Theory of Good Living
(The current state of development of the theory, see: www.visism.info)
birth, life brings a chain of problems, desired or undesirable. One
of the achievements of the
Critical Theory of Good Living is to make
life problems more solvable.
on the results of science we have asserted in our publications since
human body is a result of natural evolution. Like every living
seeks a safe life, but as a rationally-oriented human being it
can also seek
justified life in all aspects of its physical and spiritual
purpose of the theory presented here is to help us understand the
to orient it towards good living for all. To this end, we have
of existential value – philosophical, psychological, sociological
– into a meta-theory: the visism.
from Newton that the world is a system of forces, and from Hegel that
are subject to reciprocal effects, it was Parsons who could order the
to the significance of every force in our life. Darwin discovered the
as the intrinsic motive force of our behavior, dialectical completing
who had proposed equal rights as the absolute moral law for all human
O N T E N T S
I: Good life by behavior or by actions
world of human beings
within the systems of forces
systems and behavioral systems
II: Justified Action
principle of equal rights
principle of assurance of existence
action in the practice of living
III: The Life Structure
world of life and its order
importance of the life structure
structure and development
IV: The Life Concept
development of life concepts
V: The Six Steps of Action
basic structure: GACORE
structure: partial steps
theoretically and the practically progress
advice as internal argumentation
VII: Argumentative communication
of argumentative communication
VIII: Production and Consumption
as a step of action
Social Market Economy
IX: Model of Life and Life Technique
invariable conditions imposed by nature
variable agreements imposed by human societies
general structure of life and Life Technique
X: Some applications of the Life Technique
I: Good life by behavior or by actions
(384-322 BC.) proposes to seek „good life“ with „a clear plan
to strive“. AVERROES (1126-1198 AC.) provides that good life needs
science. „The true practice is to comply with the actions that have
led to the happiness and in the avoidance of those which result in
misery. The knowledge of these acts is the practical science.“
(1724-1804) describes as "ignorant“ he who lives „by groping
in the experiments and experiences, without collecting certain
principles (what is called theory) and without thought a whole
(which, if this process is methodical, is a system) about his
business“ (1793, p. 358).
finally, CLAUSEWITZ (1780-1831): „There is absolutely nothing so
important in life, than to ascertain exactly the position from which
things must be understood and assessed, because only from one point
of view we can conceive the mass of phenomena as a unit, and only
this unity can save us from contradictions“ (1832/34, p. 992). What
he writes is insightful and convincing. We begin therefore with the
definition of our position: Every human being has the right to
achieve a good life.
are the conditions and characteristics of nature, society and of the
individual himself to promote or hinder the good life? To understand
the fundamentals of their world and to find her point of view, human
beings should begin with the highly probable fact that they are the
result of natural evolutionary processes (DARWIN 1859). Its organism
serves, from the perspective of its genetic material, to safeguard
itself and enable its continuance in new organisms (WICKLER &
the assurance of existence is a basic goal of each organism. This
also applies to the human organism, with the consequence: Since it is
human nature to secure its own genetic material, selfishness is the
rule. ADAM SMITH (1776) already recognized the self-interest as a
driver of economic behavior and action, but only because we know the
theory (and the fact) of evolution we know why this needs to be. The
selfishness of man is so vital for him, he is therefore in itself
neither good nor bad. Only if he wants to prove himself at the
expense of others, he becomes a moral problem (with which we will
deal in the second chapter).
organisms are limited to sustain themselves and reproduce. But for
the human being there are many more opportunities. How did they arise
in the course of evolution? Due to the mutability of genetic
material, new possibilities for new forms of behavior have arisen.
Finally, a trend-line runs over ape-like creatures to the human
being. His unique intelligence and his features give him the
possibility to live under nearly all conditions and to create even
conditions that does not occur in nature, in particular cultural.
it is also necessary to recognize the limits of the human being. An
individual's ability to distinguish colour
him to differentiate ripe fruits from under-ripe ones. His sense of
smell helps him to recognize and avoid spoiled foods. A person's
capacity to generalize enables him to deduce from a dangerous
experience with a wild beast what would happen with similar animals
and to protect himself accordingly.
a person can only know, recognize and explain himself and his world
in relation to his evolutionary developed existence on earth. As it
has become more and more clear, his possibilities for perception and
recognition have developed during the evolutionary process
exclusively to such an extent that they respond to the need of his
organism and his genetic material to survive.
an individual cannot assume that he will be capable of knowing the
world as such, independent of its perception. Just as the smallest
particles of the world appear only as symbols, as signs on the screen
of the apparatus of a scientist, so appears the world in its totality
only by symbols in his conscience. Through his senses, he is only
able to know the world as perceived by the body, by the corporeality
human beings (Nils BOHR 1938). The man can only claim that he knows
the world in a manner that allows him to live.
typical result of existential perception and thinking is knowledge
composed of information, which an individual receives, produces and
transmits. When he communicates with others to influence their
behaviour, he argues. An author argues with his readers, a teacher
with the pupils.
arguer assumes and believes that the receiver has access to his
arguments, which he will accept or reject with his own arguments. The
receiver is influenced by arguments and he therefore demonstrates his
ability to act, since all behavior
guided by arguments can be called an action (SCHWEMMER 1979).
Under the perspective of the good life, it is desirable that human
behaviour should be an action.
it must always be considered that a big part of human behaviour has
not the quality of an action, because it is not guided by arguments
but rather by the corporeality, for example by feelings.
do not have access to arguments and are therefore incapable of
action. They can only behave in accordance with a program developed
during their evolution. Action is a behavioural characteristic of
humans that includes the external action observable by other people,
in other words, the processes occurring between individuals
(especially communication) and the influence of an individual over
nature (especially production).
also includes internal action, in other words, processes such as
thinking, which compare, accompany and evaluate external action. This
internal behaviour is accessible to the arguments of others and also
of the self. He who thinks argues with himself.
behaviour and each action (behaviour based on arguments), is
implemented for existential reasons and is influenced by
self-interest (BALTES 1978, 1984). Consequently, not all actions are
justified. Reason can be mistaken or subject only to the egoistical
goals of a person's own corporeality. But when is an action
justified? Nature knows only one principle: the strong dominates the
weak. Human morality has, then, the task of opposing this principle
and creating a solution that not only assures life but enables every
person to expand his existence to a good life.
morality that takes into account the selfish nature of human beings
and at the same time opposes nature - giving every person the right
to aspire to a good life, is not easily explained. For this reason,
in this first chapter, we will limit ourselves to describing
behaviour and action. We will describe the behaviour and the actions
of individuals without establishing moral values.
in the second chapter, with the help by the moral system of KANT
(1785), we develop a prescriptive model, a model of legitimate
action. This model makes it possible to evaluate all behaviour and
action in a justified manner.
world of human beings
a world of scarce resources, it is necessary to possess convincing
arguments if good living is to be sought. Different sciences provide
arguments; however, because they are specialized and differ from one
another, they present only autonomous fragments and do not provide
sufficient help in resolving the problem in its entirety:
deals with genetic material and organisms; physics with the
modification of matter in space; chemistry with the composition of
matter; philosophy with the ordering of information; and
communication with the dissemination of information.
an agent is forced to combine the results of the different sciences
because each problem, each success or failure, is directly or
indirectly related to the knowledge resulting from all the sciences
of existential value. Whether or not to share a piece of bread
presents an ethical problem, besides a biological, physical,
hygienic, mathematical or communication one.
whoever can bring together the results of the different sciences, who
combines the results to intelligently resolve a problem has the best
arguments and more opportunities to achieve good living, for himself
and the society. To this end, HEGEL (1812/1813) established
fundamental scientific principles. His philosophy describes the world
of human beings as a totality, that is, as an aggregate of substances
having a reciprocal relationship with one another, because they are
active and passive at the same time (see also KANT, 1784/1785).
(1966) used these ideas as the basis of his theory. According to him,
two or more units (substances) with reciprocal effects constitute a
system that belongs, as a sub-system, to a larger one. Consequently,
the world of human beings is a system composed of interconnected
sub-systems. Biology, physics, mathematics, philosophy are
sub-systems in the human system of knowledge, connected in serving
the existence. Each sub-system produces a specific output through its
characteristic properties and activities. Here are two examples:
a human perspective, plants and animals form a sub-system in the
totality (meta-system) of his world that provides the organism with
the required food.
and their children form a sub-system in the society and have a
reciprocal relationship with it. As a family, they contribute to
maintaining society, but they also expect it to provide them with
educational, health, cultural and other means.
to PARSONS (1980), the existential output of a system with respect to
other systems is defined as its function. For human beings, the
function of the world as a system consists of its output for human
life. This is obvious if we analyses the human evolutionary process.
We recognize three superimposed worlds (three sub-systems) that make
up the world of human beings.
world system: The world without life
of years ago, the Earth was formed and hundreds of millions of years
had to pass before life first arose. In the current world of human
beings, this first world corresponds to the inorganic sub-system, to
his inorganic environment (PARSONS 1966).
reciprocal effects in this sub-system are apparently determined by
causal relationships. For this reason the effects can be generalized
and become laws, in laws of nature. For humans, inorganic substances
and their reciprocal effects constitute conditions which, with the
aid of chemical and physical laws, can be used or rejected, for
example, in medicine or engineering.
must change its inorganic environment to survive, to live better. But
he must not forget, that inorganic conditions participated in his
evolutionary development. Every change, by some chemical processes,
will therefore achieve unprecedented effects on him, positive or
negative. It has therefore to be considered: changes yes, but with
world system: The world of plants and animals
the perspective of a theory of systems, this second world is composed
of two sub-systems. The first contains the chemical and physical
effects of the first world while the second has new reciprocal
effects originating from the desire of organisms to assure their
life, the world acquired its first meaning. Due to the need of the
genetic material of plants and animals to conserve and extend life,
the reciprocal effects acquired a positive or negative significance.
specific effects characterize the inorganic world, the relationships
of human beings with the world of plants and animals are also quite
specific. The behaviour of animals and plants can be explained,
predicted and modified through quasi-laws.
person who grows plants according to their laws will see them thrive,
which does not mean that this is how plants show their gratitude, as
some rose growers may claim, the plants have to prosper simply
because its laws apply to them.
behavioural psychology has shown that this principle can also be
applied to the animal world, although in a weakened form, depending
on the animal's intelligence: in dogs, its probability is higher than
in monkeys (SKINNER 1969).
the human world, this world with life but without human beings
belongs to the organic medium sub-system, to the organic environment
world system: The world of human beings
the second world system, instincts, intelligence and behavioural
patterns had developed, but it was not until human beings evolved
that reason appeared.
not only want to assure their existence by adapting themselves to the
natural world; they also has the goal to modify the world to
improve their existential conditions. They seek to expand their
lives. Reason then appears as the thinking, communicating and
producing substance, as a cultural power.
in functional terms, reason includes potentially conscious knowledge
that enables both the assurance and expansion of life. From a
biological and physical perspective, during the evolutionary process,
the human brain increased in size, especially those parts responsible
for thought, speech, personality and creativity (SCHRIEFFER &
parts and their functions have developed to the extent that, under
favorable individual and social conditions, the capacity necessary to
assure life is not exhausted, but rather remains as surplus or "free"
energy that makes the cultural expansion of existence possible.
(Favorable conditions: in war the assure of existence dominates).
areas of the brain and their output also inform us on the attributes
we should order under the concept of expansion of existence. They are
manifested, on the one hand, in all pleasurable activity without a
specific purpose that does not have the exclusive function of
assuring life, for example, artistic creation, recreation and
leisure, and on the other hand, in the development of morally
resume: Individuals perceive the reciprocal effects in the inorganic
world in a predictable, determined way (natural law). With animals
and plants, there are new reciprocal effects that cannot be predicted
with absolute certainty -- the behaviour of organisms. The
development of intelligence and the possibility of the expansion of
existence gives way to a third system, the world of human beings, in
which also a certain free will is characteristic - individuals accept
or reject arguments. Therefore, this third system is a world in which
human beings can act, not only behave.
causes and results of human action are much less predictable than the
typical intelligent behaviour observed in animals. HEGEL (1812/1813)
recognizes consequently that the human spirit is distinguished from
animal intelligence because it does not permit an external effect to
influence it without resistance, but instead attempts to reject or
transform it. Who educates in the best way must not achieve the best
effects in the child. Children are not plants.
the perspective of the natural sciences, oriented toward a strict
mathematical order, chaos arises from the effects of human
intelligence. Due to the growing liberty that the agent possesses, it
becomes increasingly difficult to comprehend and predict his
behaviour, his acting with the formulas of traditional mathematics.
a result, for the "exact" sciences, individuals and their
communities become increasingly chaotic (DEVANEY 1989). Nevertheless,
this lack of order has two existential sides: although risk grows
with liberty, the possibilities for attaining good living by
organizing life in individual ways also increase. We will see: human
order in a chaotic world is caused by his goals. Life orders the
human organism is influenced by a unique intelligence. It must be
considered too, that through the interaction between human
intelligence and human body the human feelings are also unique. No
animal can be happy about justice among others, no animal can be sad
about his future end.
human organism is different from the animal organism, therefore, we
will refer to it as corporeality. We thus view the human individual
as composed of two main forces: his corporeality and his intelligence
individual has his own corporeality and intelligence. All give
a special meaning to their lives, create their own world system,
place themselves in the center and interpret substances and their
effects from this vantage point.
this reason, our theory also serves as the basis for a position that
could be called "existential relativism." We renounce the
intent to know and achieve absolute truth because, as explained
earlier, human beings are the product of an evolutionary process and
can only describe and change the world with their own means. A
distant star, upon being discovered, becomes an object described by
human categories, even in its scientific explanation.
distancing from the absolute truth, this recognition of the
relativity of what determines us (a recognition that corresponds
largely to the twentieth century and takes exception to the ideas of
KANT, HEGEL and MARX, oriented to the absolute) deprives us of
certainty in life. Probabilities and approximations to the goals of
life rather than certainties characterize our lives.
