It is from the “happy salaried” that the Middle class is born. We also know that is not in the commodities circulation (in commercial sphere) where the surplus value is. It is induced by production industrial process (the specific process of production). And so because in the factory, in the farm etc., the means of production (owned by capitalist) and the labor force (sold from the salaried and bought by the capitalist) are again united forming the work (labor) in a full sense. The result of this work (labor) is the commodity which is alienated (Alienus) from the worker and sold at the market by the capitalist. For Marx “full labor” is the essence of men’s life. And is for this that the alienation is so bad. When a man loses the result (the profit) of its work he is dies. And this is not so strange: also in the capitalistic world, in our world, losing the single and individual fruit of work (profit or salary) means death (physical and psychological). But this is what we formerly know. For our hypothesis it is not important to refer again the Marxian theory. We have anything we need. What is important is to gather some logical consequences of the Marxian theory and some evidence too.

K. Marx, Il Capitale, Newton Compton, Roma 1970, Libro III, Sezione III, cap. 15, p. 1081. What constitutes the concept of capital is precisely the separation between instruments of labor, on one side and producers on another.

IV. (4) – The Capitalistic Zusammenbruch A possible consequence of the previous analysis is the modification and the collapse of the capitalist mode of production, namely Der Zusammenbruch des Kapitals. Zusammenbruch is the German word for mean collapse, bankruptcy. Zusammenbruch des Kapitals is the collapse of Capitalism, Marx thought, and that was supported by many Marxists (with quite a few errors). We must say immediately that the collapse of Capitalism is not through a political revolution which, as history shown, cannot last forever if it isn’t rooted in the will of man as best and most convenient way of life. In fact the so-called “Communism” (which was never realized) should not be confused with Soviet system (lasted about fifty years before the economic failure and social), or with Maoism, lasted even less. In fact, the life style of Capitalism did a long way in Russia until today and it is doing in China as well1. To change and above all keep a new way of life requires a critical mass of individuals and a relationship of coherence between the past and the present to have a future (fundamental dynamic of the dialectic). Without going any further, we will say simply that, while the Russian revolutionaries knew and wanted to change their system, the men of Capitalism (in Central-North Europe before) had no intention to do so. They didn’t come together to say: “Today we establish Capitalism”, but they just followed what appeared to be a favorable and useful way of life. The first ones have acted with the idea of a superstructure that would immediately change the structure, the second ones have acted on the structure (with new, higher relations of production), which in turn acted on the superstructure (bourgeoisie, democracy, freedom from the aristocratic power). A system therefore firmer, regardless of ideologies or ideas of justice, freedom or other nonsense. In a few words, in the capitalist system, all the capitalists want to sell their goods and all proletarians want to sell their labor force to become salaried and be able to buy all the possible goods. That’s all. They have no sense the ideological claims of «reds bourgeois» wanting superstructure directly on the structure, denying the concrete will of men living in society. What is consumerism? Isn’t it the clearest expression of the use and consumption of plenty? Any attempt to cancel it is moralistic and ideological. It comes by beautiful minds which talk about freedom, they putting all possible limits so it becomes the “to live according to their ideas”. Consumption and the consumption of plenty aren’t fair or unfair: it is a fact of the natural and social

We can just remember, for example, the USSR and the failures of the five-year plans, between IX (1971-1975) to XI plan (1981-1985), ending with the XII.

life. It is so obvious that it is even banal. Men consume because they want to consume and not because of some upper demon. And this has nothing to do with the process of predation of the capitalist system in the market, because a system that works better than another does not mean it is a perfect or eternal system. Indeed, as we saw in the previous essay, the process of predation takes place and expands directly with the expansion of trade capitalist. It doesn’t mean also that there are no conflicts to improve positions. Indeed, in the equilibriums of a global planet (more interdependencies), there’s no way to find large spaces so as to respect the Pareto improvements. There is not a way to improve own position if not at the expense of someone else. The competition is very, very strong and despite the «American dream» it is evident that for one winner there are a hundred (or more) losers. Encounter, confrontation and conflict, therefore multiply in space unfinished, but shrinking. The work of the Chinese – to put it vulgarly – replaces the work of many Westerners (older workers) which to buy the goods, they must preserve and increase their income in a different way by the position now occupied by new workers of the «Factory of the World». New workers which have damaged the position of older workers (Western). Only this (no other) is the concrete foundation of the “class struggle” to which, obviously, now the great standardized mass lacks.

ยง-20. The discourse then is this: the so-called bank rescue was only the first step to saving the capitalist system. This is because our whole world is mediated by the commodity equivalent of all commodities which flows and flowing through the banking system which is first operational tool. Thus, the theoretical and analytical solution (which is not an economic policy recipe!) to failure of Nations which we cannot afford failure, would be the following:

: global and absolute debts at time (Public and Private) - each possible value exists one value of : Common Currency World; any conventional value (average between majors money (power Nations, as economic, military etc.) - d: unemployment fixed to 0 (zero) - p: price freeze, time , with consequent block inflation.

Bibliography All books are currently in Italian language. Delli Poggi S. (2011-2012), Dinamiche dominanti dell’agire e dell’agire sociale. Per una Teoria dei valori, voll. 1, 2 e Poscritto del 16 marzo 2012 ed Estratti nn. 1, 2, 3, 4 – Ph.D. Thesis – PADIS «Sapienza». Delli Poggi S. (2012), CCRC (Copia Cartacea Riveduta e Corretta), Trattato sulle dinamiche dominanti dell’agire e dell’agire sociale, voll. 1, 2 e Poscritto elaborati dall’edizione digitale e depositati presso la Biblioteca Statale «A. Baldini» di Roma. Delli Poggi S. (2013), Teoria dei Valori. Prima congettura e dinamiche dominanti dell’agire e dell’agire sociale, Edizioni Accademiche Italiane, Imprint der GmbH & Co. KG, Saarbrücken, Deutschland. Delli Poggi S. (2015), Scritti di Sociologia, volume I. Analisi e Teoresi. Economia e Società, EAI, Saarbrücken (D). Delli Poggi S. (2016), Prædator – Scritti di Sociologia, volume II, Anicia Roma, Kindle e-book, Autori Associati, Roma.