"truth" now has validity as something provisional and
relative, which is manifested in dynamic good living. If a change in
perception is experienced due to evolution, for example in the
perception of colors, the existential truth would also change. In
other words, truth is what constitutes a positive or negative meaning
for life (see JAMES 1909). So we understand FEUERBACH (1830/31, p.
288): The purpose of life is none other than life itself.
it would be a contradiction to claim that this existential relativism
is an absolute truth. Presumably, it is only the most justified
position for good living. Its other limitations will be explained in
Chapter II, which addresses the issue of a morality mandatory for
within the systems of forces
that produces effects is called a force. Consequently, all
substances, whether mental (judgments, ideas, notions), organic
(physical bodies, behaviour, feelings) or inorganic (materials in
space and in time) are forces, a term that permits us to relate all
substances in our world of life and integrate them into a complete
as a notion is both sufficiently abstract to be used in theory and
concrete enough to be used in practical life. It unites theory and
practice, a key advantage as compared with other, more abstract
metaphors that could be applied to all substances, for example,
energy and information (see NEWTON 1687, LEWIN 1951, JOKISCH 1981,
ULMER, HÄFELE & STEGMAIER 1987).
we have chosen the good living of humanity as a basic perspective, if
we imagine life as a system of forces, we must ask ourselves: How
should we structure and use the forces to make the possibility of
good living more likely?
and intelligence or reason (we be able to determine the difference
between intelligence and reason in the second chapter) are the basic
forces in the area of reciprocal effects because distinguishing
between them helps us to understand how humans, through reason, can
introduce new elements into nature – among others, morality –
without which good living would not exist.
we will see too in the second chapter, the function of morality is to
respect and consider others as joint forces. In a world in which
organic and inorganic resources are limited, individuals must take
into account not only their own desires and ideas, but also the needs
if we look at the functions necessary in the world of human beings,
reason and nature are sub-divided into six forces: our own reason;
others' reason; our own corporeality; others' corporeality; the
organic medium (organic environment); and the inorganic medium
is thus possible, for each action (and each human behaviour), whether
it is communication or production, to take place in the area of the
reciprocal effects of these six forces. The action uses them and at
the same time constitutes their output.
six forces also produce reciprocal effects among themselves, however.
Consequently, they cause more subtle forces which, gathered and
ordered in the "Life structure" (Figure 3) represent the
ramifications of living.
is essential to consider that all six forces and all partial forces
belong to a common field of interactions (can be illustrated by a
hexagon), that is, they influence one another. Any force that changes
is influenced and affects all other forces. A newly born child has a
more or less strong effect on all the forces in the life structure of
the moment, we will stay with the basic structure composed of the six
forces. For the agent, these forces determine the conditions and
possibilities for assurance and expansion of existence; in other
words, for good living, since they increase or limit his
these existential processes, each force carries out its specific
tasks (functions). To make this possible, forces are differentiated
by their properties and activities. To say: each force produces
specific effects through specific properties and activities.
A force, whose function consists of assuring the existence of human
corporeality - for example as food - must possess adequate properties
and activities. The organic medium, for example, is composed of
plants and animals that are born, grow and die.
a force that is both captain and helmsman within the system of forces
of an individual, must have elements corresponding to those
functions. In other words, this force of a person must have the
properties that enable to make judgments and perform activities to
define and accomplish the goals.
it is necessary to define all the basic forces, in terms of its
specific properties and activities, and to distinguish them in this
manner. This differentiation will be one of the basic ideas in our
theoretical construction, although we must make clear that the
definitions of forces are only approximations:
task of our intelligence is to distinguish and define forces, but
intelligence itself is the result of evolutionary processes in which
both nature and the spirit have participated. Intelligence and even
reason were created through reciprocal effects, linked to nature
through corporeality. Thus, intelligence and reason can only
imperfectly be distinguished from itself and from the other forces,
defined as approximations:
own or others´ power (intelligence), which recognizes and creates
the existential through characteristic properties (notions, ideas,
judgments, concepts), and through activities (generalizing,
concluding, inventing, examining, communicating).
own or others body as a force that perceives and realizes the
existential through characteristic properties (physique, sensations,
representations, needs, feelings) and activities (perceiving,
memorizing, communicating, moving, growing, reproducing).
MEDIUM: animals and plants, which are forces of existential
importance for humans because of their properties and activities.
forces with characteristic properties (physique, sensations,
representations, needs, feelings) and activities (perceiving,
memorizing, communicating, moving, growing, reproducing).
forces with characteristic properties (organic structure, programs
for the assurance, extension of existence) and activities (feeding,
MEDIUM: inanimate forces with properties (mass, form, color,
temperature, valence) that produce physical or chemical effects in
time and space.
importance of the system of forces lies in the fact that the goals of
the individual, the assurance and expansion of his existence, create
a series of problems throughout life.
achieve their goals, individuals need resources they often cannot
easily access. Additionally, these resources are needed by others to
achieve their own goals. As a result, individuals must understand the
world, order it according to their goals and modify it based on
this, the system of forces orders the world and prepares the skills
necessary to change the conditions of life:
informs on the properties and activities of forces, elaborated in the
models Structure of life (Chapter III) and Concept of life (Chapter
helps each person find the arguments to plan, defend and create his
world by justified goals. The system of forces prepares the skills
for planning and achieving goals, elaborated in the models
Self-advise (Chapter IV), Argumentative communication (Chapter VII),
Production and Consumption (Chapter VIII).
processes contribute to know or change the conditions of life, they
are the tools of life (Chapter IX). We have therefore to look closely
on their features, contents and forms.
and forms of forces
understand the processes of knowledge and modification of forces, we
turn to KANT (1784/1785) and Hegel (1812/13), who said that no force
is purely passive before others because it also actively performs.
Therefore, unilateral effects do not determine the relationships in
systems of forces. Reciprocal effects characterize the human world.
To analyze this, we must describe them as processes with content and
and their properties form the contents of the process and respond to
the question: Which substance acts? (A plant's organic material grows
as a result of the force of humidity, mineral substances and light).
Additionally, the activities of forces determine the formal aspects
that can be observed in a process: What programs or rules does this
process use? (The plant grows in the direction of the light).
explaining the formal aspects of reciprocal effects, we should
consider that forms do not exist by themselves. They can only be
mentally separated from their contents (there is no mathematical
circular form without a more or less circular object in reality).
However, once separated mentally, the same form can be used with
respect to different contents.
formulas are equally important for all calculable problems: two
"contents" of human action, the well in the desert and the
bridge in a water-rich region, may be quite different, but the
engineer who attempts to build a well in the desert uses the same
maths as the one who builds a bridge in the tropics. Consequently,
formal structures constitute an essential part of this book. Every
individual has different contents (has different goals), but can use
the same formal structures as the others to achieve them.
given situation, approximation
basic goal of each organism is the assurance of existence, to which
human beings add the expansion of existence. Therefore, behavior and
action are continuously oriented to reaching goals. In other words,
from a given situation, they attempt to approximate a desired
objective. Thus, if an agent structures the steps of an action, that
is, as a process, he must do so with the aid of procedural moments:
goal, given situation and approximation.
!: MOMENTS IN THE PROCESS OF AN ACTION
begin with goals. From all we have discussed until now, it can be
deduced that the goals of individuals can be very different, but that
they all share the desire to achieve good living. A principle of
evolution, as we have seen, is exhibited in the function of each
organism to conserve and expand its genetic material.
newborn has the purpose of assuring its existence through behaviour
guided by reflexes (PIAGET 1964). For an adult, however, good living
involves much more than what nature provides, since it adds a
developed intelligence that seeks to expand existence through
behaviour or actions.
notion of "given situation" means that at the beginning of
an action (or a behavior), a system of forces is already in
existence, which is qualitatively or quantitatively distinguished
from the desired system of forces, in other words, from the goal.
call the movement towards a goal an "approximation,"
thereby highlighting both the process and the imperfection of the
action. The goal, the conditions for its achievement and the given
situation can only be known and influenced in an imperfect way
(compare BACHELARD 1927). The agent can try to avoid unfavorable
conditions to achieve his goal, but he will not be able to escape
them completely (there will always be traffic accidents despite all
efforts to prevent them).
the affirmation that pure mathematics achieves perfect results, we
suggest that mathematics works in a formal way, in other words, it
eliminates contents, as mentioned already above. Three plus three
equals six, six divided by two equals three, exactly half. But in the
reality, this is only an approximation. We observe that three apples
plus another three apples appear to be six, but when we want to
divide them into equal parts to give to three children, we recognize
an approximation: each apple has a different shape and content and it
is therefore impossible to make three identical parts.
action, through communication or production, only approximates the
ideal. Therefore, we can affirm and accept that the human world, an
individual's external world and the individual himself, are composed
of approximations. This implies some consequences:
as there cannot be complete happiness, neither can there be total
person who categorically denies his guilt creates a residue of
belief in other people's innocence.
is no law without exceptions.
consequence: Since every interpretation and existential concept has
its arguments, we should prefer and choose those that contribute to
good living for all. (This apparently logical consequence is an
and dialectic effects
significance of a force depends on the position it occupies with
respect to our goals, whether favorable or unfavorable.
the forces go against our goals, if they are obstacles or opposing
arguments, we refer to these forces and their effects as "dialectic."
Generally, dialectic forces make life more difficult, although they
can often give way to a better, more expanded life. For example, the
assurance of existence is the goal of the individual but he faces
cold and humidity as dialectical forces. This in turn leads to the
construction of houses and to the development of architecture, which
today is a part of the cultural expansion of human existence.
effects bring with them risks but at the same time possibilities for
expanding existence. This is why HEGEL (1812/1813) calls them "the
root of all movement and all development."
fare, forces do not always produce dialectic effects that threaten
existence or reduce possibilities. In the evolutionary process, the
human body has adapted so well that it is supported by many of the
forces surrounding it, like a fish in the water.
individual considers these forces favorable for his existence, but
also perceives them as natural, as "normal": several years
pass before a child realizes that he breathes and the manner in which
he does so. This knowledge is easy to assimilate and does not create
any conflict (PIAGET 1976), because the child perceives, feels and
judges breathing as a means for living.
here on, we will refer to the effect of a force that supports the
goal of another as "additive." This term will also be
applied if the outcome of two effects is less or more than the sum of
the two: a poison increases the effects of another poison in an
"additive" way, but the joint effect cannot be determined
simply by adding the two.
a concrete action is always composed of additive and dialectical
effects. Only accentuating we can call the dispute as a dialectical
or, in the case of being peaceful, an additive reasoning. Both forms
are only approximations to the concepts of conflict and consent.
systems, not only are there reciprocal effects between forces, but
also within each force. Reason, for example, has the characteristic
properties of notions, ideas and judgments and the activities of
generalizing, concluding and examining. In other words, reason
interacts with others using reciprocal effects from the information
it receives or that it already possesses. But reason can be found
more or less close to reality.
2: POSITION OF EACH FORCE ON THE CONTINUUM BETWEEN DETERMINATION AND
KANT (1784/1785) recognizes two distinct functions and sub-systems of
reason, "pure reason" and "practical reason",
which are in additive and dialectic relations. He attributes absolute
liberty to pure reason, whose function is to provide theoretical
(speculative) knowledge of the world and the theoretical construction
of an ideal world, because it can be separated from all experience.
the perspective of our theory, we interpret pure reason as a part (a
sub-system) of the system of forces that constitute reason and
nature; therefore, it exists only as the goal and the desire of an
individual to disregard, in his thoughts, the conditions of his own
nature (corporeality) and of his environment.
reason exist only as approximation. But in effect, the fewer real
conditions that the reason has to consider, the greater the number of
theoretical possibilities the individual will have and the "freer''
his thought will be. Thus, pure reason is capable of inventing ideals
and imagining circumstances that go beyond what exists in nature.
Freedom, liberty is encountered in this way.
functional purposes, practical reason (intelligence) also exists.
This sub-system attempts to realize the ideals of pure reason without
abandoning the relationship with real life, since it has the goal of
the assurance and expansion of existence. To be able to survive,
practical reason is forced to adapt itself to the conditions imposed
by nature; consequently, practical reason is less free than pure
reason and is closer to the needs of corporeality and the outside
reason lives in the corporeality. The reciprocal effects within human
corporeality are explained only partially by the laws of behavior
(which similarly serve for highly developed animals) since they
depend not only on the determinism of chemical and physical processes
(The spatial modification has physical techniques as methods, the
material modification has chemical ones), but also are influenced by
the unit that corporeality and reason form. Closer to determinism are
behavior and the manifestations of life in the organic medium
(animals and plants). Therefore, we can speak of a continuum between
determinism and liberty.
qualities of the reciprocal effects within forces also influence the
reciprocal effects between forces. Where reason participates, there
is always some liberty; where nature intervenes, determinism exists
to a greater or lesser degree. In an action, both forces always
appear; consequently, they do not develop with the regularity and
need of natural law. However, they can be conceptualized according to
will cite an example: conflicts between individuals originate due to
the egoistical goals of their corporeality, of their nature. In this
case, their communication encounters obstacles and they do not reach
justified solutions. Nevertheless, it is possible to invent rules
that lead to a solution by proposing that all communicative acts take
place in the form of arguments respecting the corporeality of the
other. One of these rules states: When arguing, avoid making the
other feel defeated, since this stimulates the self-interest of his
corporeality as a dialectical force, with probably destructive effect
(compare FISHER & URY 1991).
consequence of the greater or lesser participation of reason is
creative liberty. Cultural and social attributes vary significantly
in different human societies because they are largely based on the
liberty of reason (or intelligence) while the conditions associated
with nature are more fixed: the meaning of a foreign word has to be
explained while the significance of a construction that serves as a
roof is recognized without difficulty.
and immediate effects
speaking of intelligence and corporeality as different forces, we use
a metaphor appropriate for life. A similar thing occurs with the
notions of "mediate" (indirect) and "immediate
(indirect). We use these terms because they facilitate the
realization of good living.
and immediate effects are important to cope with the reality, with
the truth in human life. The distinction makes it clear that
immediate effects are not characteristic in their frequency, they are
limited on the relation between own intelligence and own
example, the effect of fatigue on corporeality most likely produces
the same effect on reason. And we know that reason can dominate
directly the corporeality, the feeling, without the aid of other
means. And chemical forces (medicines, for example) and physical
forces appear to us to have an immediate effect on the organism.
reason cannot act immediately on its exterior world; neither can the
outside world immediately affect reason. Corporeality exists between
has the task of serving as a medium for reason, but by being an
active force, it also intervenes with its properties and activities.
It is determined by evolution, oriented genetically, what can, for
example, falsify, promote or impede the transmission of arguments.
examples: the individual with an attractive appearance persuades more
easily. - It is easy to change reality in pictures, television and
films. - To recognize true love certainly is impossible, whether
expressed in letters or in direct contact.
a result, a communication model whose function consists of exchanging
arguments and truth has to take into account that both reason and
corporeality participate (See Chapter VII: Argumentative
systems and behavioural systems
that lives has a certain amount of intelligence. What distinguishes
human beings from other ones is such a highly developed intelligence
that it can be differentiated in pure and practical intelligence, and
- under certain conditions - in pure and practical reason. In action
systems, adults for example, reason acts as a passive or an active
force. In behavioral systems, child's for example, only the mere
intelligence behave as a passive or an active force.
an active force, reason argues via its properties (notions, ideas,
judgments) and activities (generalizing, concluding, inventing,
examining). This can be an internal action or can be directed
outward. In an internal action, reason recognizes and conceptualizes,
in other words, it argues with itself. In an external action, reason
directs itself to others' reason or intelligence and arguing means
verbally transmitting arguments, that is, communicating via argument.
a passive force, reason has access to arguments. It is capable of
recognizing the existential meaning of additive and dialectic
arguments communicated to it via others' reason or intelligence. It
is also an active force, however, since it produces its own arguments
to evaluate those of others.
a system of forces can be called an action system when reason appears
as a force that has access to additive arguments, and especially to
dialectic ones (compare SCHWEMMER 1979). But if other forces dominate
(corporeality or organic and inorganic nature) we would typify the
system simply as a behavioural system or one of natural law.
is the case of plants and animals, as well as newborns and infants
(under the simple aspect of the life technique rather than morality),
because their corporeality dominates them to the extent that they
react like behavioural systems. For this reason, education is so
difficult, because moral education works typically with dialectic
arguments. (And we have to hope, that in the case of the encounter
with the so called aliens, improbable but possible, we will be in
contact with actions systems.)
and behaviour in interaction systems
evolution has had the effect that we live in communities. Individuals
live in communities and their action or behaviour is often directed
towards other people. We call this action "inter-action."
An interaction has the primary function of influencing the knowledge
of individuals that try to comprehend, devise and transmit the
existential meaning of a problem and its solution in oral or written
form. In this case, it takes place as a "communication."
second function is to influence the corporeality of another person.
Contact with newborns, sexual love or surgical techniques take place
in this way. In these cases, the interaction is called "production."
To resolve an organic problem, production modifies the corporeality
of an individual through physical or chemical activities.
in general, production is characterized by the modification of
non-human forces; in other words, organic and inorganic forces. These
forces cannot act; organic nature participates only through behaviour
and inorganic matter through its physical or chemical properties and
least two people participate as forces in interactions. An
interaction is therefore a system. It is divided into relatively
large sub-systems, among which societies (states) are noteworthy
since, with respect to their members, they include everyone and at
the same time are independent, because every society brings together
more conditions for independent existence and survival than each of
its sub-systems (PARSONS 1966). Society is consequently above
institutions and organizations because it creates, modifies or
society also represents its members before the outside world, when it
interacts with other societies through contracts or wars. But
individuals and their interactions constitute the elements of each
society and institution. Precisely for this reason, the society forms
only a relative system. Its parts are what make it an entity and it
only exists through them (HEGEL 1812/1813).
interactions that take place are related to goals. The goals of a
society, of institutions and individuals are presented as parts of an
entity, but are not always supportive, additive forces. Under
circumstances - that are not unexpected in a world of limited
resources - the different goals are in competition, in other words,
they are dialectic: the self-interest of the individual and the
collective interest of the society can be in conflict.
an individual believes is fair can be in disagreement with the norms
of his society, if it favors the interests of the privileged classes,
for example. Much social upheaval in the world is the result of
dialectic effects such as these.
that every action system is guided by reason (an important difference
to behavioural systems dominated merely by intelligence), each
individual, institution or society can create arguments that control
the other systems. This competence relativists too the hierarchy of
control which, according to PARSONS (1966), places a society above
institutions and organizations and these bodies above the
interactions of individuals.
example: The development of collective knowledge requires
corporeality as a medium, oriented above all to the assurance of
existence. Therefore, this knowledge is frequently static, not very
creative and far from ideals (compare HABERMAS 1965). Often,
technically or morally justified inventions are the product of
internal action and the reflections of an individual and must impose
themselves over opposing social forces. KANT's ideas (1793) and the
difficulties of their acceptance in the societies constitute an
some remarks, how the self interest of people caused the main
problems of the human world: If society wants to assure and expand
existence, it must offer sub-systems to individuals so that they can
concretely reach their goals (see BERELSON & STEINER 1972).
these sub-systems are institutions and organizations related to the
family, the school and the workplace, which have a special
significance because their conditions also determine to what degree
the individual will be capable of realizing the assurance and
especially the expansion of his cultural existence.
therefore constitute the main causes of existence of the social
strata and of the differences between the countries. The lower class
is limited to the assurance of existence while the middle and upper
classes, mainly due to their superior education and formation, have
greater opportunities for realizing good living (See MARX 1844).
characterizes the internal situation of a society also produces
existential differences between societies -- the level of instruction
and education, which give rise to the different qualities of life
among nations. Descríbing it in the most general term: The closer a
society is to the conditions of nature, the further from a modern
education and formation, the more improbable is a good life for all
solution is to make actions and interactions in all societies more
probable, diminishing the pure selfishness of the behaviour:
Individuals, institutions, organizations, societies and humanity are
entities, systems with reciprocal effects. If they develop as action
systems through adequate instruction and education, the force of
reason, and not of uncontrolled selfish behavior, will guide more and
this case, as HOBBES (1642) noted, humanity would be guided by the
same principles. It would be guided in its arguments and decisions by
the same values and norms when realizing its projects or evaluating
the results, devising a good living for all. Some of the most
important of these principles, which are created by pure reason, but
which are usable by practical reason, are the subject of the next
II: Justified Action
conditions cannot be expected in a world in which every organism is
born with self-interest, which remains an active force throughout
life. Therefore, a force that opposes self-interest must be
developed. KANT (1785, 1788) demonstrates that human beings, with the
aid of pure reason, are capable of developing this force.
remember: In the evolutionary process, due to the scarcity of
resources, only the organisms that used existential means for their
self-interest survived. If they shared these means with others, it
was only for the purpose of increasing the possibilities for life of
their own genetic material. That is why every existence is
accompanied by self-interest.
descriptive model of behavior and action (Chapter I) presented the
form in which individuals attempt to achieve the assurance and
expansion of their existence. However, it did not determine whether
they achieve it in a justified manner or through pure self-interest,
without consideration for others, without morality. But living in
societies, all action encompasses both: life technique and morality,
or clearer: morality in life technique. In this chapter, we will
discuss therefore the moral component of each action.
individual who reflects on his life mainly thinks about his
happiness, since this is the universal goal, and all other things
serve as means to this end (AUGUSTINE, 414 AD). The measure of the
desired quality for the assurance and expansion of existence is
therefore a happy life, in other more modest words: good living.
the existential means of good living, especially material resources,
are limited. How many of these resources can an individual claim for
his own living, for the purpose of assuring his own existence and the
expansion of his life? This is the main moral question that a model
of justified behaviour, so of internal and external action should
principle of equal rights
does not give satisfactory answers to moral questions: the strong
destroys the weak, the weak eliminates the weakest. But human beings
are capable of overcoming that natural state through a force that
went beyond the force of nature, this force is the reason. In pure
internal action, reason can distance and free itself from nature and
was therefore necessary and led to different proposals: (1.) In the
realms of religion: morality is the result of a supernatural force
and its revelation or (2.) morality is based only on human forces:
the reason alone has to found a solution.
to both proposals is, that her founding can not be observed - but
their effects in the world - because they go beyond nature (compare
LOCKE 1790). One decisive consequence: This discrepancy between
nature (the self-interest of the corporeality) and morality impedes
to oblige a person to limit his self-interest, since morality is
directed to the human spirit (intelligence or reason) and only
indirectly to his corporeality.
freedom to propose and accept becomes an option. Anyone who does not
eat will die, it is natural law. Those who do not follow a proposal
to overcome self-interest can believe (and often experience) they are
able to live better than those who adhere to a moral code.
it is necessary to select from the different proposals the one that
can at least enjoy wide acceptance (often only verbal) and,
consequently, have the force to be a law in modern democracies. This
is the proposal that all individuals have equal rights in their
efforts to achieve good living.
is not the place to discuss the history of the development of this
concept, but it is necessary to distinguish it from morality that
uses "justice" as the measure, for the purpose of
justifying a society's regulations and laws.
important example: At around the same time as KANT was writing, HUME
(1751) published "An Inquiry Concerning the Principles of
Morality," in which he proposed justice as the basis of
morality. He illustrates his ideas with an example on fidelity in
marriage, demonstrating his ideological dependence on the norms of
his time: "An infidelity is considerably more harmful to women
than it is to men; therefore, the laws of punishment are more severe
for females than they are for males."
(1785, 1793) avoids this deceptive notion of justice and bases his
ethics on equal rights, which are independent of individuals, time
and place: Act only so, that your action could become a universal
law. That is what his Categorical Imperative demands.
presents the concept of equal rights as the outgrowth of pure reason.
If during internal argumentation individuals do not take into account
the characteristics of reality, especially of own practical reason
(strong or not) and own corporeality (strong), only pure reason
remains as a force; therefore, under this perspective, all
individuals are equal.
free the individuals, in thought, from the conditions of their nature
is the decisive step, but we must accept that in reality each person
is an individual entity composed of intelligence (reason) and
corporeality, inclined to act in self-interest due to the experiences
acquired during the evolutionary process.
if we consider that society expects its members to facilitate the
task of developing this knowledge and transmitting it to others, we
are again faced with the perspective and actions of individuals. Thus
we find in our world of life a system that causes the two
perspectives to act reciprocally – the wishes and tasks of the
individual and the demands and tasks of society - and that integrates
them into a single system: culture.
equal rights and individual corporeality have a dialectic
relationship. It is therefore necessary to provide the third force of
man, the practical reason, with a second tool to mesh the goal of
pure reason with the goals of corporeality, in other words, a moral
criterion that takes into account too the needs of an individual's
principle of assurance of existence
concrete situations, it can be decisive to consider the special
conditions of the corporeality of individuals. No general law can
determine when we should feel happy or that we should fear death.
Neither would it be justified to demand that traffic regulations,
based on equal rights, always have the same weight in every
situation. In the case of a truck without brakes, the principle of
assurance of existence takes precedence over equal rights.
example: KOHLBERG (1981) asks whether or not it is acceptable to
steal a medicine to save a person's life in an emergency. As we see:
it is only possible to answer this questioned in a justified manner
if we introduce as a second criterion the principle of assurance of
existence, in other words, the requirement for life.
example: The principle of equal rights requires that all individuals
tell the truth since everyone wants to be treated equally. In certain
situations, however, this can jeopardize existence. A seriously ill
individual who has been told of his condition may become desperate
and lose his will to live.
KANT's idea presents difficulties when the real problems of
individuals are addressed. His moral rigor, based only on pure
reason, cannot accept any concessions to or weakening of the pure
principle of equal rights. He demands that the truth be told, even to
the assassin who wants to know the whereabouts of his intended victim
can conclude that a morality based solely on pure reason, although it
recognizes and accepts equal rights, cannot satisfy the individual as
a totality composed of reason and corporeality. For this reason,
modern mankind has decided - or should decide - that only is
legitimate what considers both: equal rights and the assurance of
existence. Thus, each person has to develop and evaluate an action
based on the following two principles:
Does it respect equal rights?
Does it take into account assurance of existence?
an action is confirmed through both principles, it can be accepted as
legitimate. However, this is not as easy as it seems, since both
assurance of existence and equal rights are values and norms created
by humans. In other words, as to expect, they are approximations that
must allow for exceptions. If three people are lost in the desert and
only have a limited supply of water, the principles of assurance of
existence and equal rights cannot conclusively help them to decide
which individual should receive the water to at least assure his
survival. Nevertheless, in the same way that we cannot use an
exception to formulate a general rule, we cannot refute a general
rule due to an exception. From the perspective of good living for
all, it is preferable to strive to keep such cases as exceptions. In
this way, we can justify defining and using the principles of
assurance of existence and equal rights as basic moral rules of human
to make justified actions more likely
society is to characterize as a mixture of manifestations of
justified and unjustified behaviors, that is, of actions and mere
behaviors. Under this perspective the main function of our theory is
to make justified actions more likely.
both behaviour and action are based on self-interest, justified
action must make self-interest compatible with equal rights.
Consequently, when individuals want to resolve a problem in any of
the interaction systems, that is, between people, institutions or
society, they have to apply the following moral and technical
act on self-interest, you and others act on self-interest.
must find solutions X and Y to make good living for all more likely.
X is the life technique, we include all experiences and inventions
that enable the life: the intelligent interaction with individuals
(effective communication and production) or with nature (for example
the intelligent management of natural resources).
Y is morality, we recognize the principles of equal rights and
assurance of existence.
individual is asked to solve problems in this way, but these
principles have to characterize the society in its entirety. Under
this perspective of good living by X and Y, insufficient conditions
predominate in a society which is close to the natural state and his
laws: the strong dominates the week. The short life span of primitive
peoples is no coincidence.
comes first the task of instruction and educating, to make every
member stronger, technically to have the best knowledge to produce,
morally to control the self-interest. When we compare the societies
saying it in the simplest way: the self-interest of the individuals
is equal in all parts of the world, but the knowledge of life
techniques and the moral control is qualitatively different.
desire a long, good life, for which reason an instruction that
teaches life technique faces no fundamental opposition from
individuals (compare ERIKSON 1959). Education, to emphasize it again,
becomes more complicated because it has the goal of good living for
all: it has an equal rights focus and is in a dialectic position with
the demands of the individual's corporeality to achieve its own good
living. Education is therefore characterized by conflicts and by
if we think in terms of a system of forces, some possibilities arise.
The first consists of combining, with the aid of their reciprocal
effects, the two basic human forces, reason and corporeality, into
one that strives for justified action. Equal rights should not only
be established and explained verbally, but also should be exemplified
(see chapter VII: model learning), praised and actively transmitted
(for example via poignant stories).
on HEGEL (1797/98) and SCHOPENHAUER (1840), we can affirm that a
force that participates in originating justified acting is charitable
love. This is not erotic love produced by corporeality, but rather
love created and determined by intelligence/reason and corporeality,
based too on the learned and practiced principle of equal rights for
(1975) also gives equal rights greater weight, joining it with the
corporeality (self-interest) and reason (pure reason) of individuals.
The person who ignores his current situation and characteristics,
that is, who thinks in "pure" form with respect to his
existential condition, wants to live in a society in which equal
rights are taken seriously. Old age awaits the strong, illness the
can also be a positive, an additive force. When developing this
theory, no argument was found that contradicts the existence of God,
questions without responses have remained. What forces made the
world, the genetic material and its demands, the spirit and its
possibilities? "God" as a response to the inexplicable is
an argument that cannot be refuted by reason.
our theory of life technique of living does not oppose individuals'
belief in God. To the contrary, even the apparently decisive argument
of an atheist: "If everything has a creator, then who created
God?" loses its absolute force since existential relativism
shows us that human beings can only recognize the human world.
we have mentioned briefly: The moral difference between justified
action systems and behavioural systems applies not only to
individuals, but to all interaction systems, that is, to society as
well as to its institutions and organizations. The constitution and
configuration of a community, of a society can only be morally
justified when its norms attempt to approximate as much as possible
the principles of assurance of existence and equal rights.
must create the conditions, especially through its institutions, that
enable all members to develop as action systems and live as such,
assuring and expanding their existence. Likewise, society should
punish behaviour that is not justified (compare MERTON 1968). To be
tolerant in the face of selfish behaviour that threatens good living
for all is a mistake since self-interest would easily gain the upper
world is fraught with offensive and defensive wars, for which reason
it is necessary to promote and defend good living for all through
strong, supranational institutions, in other words, global
institutions. If the basic goal is the good of humanity, the
different nations have to join forces to make good living for all
if there are few individuals, institutions and states guided by moral
principles? This should not lead us to fatalistic resignation. The
constitutions of modern nations permit justified action. All
individuals can carry out justified actions in the systems of forces
in their world of life. The more citizens there are who do so, the
more their accumulated actions will approximate good living for all.
III: The Life Structure
HUSSERL (1929), we refer to the system of forces that individuals
form with their environment as the "world of life." If we
order this life-world with the help of existential functions, we
speak of the "life structure."
it is necessary to order the human world? The reciprocal effects of
the six forces generate a seemingly infinite number of major and
minor forces that act on our life with different properties and
activities and that also have reciprocal effects on one another.
create a "chaos" in which, to build a good life, we must
find our way. The natural evolution gives us an order already. From
the point of view of existence, it assigns positive (additive) or
negative (dialectical) forces. But we humans have to breakdown and
arrange them further, because we are concerned with our extension of
have already proposed a first structure of our world of life with the
general system of six forces. This corresponds to the position and
perspective of an individual, who, in order to act, distinguishes
different outputs (functions), identified with different forces of
his world of life:
action must be planned and directed. Forces that we refer to as own
and others' reason (intelligence) have this function;
action also needs an organic base, so the outputs (functions) of
action needs material energy, so the outputs (functions) of organic
and inorganic nature.
the individual perspective is insufficient for understanding the
world of life in all its complexity. Because of the invariable
conditions of human life, each individual is born with a need for
interactive systems, that is, communities, to instruct and educate
is it worse to kill a woman than a man, despite the fact that a man
has more value due to his nature? Surely because she does not have as
much strength and can therefore do less harm. Besides, it is not a
heroic act to prove strength before a weaker person."
to PARSONS (1966), who analyses societies from this perspective, each
one (if it wants to guarantee its own and members' existence) must
carry out the following special tasks (functions):
and sustain common knowledge;
members into the society;
favorable conditions for the individual goals of its members
the adaptation of organic and inorganic nature.
every modern society has concrete or ideological systems that have
specialized in one of these functions:
whose characteristic function is to create and transmit knowledge.
its specific output consists of the integration of members via
regulations and laws.
society has the function of creating favorable conditions for its
members to achieve their goals.
society promotes and supports those individual properties and
activities that foster members' necessary adaptation to the organic
and inorganic environment.
society regulates the use of organic and inorganic resources.
biggest systems in our world of life contain parts, systems of
differing sizes that give rise to its structure. We refer to these as
"sub-systems," "spheres," and "elements."
(See figure 1: The life structure). How do we see these distinctions?
They are the results of the reciprocal effects among the necessary
functions from the perspective of society and from the perspective of
culture as example: The function (output, task) of society of
integrating its members and that of the individual of respecting the
rights of others generate morality as a sub-system with the sphere
values and his elements assurance of existence and equal rights.
3: THE LIFE STRUCTURE
scientific study in some communities confirmed the differentiation in
functional systems of the life structure because all elements found
in the world of life of these populations were ordered into one of
their systems, so in sub-systems, spheres and elements.
this could only be achieved as an approximation since all elements
are the result of reciprocal effects among the six forces and their
ordering into a single force is therefore always questionable.
the life structure (Figure 1), sexuality is presented as an element
of corporeality, but it could be interpreted only from the
perspective of society and therefore ordered within the community:
the life structure is the result of the attempt to acquire the most
general perspective possible.
it should be interpreted from this angle. We must take into account
that every person has specific characteristics, goals, conditions and
possibilities: each individual structure is qualitatively different
differences in life technique and morality are not extinguished
through this general life structure; rather, they are even more
apparent as individual. The sub-systems, the spheres and elements of
life serve both for the despot and the slave, but the individual
assessment of the elements, which are ordered and therefore
comparable, facilitates the recognition of the qualitative
differences among the worlds of life.
importance of the life structure
and reason (or intelligence) are the basic forces that create and
determine the life structure. Reason has as essential attribute the
liberty while determination and need are qualities of nature. Since
each element of an action is the result of all forces, every element
of the life structure is a system composed of liberty and
in the figure of life structure, from top to bottom liberty grows as
determination and need decrease (the culture is characterized more by
liberty, the corporeality less). We can therefore conclude that the
more people who consciously try to resolve conflicts using cultural
and social means rather than behavioural techniques or even
physical-chemical means (so those of war), the greater the
probability that liberty and self-determination will be respected.
knowledge and the specific case act reciprocally, but they belong to
different planes of reality, either to the mental plane (theoretical)
or the concrete plane (practical). The life structure can be
understood as a meta-theoretical system, according to LOSEE (1977),
because it contains all the elements corresponding to practical life
and does not exclude any theory.
life structure can so be used to link theory and practice to favor a
better life for all. In this case, theory has the function of
mentally recognizing and modifying practices while practice has the
function of developing the theory (DILTHEY 1890). From a better
theory into life and from a therefore better life into a still better
theory (an so on).
the system of forces we can deduce that each element of the life
structure is directly or indirectly associated with another element.
Therefore, if one element of the life structure is a problem, all the
other elements become mediate or immediate forces, in other words,
they become conditions that impede (as dialectic forces) or favor (as
additive forces) the solution to the problem.
example: Who changes his place of residence (environment) for reasons
of illness (corporeality) should consider (personality) the effects
on the school situation (culture) and the friendships of his children
life structure sets the content of life, but it requires smart and
fair procedures to bring these forces to a positive effect, to a good
common life. Thus, the individual who recognizes the multiple
possibilities for resolving a problem can more easily reach a
solution, but he must also realize that in most cases, solutions
affect the interests of others, either fostering or limiting them.
content of these relations among individuals has to be considered
with the aid of the principles of morality (Chapter II) and,
methodologically, with the six steps of an action, named GACORE
(Chapter V), with self-advice (Chapter VI) and argumentative
communication or production and consumption (Chapters VII and VIII).
structure and development
is born into an existing life structure, in its own as genetic
influenced being, in a given environment: parents, family,
institutions of the society. But the newborn begins to existentially
influence his surroundings, which in turn try to influence him
through forces as education. In other words, reciprocal effects
characterize life from its beginnings.
do not begin from zero, since evolution has configured the properties
and activities of their corporeality. It is likely that individuals
will never again behave as selfishly as they do at the beginning of
life - directed by behavioural programs that have the goal of
assuring existence - because they will develop during childhood as
action systems that also consider more or less the interests and
ideas of others.
N° 4: From a behaviour system to the action system
(1969) describes the characteristic steps of this process. Figure 2
is based on his theory, but associates the key phases of human
development (newborn, child and young adult) with the three planes of
action. In this way, it recognizes how the existential skills of the
newborn are honed, developed through an increasingly broad, abstract
knowledge: the child develops a personality that more and more knows
how to think and feel in a justified manner and that shapes his life
in an autonomous way.
grasping reflex, for example, characterizes a sphere of behaviour
through which the newborn, assuring his own existence, attempts to
dominate his environment. Parallel to the development of conscious
reason, the grasping behaviour is later associated with
representations that eventually become abstract notions and that
characterize argumentation regarding the problem of private property,
have three moments. Given situation, approximation, goal. But actions
must consider two functions: thinking about the systems of forces in
the life structure (internal actions) and - eventually - modify them
(external actions). Both functions complement a real action.
IV: The Life Concept
life structure orders the multiple elements of living, thereby
enabling us to recognize the numerous and complex forces that
favorably or unfavorably influence our lives. What forces can and
should we use? Against which forces can and should we fight? This
depends on the goals to which we aspire.
criteria of justified action permit us to recognize which goals are
justified. However, as tests, they can only judge an existing goal
and cannot create individual goals. It is the agent who has to
develop goals in keeping with his needs and ideas. He then uses the
criteria to judge them.
different goals of an animal form a system that corresponds, in its
entirety, to the needs of its genetic material, that is, to the
assurance of its existence. In the case of humans, goals should also
constitute a system, but for both the assurance and expansion of
all-encompassing system is the life structure. If we interpret its
elements with the aid of procedural moments - goals, given situation
and approximation - we see that each can be a goal, a given condition
or a means of approximation. If we concentrate only on goals, the
life structure is at the same time a structure of goals, which we
refer to as "life concept."
fact that a person's goals constitute a system is more than just a
theoretical conclusion. In reality, we observe as typical that
individuals want to act based on a concept: they aspire to several
goals, but these are not isolated; rather, they form an ordered
system without contradictions (FESTINGER 1976).
life concept of a person is an entity, but this does not mean we
should conclude that all goals are equally important. Based on his
desires and problems, the individual determines which spheres and
elements are the most important, and consequently selects the
essential goals of his life that orient all the others.
person is at the center of his world even though he is part of an
interactive system due to existential reasons and thereby shares life
concepts with others. The family is one of these systems in which
members integrate their own life concepts through interactions to
form a family life concept whose sub-systems are the life concepts of
the different members (see BRONFENBRENNER 1979).
modern societies, for example, many women face the problem of
coordinating their profession (work system) with their family
(private system). These essential goals influence other elements of
the life structure, for example, the duration of studies and the
selection of a profession, partner and place of residence. To
determine the essential goals and form or coordinate the forces of
the life structure accordingly are decisive skills for good living
the world of life, new forces appear in each new situation. They
occur as relatively independent events that we accept or reject and
that influence our goals as a result. We must understand and build a
life concept as a dynamic system, open to all forces that have a
justified life as a goal or an effect. With the aid of this flexible
concept, all actions are developed and interpreted as elements of a
conscious, progressive development.
do not have to try to achieve a balance without tensions, which is
apparently a goal of nature. Rather, human equilibrium is understood
as a judgment and the feeling of having reached a state of good
living thanks to ambitious goals and the risky solutions that the
individual has achieved. If this is true, the general goal of the
life concept could be defined as life as an adventure.
this case, setting goals that are too modest is not recommended
because rarely does good result from anything less than an
extraordinary goal (compare CLAUSEWITZ, 1832/34) An individual may
aspire to a life that accepts the assurance of existence only as the
basic foundation. Curiosity about the unknown, the will to strive for
the best and not to fear risks are justifiable characteristics.
life concepts of different individuals compete because resources are
scarce. For this reason too, it is advisable to choose a larger
proposal, since if we choose a modest goal while others pursue more
ambitious ones, our arguments can demand only modest resources.
basic skills that help to create both individual and shared concepts
are, first, self-advice (Chapter VI) and second, argumentative
communication to reach a consensus (Chapter VII). Even the goals
referring to organic and inorganic nature need to be examined using
these skills. This is how a shared ecological concept is formed that
takes into account the reciprocal effects of humans with regard to
the geographic space, inorganic objects, animals and plants (BOESCH
characteristics of life concepts
achieve only approximations. They fulfill goals only in an imperfect
way. Since life concepts are goal systems, they cannot be fully
realized and consequently, there is no deadline for reaching them.
Additionally, the basic goals - assurance and expansion of existence
- are so dynamic that we must continually create new ones.
concepts are oriented toward a more or less specified future. We plan
for a better life, have mid- or long-term goals, ask ourselves the
existential question: Should I act now in a way in which in a few
years I will probably have wanted to act? Condition and requirement
are, that our acting is based on the optimism to achieve the goals,
and this can be only an approximation too, a prudent, a skeptical
between the goal and the quality of the realized occur, are depending
on whether hopes and plans refer to goals that are achieved through
inorganic and organic forces or through human forces. What is
determined by natural inorganic law can be calculated, what is
determined by the laws of behaviour can be forecast with relative
certainty, but what depends on intelligence or reason is
characterized by free will. Since, at the very least, the
intelligence of different (selfish) individuals participates in
interactive systems, success will be more likely and lasting if the
goals are coordinated and achieved through a consensus based on
reason (HABERMAS 1971).
that we can influence the future but never the past through our life
concepts, being able to predict the future is more important from the
perspective of good living than is understanding the past (compare
STEGMÜLLER 1974). Thus, the basic goal of medical, psychological or
pedagogical action is above all to enable more favorable predictions
about the individuals future lives.
reacts only in an incomplete way to this existential relationship
between the past and the future by forgetting and repressing (FREUD
1938). Therefore, the function of reason - in the case of being
plagued by certain negative memories that interrupt activity - is to
make us aware that for life concepts, the only important past events
are those which as forces have a significant effect for the intended
goals. Besides, in the approximation to a goal, the negative events
of the past are only a condition of the beginning. In the process of
approximation, they can gradually lose their effects.
concepts are the products of hope in a happy future. If we abstain
from religious assumptions, a good life on Earth is at the center.
Consequently, we must have an existential strategy to prepare
ourselves for death, for the "final reality" (PARSONS
1966), through an active life, full of plans, ideas and
accomplishments. To undertake a project that will probably extend
beyond one's own life is a force that individuals can use to counter
concepts produce tensions between reason and corporeality. Needs
require immediate satisfaction, yet mid- or long-term goals
frequently call for renouncing instant gratification. Life concepts
must strike a balance between those positions to develop compatible
solutions. Current and future good living are two perspectives that
form together the basis of all action because current good living was
once the hoped-for future.
concepts also cause tensions between individuals because they demand
resources in which others have or could have an interest. Generally,
we should not expect justified reactions to our justified life
concept. Envy and rivalry are normal outgrowths of self-interest (the
experiences of each reader will support this assumption). The
individual who communicates the goals of his life concept to others
should be aware of this reality. He may decide to make public only a
part of his justified concept and to communicate its entirety only to
people he trusts completely.
desired quality of a life concept can be compared with the structure
and action of a society. In the same way that a country's laws
attempt to establish the rules in all spheres of activity, the life
concept covers all spheres of the life structure.
agent must be trained to be his own deliberating Congress and at the
same time his own acting Cabinet, in both his internal and external
actions. Each agent evaluates and determines the goals which obligate
and guide him. In this way, he establishes the conditions for action
as if he were a minister of the interior, foreign affairs, economy,
social affairs and the environment. He acts like a nation in a state
alliance, as an independent system in the larger system that he forms
with the community.
or surely this high cultural and economic requirement cannot be the
norm for every individual. Nevertheless, we can assert that it is
justified to favor concepts that cover both theoretical and practical
action, in other words, specialized theoretical knowledge as well as
an adequate practical knowledge, both in reciprocal relation. For the
individual this is the task of learning.
individual is born as a behavioural system containing basic forces
for the development of a life concept (Figure 2). Adults (action
systems) must act on a child's behalf and support him through
education and instruction. They influence a child's goals until he
proves himself capable of recognizing, examining, changing and
autonomously realizing his life concept. Criteria to measure progress
in this area include the domination and legitimization of his life
(EYSENCK & EYSENCK 1987, HEISENBERG, MILLER ET AL. 1991).
the child develops as an action-system, his self-responsibility grows
and family support declines. Other institutions, especially the
school, complement it. Because school traditionally is organized into
independent subjects however, the school cannot sufficiently
contribute to the development of a life concept that address the life
structure in its entirety. Consequently, children must have learning
opportunities outside of school. (Another possibility is to modify
the school curriculum to undertake the task of supporting the
development of students' life concepts).
concepts must be developed through actions, using communication
(external action) and self-advice (internal action). They have the
purpose of improving both the agent's ability to plan goals through
internal action and his skills to realize them through external
action. But what links internal action to external action? The
following chapter presents the GACORE model, which demonstrates that
all action, internal and external, has to be structured in the form
of and in six steps.
V: The six steps of an action
objective of our theory is to contribute to good living for all. In
the first chapter, we discussed how every individual, as a product of
evolution, is at the center of his own world and we concluded that
each person must not only adapt himself to the world like an animal
but also create it, ideally through intelligent behaviour, through an
the second chapter, we examined how individuals must behave in
accordance with the principles of equal rights and the assurance of
existence, since they live in interactive systems composed of
subjects with the same rights. To facilitate this task, we ordered,
in the third chapter, the world of life of each individual with the
aid of functions. The result was the life structure. In the fourth
chapter, we defined and described the life structure as a system of
goals, as the life concept.
this fifth chapter we examine how an action takes place. To this end,
we have to develop the methodological base of the fundamental skills
the agent must possesses: so we do not concentrate on the materials
(contents of the life structure), we shift our focus to the formal
methods to achieve a solution; in other words, we examine the formal
process of an action.
are three formal moments (see chapter I): given situation,
approximation, goal. Because we are acting inside our life concept,
more or less consciously, we are oriented to goals, and the three
moments have to change in her order: 1. goal, 2. given situation, 3.
an action has two functions: (a) thinking about the forces of the
problem (internal action) and - if necessary - (b) modify them goal
directed (external action).
5: THE SIX STEPS OF AN ACTION
GACORE MODEL -
internal action covers so the three formal moments: goal, given
situation and approximation. All external action, in the case of
being directed to the same goal, covers the three formal moments too:
goal, given situation and approximation. Thus, each real action takes
place with the aid of six steps, having every step a particular name
according to his task (function).
The individual who wants to know the meaning of a foreign word sets a
goal (first step: goal); thinks about the possibilities for achieving
it (second step: analysis); and decides to consult a dictionary in
order to achieve it (third step: conception). Once the agent has
completed these steps of internal action, he begins the three steps
of external action, of real modification: by opening the dictionary,
he creates favorable conditions (forth step: organization), then
reads and understands the meaning of the word (fifth step:
realization), and finally, using it, he observe if the acquired
knowledge has proven useful (sixth step: evaluation).
the initial letters of the six steps (goal, analysis, conception,
organization, realization, evaluation), the name of the model is
agent more or less consciously follows these six steps. In routine
action, we only perceive them in abbreviated form, but we can
classify what is perceived in terms of the total process: "Careful!"
shouts a cyclist on the sidewalk. With this word, the cyclist
manifests only what corresponds to the fifth step (realization) of an
action. The other steps have developed so quickly that the individual
is barely aware of them: the recognition of the goal, the analysis of
the conditions, the conception that the analysis results in the
decision to shout "careful!" and the preparation for the
shout (its organization) using the voice. But pedestrians understand
the complete context and try to react to assure their existence.
six steps are not sufficient to solve complex problems. But every
step can itself be divided using the six steps. For example, the
analysis, when it is part of a complex problem, requires a clear
definition of its goals (What is to be analyzed?), requires to
recognize his conditions (Analysis of the conditions to make the
analysis) and requires to make a conception, to organize, to realize,
we resume: the best solution of any problem, whether theoretical or
practical, has two dimensions: as contents the forces of the life
structure, and formal the six steps of the model GACORE.
function, the task of self-advice is to devise and manage the life
structure of the person and with it, his life concept. Self-advice
should be an internal action, not mere behaviour, therefore his form
follows the six steps of action.
agent orders all forces in an effort to reach a positive goal and
interprets these forces as either additive (as means to approximate
the goal) or as dialectic (as conditions that impede approximation).
is an internal action, but generally directed to external action, it
prepares it, accompanies it and has to evaluate it. Therefore we can
say that the external action, the practical action is generally the
purpose of internal action, of self-advice.
we exclude here the technical problems of production activity,
external actions are dependent on communication, on argumentation. In
a world characterized by selfishness, in a world of limited
resources, we need therefore the best arguments to convince.
as internal argumentation
already stated: we consider the systems of forces from two
viewpoints, as substances and as processes. If we focus on
substances, we speak of the properties of a system of forces; if we
look at processes, we refer to formal activities.
let us consider the properties that appear in internal argumentation.
Sensations, representations, needs and feelings are properties of
corporeality and are therefore in principle selfish behaviors.
Therefore, if an individual must resolve problems through justified
action, he must examine and clarify this information through reason.
works with the aid of its specific activities, such as generalizing
and concluding, thereby transforming the thoughts (sensations,
representations, needs, feelings) into notions. Notions help us to
more clearly understand and resolve a problem than do the properties
of corporeality alone.
nevertheless, in an action the influence of corporeality is always
present, and depending on the existential situation, it can be strong
or weak. If a person feels panicked, his existential fear can
predominate and block reason. The individual who had previously been
an action system will react as a behavioural system by blindly
critical situations, when our need for assurance of existence is
apparently affected, merely in discussions, it is essential that we
observe ourselves, that we mentally distance ourselves to determine
whether or not we are still an action system or if we have become a
behavioural system. Self-advice must be capable of conscious
reconstruction (see BIRREN 1981, LAMP 1984).
argumentation is linked to an internal language as its instrument.
That is why humans learned to speak during the evolutionary process
(see WITTGENSTEIN 1948, SOKOLOV 1972, MEICHENBAUM 1979). Initially,
as the comparison with animals shows, language was motivated by the
assurance of existence, that is, by the basic need of corporeality,
but later it was also motivated by the human goal of expansion of
human language has developed through the reciprocal effects between
corporeality and reason (SEARLE 1987). Language can be the mean of a
behaviour or of an action, depending on whether corporeality alone is
active or whether reason and corporeality form a unit.
a person's development, language gradually becomes a means of action.
A child's language still largely depends on what he actually sees,
while an adult uses language based on notions and is capable of
abstract thought without taking into account real events.
self-advice begins with the perception of a problem. Individuals
often respond spontaneously to a problem, proposing immediately a
solution. They are called upon to react without consciously examining
the situation and its possibilities. This spontaneous internal call
is what KANT names a "maxim" (1795, see his formula for the
spontaneous maxim does not always have the same quality for good
living as a deliberated action. Since each situation has something
new, it is distinguished to a greater or lesser degree from previous
experiences. Sometimes it contains an element that is so different
and important that the solution can and should be achieved only
through a new, novel action. In this case, the spontaneous maxim has
the quality of a dangerous behaviour: after a dispute with her
husband, a woman directs the car into the oncoming traffic, with
must technically and morally examine the information in the maxim and
modify it as needed. To this end, it compares, generalizes and
reaches conclusions, which are all conscious activities with
conscious results (compare HEGEL 1912/13). How is the role of pure
reason and practical reason in this process?
reason produces its own information for internal argumentation. It is
capable of developing ideas that do not have their roots in the
observation of reality, in the needs of corporeality, it has the
advantage to be creative, but it can be dangerous too. Ignoring the
reality is dangerous.
s why pure reason does not always have better existential ideas than
corporeality. It can introduce in the internal arguments maxims that
threaten existence. It is not possible, then, to maintain that it is
always better to follow pure reason alone and ignore both the
corporeality and the outside world. For this, it is the task of
practical reason to mediate.
given that the realization of an existential goal always depends on
outside forces, which are often dialectic and sometimes invincible,
we are advised to develop, from the beginning, an alternative to the
maxim, so that in the event the original maxim fails, we always have
the possibility of reaching a satisfied goal.
resume: Self-advice examines the maxim, to evaluate and
differentiate it in accordance with real life conditions.
methodological bases of the model are the steps of internal
argumentation, initiated by the perception of the problem and the
spontaneous maxim. Self-advice uses the GACORE model, whose steps
determine its course. But since self-advice is only an internal
action, the outside steps of an action, namely, organization and
realization, are included only indirectly..
one: the goal
function of this step is to examine the spontaneous maxim from the
perspective of good living for all: comprehend the problem, its
relevance for life and its goals; outline a solution; and prepare,
with the aid of reason, a provisional guiding maxim. Provisional,
because many forces in the external world cannot be predicted or
this reason, it is advisable, as we have mentioned, to incorporate an
alternative maxim from the beginning, which should depend more on
justified action of the agent himself than on the behaviour of
opposing forces. It should be as similar as possible to the guiding
maxim. In consequence, the guiding and the alternative maxims form
two sub-systems within a single system. They are two interwoven
function of this step is to identify the favorable and unfavorable
conditions for the realization of the guiding maxim. It is
characterized by the recognition of relevant forces for the goals
with the aid of the life structure (Figure 1). These forces belong to
organic (animals, plants) or inorganic (materials, products) media or
to the human world (individuals, communities).
individuals constitute the most important conditions, whether
positive or negative. If they oppose the maxim (the solution to the
problem) we must seek an explanation and approximation through an
external action, in other words, generally through communication.
However, we must accept the fact that individuals, due to their
self-interest, do not fully reveal their goals. To investigate is,
then, less helpful than accepting self-interest as natural and basic,
without abandoning the own justified intentions.
trust in self-interest is more constructive than to believe in an
assumed desire for the collective good. It brings with it fewer
risks, without excluding the possibility that the behaviour of others
can be guided by the obligation to respect equal rights.
uses the knowledge obtained until now to create a justified maxim.
The conditions of the solution found in the first step (goal) and in
the second (analysis) become notions, which are elements of an
examined maxim: a spontaneous maxim gives way to an examined guiding
maxim, which also includes an alternative maxim.
in the conception increases the chances that we will achieve our
goals. Of course, it is reasonable to plan for success, but it is not
always possible to orient the life concept to the most easy way of
achieving it, because the bigger the goal, the greater the risk of
opposition. The more ambitious our goal is, the more difficult the
problems and the greater the probability of failure. It should not,
if at all possible, go around the whole mosaic of life, but only a
stone from it, so that possible failure can be accepted as - a nearly
normal - result. A battle was lost, but not the war.
four and five: Organization and realization
(fourth step) prepares for the realization of the guiding maxim by
establishing favorable conditions for its initiation, generally with
the aid of communication. We attempt to carry out the guiding maxim
through the fifth step (realization), that is, we try to approximate
the goal. Since organization and realization are external actions and
do not directly belong to self-advice, we will discuss these steps
(using communication and also production) further in chapters VII and
having completed the approximation toward the goal, by organization
and realization, we must evaluate what has been achieved. We form a
judgment, accompanied by feelings regarding the existential quality
of the accomplishment. A new situation has arisen and we compare this
situation with the initial conditions. We critically evaluate the
process from beginning to end.
we recognize what has been achieved as satisfactory, this is
naturally not the end of actions: the assurance and expansion of
existence will appear as new tasks. If we decide it is
unsatisfactory, we must first, before abandoning the goals of the
maxim, determine whether other materials or methods could have
produced a better result. From a technical and existential
perspective, justified goals are more important than their means. We
establish new goals and develop another maxim only after we have
determined that changes in the means of the guiding maxim and even of
the alternative maxim have been useless.
and their solutions generally are affecting the living of the agent,
but generally of other individuals too. Each approximation forms part
of an individual's life process. It is an element of his world of
life in progress. There is no good living without problems,
regardless of whether they are desired. But justified approximations,
justified problem solutions lead to the positive feelings we need.
For this too, they represent not only end products, but also the
starting point for developing new goals and approximations.
success tends to strengthen the individual, failure is sometimes even
more effective, because humiliation fortifies the corporal and
spiritual disappointment. Therefore, a justified action should not
focus on defeating the other, but rather should have the goal of
reaching consensus. This generosity does not ignore own
self-interest, since defeat often unleashes impetuosity, endangering
the assurance of existence, and incites the other to defend his own
goals with radical, dangerous behaviour, with aggression (see
resolve typical problems through self-advice (internal action), and
through communication (external action). There area production
problems too, but the next chapter discusses first communication, its
structure and methods.
VII: Argumentative communication
should communication take place to make good living for all more
likely? Communication has the function of transmitting or receiving
information. The results (contents) of internal action (or internal
behaviour) are transmitted to a receiver, influencing his behaviour
or action. Generally, communication serves to solve an additive or
creates its own maxim while successful communication produces a
shared maxim. What is structural true for self-advice (examination
and evaluation of maxims, is also valid for argumentative
communication. The peculiarities of the latter arise from the fact
that it is not a single individual, but rather several people, who
participate in the process and influence it through their individual
forces, their individual conditions, reason (or intelligence) and
structure of argumentative communication
clear and introduce the structure of communication it is convenient
to reduce it to a reciprocal effect between two action systems,
between two agents. Their internal argumentation can be connected
structurally, and both are therefore capable of communicating via
6 illustrates this process: Person A develops an argument and
communicates it. Person B perceives the argument as an impulse for
his internal argumentation, an impulse to act. As any action begins
with a goal he interprets it as a goal proposal, as a stimulus.
(Conditioning, a theory of behavioural psychology, refers to this
process as stimulus and response).
6: ARGUMENTATIVE COMMUNICATION AS RECIPROCAL ACTIONS AMONG
on the goal proposal, Person B uses his own internal argumentation
system to examine the argument (analysis) and form (conception) his
own argument, equal to or different from that of the person A.
Communicating this argument to Person A, this one interprets it for
his part as a goal proposal and uses it as a stimulus to evaluate his
previous argument. If the arguments have an additive relationship,
there is agreement. If it is dialectic, the process has to be
repeated until the final result, a shared maxim would be the ideal
6 describes this model of argumentative communication, limited to
communication between only two persons who are both agents. But
reality is often different because there exists not only action
systems but behaviour systems too. Therefore, we have to consider the
following possibilities for communication:
action system communicates with another action system;
action system communicates with a behavioural system;
behavioural system communicates with another behavioural system.
action system must have the complex capacity of communicating not
only with other action systems but also with behavioural systems. The
key question here is what an action system must know methodically if
it wants to consistently communicate in a justified way.
previously discussed, behavioural systems are incapable of realizing
internal behaviour as a justified argumentation. It's characteristic
that they have no access to dialectic arguments, particularly that
come from external sources. Corporeality (and with it, self-interest)
dominates through its properties and activities. Needs and feelings
take over where only the unit with the goals and judgments of reason
would be capable of responding in a justified manner.
an action system needs different skills and methods that have the
power to reconstruct the receiver’s capacity for communicative
action or to construct it in the short or long term (children). The
discussion below is based therefore on the following perspective:
Which methods should an action system use with respect to other
action systems and which should it select with regard to behavioural
systems as children or in the actual situation or longer psychic
of argumentative communication
begin with a review of what we have clarified until now. An agent
always argues, at least in his internal action. In each situation, he
uses the communication method best suited to the particular type of
receiver. The receiver is either a behavioural or an action system.
The agent must therefore choose between the verbal or non-verbal
communication method that leads best to a collective justified
solution to the problem.
argumentation (all are agents, actions-systems) should be upheld as
an ideal and a norm because it is the one that best responds to moral
principles of equality. This means that the agent has to decide on
the method closest to this ideal in the given situation. Thus, a
hierarchy exists among the communication methods, which constitutes
the basis for ordering them. We will see: "mutual argumentation"
is the method that best meets the demands of symmetrical
argumentation, while physical and chemical means are the least
A method for communicating through verbal arguments, both additive
and dialectic, in a free, open way. It is oriented exclusively to the
problem and is determined only by reason, in other words, it does not
take into account the demands of the receiver's corporeality.
individual who expresses his arguments without considering the
receiver's feelings, especially those of the assurance of existence,
generates in the receiver conflicts that can and often will impede
him from reacting as an action system. Therefore, pure argumentation
is not the best way of communicating in real life. It constitutes an
ideal for pure reason, but not for real individuals as units composed
of reason and corporeality.
we should mention some positive effects of this method. Pure
argumentation, if it is dialectic and has the intention of provoking,
also stimulates the receiver's intellectual activity (compare HEGEL
1812/1913). To this end, the receiver must be a strong, stable action
system susceptible to modifications. Pure argumentation is also used
in psychiatry to provoke rage in a behavioural system (the patient)
in order to create a therapeutic situation that can help the patient
in his reconstruction (AMONN 1973).
method communicates through verbal arguments, both additive and
dialectic, in a free, open way, but using dialectic arguments in such
a way and form that the receiver's corporeality can support them
without turning in a behavioural system.
characteristic goal of corporeality is to assure existence. For this
reason, if the receiver is respected as an entity composed of reason
and corporeality, the basic condition of symmetrical communication is
fulfilled. Dialectic arguments will be expressed, if they are
unavoidable for resolving the problem, in a way that does not harm
(or do the least harm possible) the receiver’s demands or feelings.
The two principles of justified action (assurance of existence and
equal rights) constitute the moral standard for mutual argumentation
(see also ALEXY 1978, FISHER & URY 1981).
verbal argumentation should be the standard method used among action
systems. In the family, in school, in political life and in social
life in general, it is the appropriate form (oral and written) of
communicating to resolve collective problems. It does not place the
agent over the receiver. It is oriented to self-interest, but also
takes into account the interests of everyone directly or indirectly
affected. There are two basic rules for this form of communication:
The individual who argues must consider that each person possesses
his own life structure, his own life concept and his own values and
If the task is to jointly resolve a problem, the total maxim (the
guiding maxim and the alternative) must correspond to the life
concepts of all participants.
this type of argumentation, the agent expresses himself verbally but
does not use dialectic arguments until the receiver has recovered his
capacity for mutual argumentation.
argumentation also contains dialectic arguments, for which reason it
can fail, even if the rules of stabilization have been taken into
account. Additive argumentation can be used to replace it. Only
arguments that do not produce any conflict in the receiver are used.
In other words, they demonstrate confirmation, consent and a
quantitative expansion of his knowledge.
addressing a problem, the receiver will accept additive arguments
because they seem to him to be positive conditions for his own goals.
The person who agrees with the receiver, or who decides not to
contradict him, can expect harmony instead of tension, can expect
cooperation and, finally mutual argumentation.
through additive argumentation
light of these negative effects produced by dialectic arguments,
ROGERS (1951), to cite one example, developed a method that permits
the agent to reconstruct a behavioural system, whether temporary or
even general. This method is in essence none other than additive
argumentation: the agent must strive to make the dialectic argument
act only on the receiver's internal behaviour so that the individual
will not interpret and reject it as an external pressure.
argumentation does not always require such a passive attitude
throughout the problem-solving process. If the receiver recovers his
ability to communicate via additive or dialectic arguments, he should
be respected as an action system, as an agent, at which point mutual
argumentation should be used. The receiver is now the one who expects
constructive proposals without rejecting dialectic ones. He feels
like an agent and wants to be treated equally. He will feel
manipulated if additive argumentation is furthered as method of
through additive argumentation
supports the development of the necessary kills for good living. If
we consider only the teaching for good life, by matters like math or
biology, the receiver generally interprets the arguments as useful
for assuring and expanding his existence, he views them as additive.
But in education, when arguments have the basic goal of eliminating
the domination of self-interest, we must use dialectic arguments that
counter the strong demands of corporeality.
additive argumentation is insufficient for fully constructing
justified action. Construction needs both additive and dialectic
arguments. Leaving the recognition and realization of equal rights
alone to the internal argumentation of children and young people,
rather than teaching them these concepts, is unrealistic because the
heritage of evolution - self-interest - is too strong. As we
mentioned earlier, this is the cause that teaching (additive) has
less difficulties than education (dialectic).
The agent does not communicate his arguments verbally; instead, he
tries to get the receiver to learn through the observation of people,
objects or situations.
is not always possible to communicate through mutual or even additive
argumentation. In the case of behavioural or action systems that do
not fully comprehend the problem and its conditions, it may be
necessary to move even further from the ideal of symmetrical
argumentation, and to accentuate the properties of corporeality: on
the one hand, needs and feelings, and on the other, perceptions and
to BANDURA (1979, 1986), people become fearful when faced with
problems whose solution seems extremely difficult. If under these
circumstances their corporeality takes precedence over reason, they
are incapable of reacting in a justified way to calming arguments
(additive) and even less so to critical (dialectic) arguments.
if they observe that other people resolve problems without negative
consequences, it empowers them to overcome obstacles in similar
situations. Their fear subsides, their self-confidence increases. The
aid of models can lead to the reconstruction of the capacity for
argumentation and action.
receiver has certain internal processes that pave the way toward
argumentation. These are processes of cognitive transformation of
what has been observed. The individual is scarcely aware of these
processes, for which reason we should not refer to them as internal
the case of a behavioural system that reconstructs itself through a
model, the receiver does not consciously work to identify his goal,
analyze conditions or develop a solution. Nevertheless, the processes
of cognitive transformation are directed toward action, since the two
basic categories of an action, recognition and modification (and with
it, the six steps of an action) are included in learning through
models. This method of reconstruction is therefore closer to internal
argumentation than it is to conditioning, which we will discuss
through models is a necessary method for both the reconstruction and
the construction of the ability to argue symmetrically, because it
increases the development of representations at the beginning of life
and their subsequent transformation into general notions.
tend to acquire their knowledge from people who have an existential
importance for them (parents, relatives, teachers) and who,
therefore, are always models, although they often are unaware of the
effect they have. Thus, educators should not only verbally advocate
justified action but instead should demonstrate it through real
behaviour of models that contradicts his verbal arguments has the
effect of weakening them and can cause behaviour that is neither
justified nor desired. But an agent can consciously act as a model.
The individual who educates or teaches can seek or create situations
that serve this purpose (AEBLI 1983).
through models begins with imitation. But there is a point at which
the receiver, due to his developed cognitive skills, starts to
critically evaluate the model. BANDURA (1979) says that as children
grow older, they link the properties of different models to create a
new, qualitatively different model.
it is more or less necessary to replace or support verbal arguments
through models, it is appropriate to use models such as diagrams,
illustrations and charts, even by adults to help them understand
abstract or complex notions.
The agent does not verbally express his arguments, but rather
influences the receiver’s knowledge and behaviour through
conditions that have an existential importance for the receiver. The
agent uses the demands of the receiver's corporeality to provide him
with information or to control his behaviour, especially through
rewards or punishments.
of models requires a higher intelligence than the conditioning.
Characteristic of dogs who have learned independently to open doors
is the accidental learning, but chimpanzees learn this even by
observation. Learning through models is carried out through
processes, which, under favorable conditions, are capable of
activating the receiver's internal argumentation.
if he is conditioned, he usually learns only what the agent wants him
to, since it is mainly his corporeality, with its limited knowledge,
which learns. The receiver's reason is influenced only in an
indirect, incomplete way since receiving information expands its
properties but does not develop its activities, such as examining. If
we use symmetrical argumentation as the standard, conditioning is
less morally justified than is learning through models.
evolution of corporeality and the learning linked to it through
conditioning share the trait of trying to adapt to the outside world,
made up of nature and human beings.
classic conditioning, corporeality expands its knowledge of objects
that assure or enrich life. For example, the person who feeds a child
every day is a positive force for the child and becomes a component
of his existential knowledge. Expressed in abstract form: If a new
object regularly appears with another, known object of existential
value, corporeality considers it as a necessary condition and
consequently, memorizes the new object as positive (additive).
operand conditioning, however, corporeality learns which behaviors
have value for the assurance or expansion of existence, depending on
the circumstances (HOLLAND & SKINNER 1974). If a child who wants
to play accidentally rings a bell, he will purposely repeat the
behaviour in the future. In other words, a behaviour that produces a
positive result will be chosen again in similar situations. However,
if that same boy accidentally hits his head on the corner of a table,
he will try to avoid it in the future since a behaviour producing
existential harm will be repeated less frequently in similar
simple way to reconstruct a temporary behavioural system is to reward
everything that belongs to the properties of symmetrical
argumentation. An individual who becomes increasingly aggressive
during a quarrel, to the point where he stands up to leave, but who
then sits back down, can be rewarded for the latter behaviour in a
non-verbal way (with a smile, for example) since it is an element of
symmetrical argumentation. His corporeality will interpret the smile
as existentially positive, which can lead to the reconstruction of
the ability to argue.
well-known methods are also related to conditioning, the
"time-factor" and the "relocation-factor." An
agent uses the time when he tries not to influence the receiver until
he observes that the receiver has regained his capacity to respond to
dialectic arguments. Likewise, he can take advantage of relocation by
distancing the individual from the system of dialectic forces. He may
propose, for example, to discuss the problem at another location
(BOESCH 1971, THOMAE 1973).
human being is born as a behavioural system. Corporeality dominates
in the small child, who learns mainly through conditioning. For
example, when he builds a sandcastle with other children
(production), he expands his knowledge of existential objects
(classic conditioning) and also learns which verbal expressions
(communication) his peers (operant conditioning) understand. Thus,
educators frequently use conditioning to promote the development of
children’s communicative and productive skills.
does have some risks. On the one hand, if it is excessive, it can
create overly strong emotional dependencies. In cases in which the
child does not receive a reward, he quickly loses interest, because
the person motivates him more than the effort does. On the other
hand, conditioning that serves as punishment runs the risk of
unleashing aggression. For this reason, we have to agree with
DREIKURS’s (1987) recommendation that the "natural
consequences" of children’s behaviour is the preferable mean.
If a child refuses to eat at the family mealtime, he will soon feel
the effects of hunger and will modify his behaviour without becoming
aggressive with his parents.
the process of the child's intellectual development, conditioning
becomes less important with respect to the other methods. Learning
through models becomes more frequent and finally both methods will
support only symmetrical argumentation.
and chemical means
The agent does not verbally express arguments, but rather attempts to
influence the receiver's behaviour indirectly through physical and
chemical means. He uses the reciprocal effects between the properties
of the receiver's corporeality and organic or inorganic forces.
mutual argumentation uses the receiver's corporeality, for example,
his senses, as a means to activate internal argumentation. This also
applies, although to a lesser degree, to learning through models and
conditioning, because in both methods the receiver has more or less
the possibility of consciously refusing to cooperate. But if the
agent uses certain physical or chemical forces, he can obligate the
receiver to follow his arguments and can destroy the receiver’s
ability to influence or modify effects, in other words, to exercise
his free will.
view of the fact that the purpose of communication is to achieve
symmetrical argumentation, we must reject most measures that form
part of the productive sphere. Corporal punishment and torture, drugs
and certain medications are examples of these physical or chemical
the practice of life, physical or chemical forces are frequently
used, whether to impose arguments or to reconstruct the capacity for
argumentation. A rebellious child is spanked; a troubled individual
is tranquilized with medications. These methods, which have the
function of substituting communication, not only violate human
dignity, but also involve unforeseen risks to the assurance of
we observe that they only have temporary effects on behaviour and do
not influence reason on a long-term basis. Corporal punishment, for
example, has often the ability to reconstruct only when the receiver
feels pain or when the individual who carries out the punishment is
present (REYNOLDS 1968).
should also mention war, because during a war, physical and chemical
forces replace argumentative communication. According to CLAUSEWITZ
(1832/1834), war means to substitute political arguments with
physical or chemical means. Using the moral criteria of equal rights
and assurance of existence, there are no positive arguments except
for a defensive war, because its function consists of responding,
through physical or chemical forces, to the forces that threaten
existence. Therefore, the purpose of a defensive war is to protect
good living for all in order to return finally to peaceful
VIII: Production and Consumption
arguments and communication create and establish an exchange of
knowledge. In the sphere of material production, nature's organic and
inorganic forces are transformed and exchanged as systems of forces
best suited to life: goods. Those who produce goods need the ideas of
thinkers and communicators, who, in turn, require products. Both
systems of forces are necessary sub-systems and have footing in the
system of good living for all.
modifies a given organic or inorganic system of forces, orienting it
toward a goal. If production is based on arguments, we refer to it as
productive action, which is therefore characterized and structured by
the six steps of the GACORE model (Figure 3): Internal action
prepares production through the steps of goal, analysis and
conception. External action creates favorable conditions
(organization) and creates the product (realization). Internal action
then evaluates the product and the production process (sixth step).
a world of limited resources, this process generally occurs in
interaction systems, either promoting or limiting others' action.
Thus, both in production and consumption, we must technically and
morally evaluate all products with the aid of the principles of the
assurance of existence and equal rights.
modern societies, not everyone participates equally in this ideal
production process. The division of labor has been established in
such a way that some people can conceive, plan and evaluate products
while others implement plans in a rather mechanical way. The people
in the first group develop their intellect while the second develop
their corporeality and considering that reason characterizes
humanity, we can say that conceiving and planning production has more
human dignity than is mere mechanical implementation.
conditions, means and effects of production influence every life
structure. Its characteristics determine the existence of all members
of society, for which reason the productive life technique must be
accompanied by morality, by the equitable right to good life. This
has to be a central point of a justified theory of production. For
this reason we will not go into detail here about physical and
chemical techniques but concentrate on the conditions under which
producers work and consumers live.
function of production is to assure good living for all. Fundamental
is therefore the relation between the producer and the consumer. The
place where producer and consumer come together is the market. In
modern societies the money is the medium between both groups on the
market. The definition of money as a mere medium is essential,
because it demonstrates that the so called Capitalism should not be
the basic economic concept of societies.
If the economic situation in a country is bad, the government can
produce paper money as much as it wants in the hope to stimulate the
economy. The Stock exchange, where the money is denominated capital,
has in consequence money in abundance, above all the banks as most
important. The banks receive the money, but in an economic crisis
they don´t have enough trustworthy clients to lend them it. In
consequence, they prefer to invest the money on the stock exchange,
where the shares and bonds will prosper, without sufficient
contribution to the good life of the society in its totality.
this reason, we have to focus on the economic concepts that use a
market economy as basis. The market is founded on the self-interest
of producer (he wants the best price) and the self-interest of the
consumer ( he wants the best product at the lowest price).
Consequently, the market economy per se has not the sufficient effect
of good living for all and we must evaluate the market economy using
the moral criteria of justified action and develop proposals for its
expansion and development.
market economy is based on the idea of private property. The question
is: Why do privately owned goods mean so much to the individual?
Human nature (corporeality) is a result of evolution in that
surviving humans like other species used their organic and inorganic
resources according to their self-interest (WICKLER & SEIBT
1977). Thus, human nature calls for the private possession of goods.
universal desire of individuals to own private property is a
permanent force in their nature that hinders equal rights.
Nevertheless, it also provides a major advantage since it motivates
the individual to produce goods. A person wants to consume goods or
exchange them for others, driven by his own assurance or expansion of
existence. This motivation is the basis of the market and its
conception, the market economy (SCHMÖLDERS 1969, CLAUPEIN 1990).
this is not the ideal. However, all attempts to overcome the human
desire for private ownership, with the aid of reason, whether through
early Christianity or the doctrine of Karl MARX (1844), have failed
as social concepts (NELL-BREUNING 1969). A human being is an entity
composed of nature and reason (or intelligence), for which reason the
only practicable economic models are those that technically accept
self-interest, but which are based in reason and morally associated
with equal rights.
choose as example the social market economy (MÜLLER-ARMACK 1946) as
the basis for our study because it fulfills both conditions. As a
market economy, it accepts self-interest; as a social system, it
attempts to respect equal rights among individuals. But being - as
all that human - an approximation, it needs to be critically
analyzed. It can be critiqued by determining to what extent
production and consumption can occur in ideal form and then compare.
economy without self-interest?
justified production and consumption system would be most likely in a
society made up of members that are ideal action systems. In
practice, however, these systems are non-existent.
in the other spheres of our world of life the members of an economy
are systems of behaviour and of action. The individual who always
behave as an ideal action system exists only in theory. Nevertheless,
this ideal economic individual performs a function that is
existentially necessary, because he demonstrates the direction toward
which each economy should develop.
begin by defining the ideal producer and consumer (as beings composed
of reason only) to later identify the limitations resulting from the
properties and activities of their corporeality. Ideal producers are
absolute systems of action capable of technically and morally
influencing all spheres of life. They have an equal relationship with
consumers, for which reason they produce for others as they would
produce for themselves. According to MARX (1844), the ideal producer
has realized himself as an individual and as a social being in four
develops his own personality in his product;
accepts the product consumer with absolute equality;
enables the development of the consumer as an individual, as if it
were he himself; and
helps the consumer develop himself as a social being since through
consumption of the product he relates himself with the consumer.
aspects can also be applied to the ideal consumer: through
consumption he develops as an individual and as a social being in
that he consciously relates to the producer, at the same time
enabling the producer to develop as an individual and a social being.
ideal producer and consumer complement each other with absolute
equality. This model - conceived by pure reason - is imaginable, but
in real life corporeality limits equality and symmetry among
"ultimate truth" (PARSONS 1966) is that humans only live a
certain amount of time, for which reason their ability to learn and
act is limited. Thus, in modern societies, multiple existential needs
can only be satisfied through specialized individuals, namely,
through the division of labor following more or less the general life
structure (Figure 1).
with needs and demands, each person is limited in his action and does
not exhibit the same skills in all areas of production and
consumption. Therefore, he must choose a sector of the life
structure, especially with regard to the professional sphere.
in the society not all sectors are considered equally: a physician
and a house painter do not receive the same recognition or pay. Each
has a distinct existential significance, which, from the perspective
of the life technique, has a dialectic relationship with equality.
a human being can be limited in his production due to individual
characteristics: the intelligence is unequally distributed among
people, or limited as a child, a sick or elderly person. These people
are incapable of producing or exchanging enough goods, they are not
capable to participate sufficiently in a world of markets.
should recall that, due to evolution, the principle of assurance of
existence is linked to self-interest, which opposes this ideal. An
organism that seeks the best for his own genetic material possesses
the best existential possibilities, although this does not
necessarily benefit others.
is the essential force of the individual, the driving force of
behaviour, the source of enjoyment and happiness, the criterion for
distinguishing between positive and negative forces. But from the
point of view of humanity, it is both the basis of good living and an
obstacle to good living for all. We must therefore conclude that
rigorously imposing the economic ideal of equal production and
consumption could threaten collective existence and could bring about
changes in society.
resume: Ideal production and consumption are limited by at least
three human qualities: the limited life span; the individual's life
process and characteristics; and the self-interest acquired during
evolution. So ideal production can´t be the realistic concept of an
economy. If one attempts to achieve the ideal at all costs (as
demonstrated by historical experiences with the communism), he will
face the hardest and intolerable restrictions of individual freedom,
with decreased motivation for work, and even migration, because there
would be no other way to satisfy needs.
economy based only on self-interest?
the ideal of MARX excludes a basic force of production, namely
self-interest as a driving force, the goals actually reached differ
significantly from expected goals. Neither is the other extreme, the
pure market economy, a justifiable concept. Accepting self-interest
as the only criterion and excluding or ignoring the principle of
equal rights, leads to the dominance of the individuals with
best competences over the weak.
most producers were determined by the minority of highly trained
individuals to be only means of production (which is a normal
consequence of a pure market economy) and were limited to assuring
their existence, they would find themselves defined as general
behavioural systems even though they are potential action systems.
producers perform only mechanically, their capacity for internal
arguments, self-advice and argumentative communication is poorly
developed. As producers and consumers, they are unfamiliar with the
entity of inter dependencies and do not give importance to the
effects of their work, on the environment, for example.
Oriented only to self-interest, this market concept forget the needs
of the helpless, of the individuals without the capacity to produce:
elderly people, sick ones, children. So no society can be based
sufficiently on the concept of compassion of her members. The help to
the helpless must be an elementary piece of his constitution, must be
has to be admitted, that from a perspective of societal development,
the results of a pure market economy are attractive, when we do not
consider the life of each individual but only the average quality of
life. The quantitative success of a pure market economy is determined
by the exclusive orientation of economic processes to consumer needs.
is only because he has previously produced and sold his product -
material or intellectual - that he can now acquire what he needs and
desires. In this way, the market economy creates interest in all
participating forces and integrates these forces into a production
and consumption system which works as a market. To summaries,
according to MÜLLER-ARMACK (1946), the market economy performs
better than any full planned economy, better than any socialism.
market economy is based on the different life concepts of people and
thereby promotes individualism, for which reason KEYNES (1936)
believes it is "the best guarantee of personal liberty" and
"the best guarantee for the expansion of life." Moreover, a
very advanced technique needs creative training and promotes not only
practical reason but also pure reason. Thus, in societies guided by
the market economy, critical-moral potential increases, particularly
in universities, as demonstrated by the student protests in
(1989), who compares the market economy with the Soviet planned
economy, highlights its effects on producers. It:
the capacity to adapt to technical changes in production;
highly qualified workers who aspire to democratic freedoms and who
are interested in developing their personalities to spiritually
enrich their lives.
judgments may seem overly positive because the idea was to propagate
the Western economic system in the Soviet Union of the time, but
KRASSIN is describing the situation in countries in which there is
both a market economy and democracy. These are countries in which
there is no real pure market economy, because citizens and their
constitution are influenced by reason and not only by self-interest.
An example of such a country is Germany, ruled economically and
politically as "Social Market Economy".
Social Market Economy
social market economy was developed as a result of the criticisms of
the communist economy and the alarming effects of the pure market
economy. It was politically established in West Germany after the
W.W.II, especially by Ludwig ERHARD, who relied on the concepts of
his collaborator, MÜLLER-ARMACK (1946). We will summarize
MÜLLER-ARMACK's basic arguments here to demonstrate how they
coincide with a justified theory of life technique:
We cannot choose a political-economic solution that contradicts the
central values we advocate. Therefore, we must determine whether the
market economy corresponds to the economic and social goals we
consider basic to our democratic system. These new forms do not
originate from individual ideas, but from intellectual collaboration.
The goal is to achieve a synthesis of the economic and the social.
It means that we accept the market economy as basic. However, it is
not a liberal market economy but is rather consciously guided by
social criteria. There are possibilities for social policy in the
productive increase of the economy, in the relationship among
individuals with private property, in the promotion of private homes
and subdivisions, as well as in the assurance of existence of
artisans and small business owners.
In the long term, market and social policy provide together a better
foundation for a justified social order than do the concepts of the
pure or planned (communist) market economies.
social market economy is oriented toward both self-interest and equal
rights. While it has proven effective, we should still note that the
MÜLLER-ARMACK-conception of a social market economy, and
consequently, its realization, contains some deficiencies as compared
to the demands of justified action.
we believe that it is necessary to enumerate the main deficiencies in
order to stimulate solutions. The conception of a social market
economy is not a static one, it is dynamic, adapting the state of
conditions and possibilities.
The social aspect is limited to the assurance of existence.
(1946) conceives the social aspect mainly in relation to the
assurance of existence of those who do not have adequate conditions
for the market, for example, children, the sick and the elderly. But
if we recall that the
properties and activities of production, in the public opinion more
or less worthy in terms of their existential value, have not received
sufficient attention. If in a society characterized by the division
of labour, young people are trained for their future profession,
whether it is theoretical or practical, we will find adults prepared
for only one of the two options. Therefore, there are still
individuals who can set goals, critically analyse conditions and
develop concepts; while there are others, the majority, who are
limited to creating outputs. The majority needs the former as guides,
but the former can and want (due to self-interest) not only to lead
but to dominate.
A concept opposing the division between employees and entrepreneurs
should reduce the radical division between employees/workers and
executives/owners. Both notions contain something offensive, because
they imply a hierarchical relationship: some give work while others
all the arguments of our theory, none contradicts the thesis that the
ideal enterprise should be composed only of entrepreneurs, in other
words, of individuals who understand the properties and activities of
their production and know how to use this production, thereby
developing themselves as human beings (MARX). Naturally, the
inequalities in achieving a good life will then not disappear in
totality. However, this is a goal toward which the community can
orient its economic organization.
A program is needed to address the isolation of producers from
concept must also be developed that attempts to eradicate the
isolation of producers and consumers and that increases the
possibilities for justified action. Until this becomes a goal,
economic science can maintain as a basic perspective - in a society
that seeks to increase the assurance of existence and equal rights -
that the only reason for the market is for consumers to obtain the
maximum benefit and producers the maximum earnings (SIEBERT 1989). In
this case, both producers and consumers act guided only by
self-interest rather than as individuals who are concerned with
others' good living.
general, we can say that the producer and the consumer have fulfilled
the demands of justified action when both are satisfied with the
exchange. If this is not accepted as a basic criterion in economic
theory, then the model is not oriented to good living for all.
Reciprocal exploitation, inherent in a market economy, is - to repeat
- simply the logical consequence of this selfish goal of producers to
obtain maximum earnings and that of consumers to buy under the
selfish most favorable conditions.
The equal rights of future generations do not receive enough
the original conception of the social market economy by
MÜLLER-ARMACK, the idea of equal rights is limited to present-day
producers and consumers. But future generations have the same right
to control current consumption of the limited resources. The
Categorical Imperative of KANT is valid not only at every place but
at every time. This does not mean we have to rename the social market
economy as "ecological market economy", since the social
aspect therefore includes the future. Because the social market
economy is a dynamic conception, we can and have to include
consciously the future-oriented perspective.
The social market economy is understood as a national concept.
economies have the selfish goal of importing low-cost products and
exporting their own products at high costs. These economies cannot
successfully respond to the growing universal problems of migration
to richer countries, deterioration of the environment, climatic
changes as well as scarcity of water and food.
national economy of an industrialized country, in which wages - still
more or less - permit the assurance and expansion of existence, will
take advantage of less developed economies, in which wages barely
cover the needs to assure existence. A highly industrialized country
takes advantage of the cheap manual labour of these countries to
obtain the products it needs. Even a social market economy, if it
considers only national borders and is exclusively oriented to the
good living of its members, will justify the development and
promotion of concepts that attempt to take advantage of the cheap
manual labour of developing countries.
conditions are unjustifiable not only because it does not eliminate
universal problems but also because it makes them worse and creates
new problems due to this separation into independent national
economies. A characteristic example: the owners of the surplus
capital of industrialized countries can escape the necessary national
taxes deposing it in countries without taxes. The majority of the
citizens, especially blue-collar workers, have to compensate for this
by paying increasingly high taxes.
is one response to the globalization of economic problems: National
social economies must be transformed into a global social market
IX: Model of Life and Life Technique.
back and summarizing we conclude that we have built a theory of life
technique, which means, that this theory is not an arbitrary one but
a system of thoughts conscious of human life.
are learning from KANT that the human spirit, as reason, not only is
capable of analyzing the realities of life, as DARWIN did, but beyond
that to create the concepts of a better living. The man, guided by
his reason, is able to find and realize a better life than animals or
plants: a life formed in individuality but at the same time protected
in the community, because in the human world it is not necessary that
the strong dominates the week, but that equals rights are guiding the
we consider the theory of life technique in its entirety, as a system
of contents and forms, then we recognize: it es the task of the
methods to change the contents, of the elements of the life structure
and thus of the life concept to a good common life.
is the structure of the elements? We have to differentiate in (a) the
conditions nature imposes on us and (b) the agreements between the
individuals as part of the community.
The invariable conditions imposed by nature
theory that has the goal of ordering and configuring reality and
human possibilities must accept the invariable conditions of human
life imposed by nature.
individual is the result of natural evolution. His life is limited.
He lives in a world of scarce resources and behaves according to his
self-interest. His conduct is therefore oriented to achieving goals.
He aims to assure or expand his existence, taking into account that
the conditions of the world of life act in either an additive or a
individual and his environment form a system, the world of life,
whose processes are characterized by their reciprocal effects.
Existential functions structure each world of life.
his intellectual capacity, an individual can modify his environment
and own nature, but given that his knowledge is relative and limited,
approximations characterize reality and theories of action.
action has six steps, three of which have the function of recognizing
(goal, analysis, conception) and three of modifying (organization,
action creates and uses knowledge in the form of arguments, processes
in which both the properties and activities of corporeality and
individual prepares, controls and evaluates external action, which in
turn has repercussions on his internal action.
action encompasses communication, production and consumption.
Communication creates and exchanges knowledge, production
manufactures material goods and consumption uses them.
receiver is an action-system or a behavioral-system or organic-system
communication type is a symmetrical argumentation between
action-systems or construction or reconstruction.
production types are physical techniques or chemical modifications.
The variable agreements imposed by human society
all necessary knowledge is to be acquired through observation of
nature and by complying with nature. Equal rights, a human invention,
are opposed to the laws of nature. To impose such standards, we need
agreements between the individuals, between the institutions and
discussing these agreements, which exist in the form of customs, laws
and treaties, we will limit here to the principles that could be the
moral basis of good living for all in all places at all times: the
principles of assurance of existence and equal rights determine what
is morally justified.
we comprehensively analyse the conditions imposed by nature and the
ethical, moral agreements we acknowledge: We will never live in
harmony with nature because in it the strong dominate the weak and
death awaits all living things. Nevertheless, we can aspire to the
goal that no individual will live worse than necessary and die before
Each problem is an alteration in the system of forces that the
individual forms in himself and with his environment. Therefore, the
agent must identify all the forces which (by being activated or
eliminated) can resolve the problem, by content or by form.
the content are dedicated the models life structure and life concept,
to the form the models self-advice, argumentative communication and
of production or consumption.
7: STRUCTURE AND ELEMENTS OF AN
models of form are oriented to the six steps of action. We begin by
clarifying the goal (recognition of the Goal). We then classify the
conditions as favorable or unfavorable (Analysis) and ultimately
reach the concept of the solution in the form of a maxim
(Conception). To achieve the maxim, we organize the conditions
necessary (Organization), activate the forces that lead to the
solution (Realization) and we appraise, maintain and expand the
result (Evaluation). GACORE as model of steps.
self-advice is a competence of the agent himself, is a competence of
his internal argumentation. Therefore, it is characterized as a
perfect symmetrical argumentation and the agent uses, with himself,
the method called Pure argumentation. But if the communication is
directed to other people, we have to distinguish between action
systems and behavioural systems, to employ the corresponding types of
communication and method.
the goal is to produce goods, we subdivide the environment into the
organic and inorganic nature, that is into the Organic system and
Inorganic system. The corresponding types of production are the
Spatial modification and the Material modification. The spatial
modification has physical techniques as methods, the material
modification has chemical ones.
is the cognition, that an individual who argues about the contents
and methods of an element is stimulated to consider the other
elements of the life structure and take them into account. An
appraisal of an element has to consider whole life structure.
model of life technique not only demonstrates its force in practical
life but also in the theoretical, in the sciences. With the aid of
the six steps, we can order and appraise theoretical knowledge,
asking for example: Does this theory try to describe the reality only
(analysis) or does this theory try to change the reality too.
model helps to uncover the existential importance of all systems of
forces and provides so the criteria for each individual to choose,
according to his justified life concept, among the possibilities and
restrictions of the social systems. That decreases all superfluous
external power. It strengthens the individual to follow his justified
maxims. In the whole of the society, this individual will be a
positive element. And this is the essential, fundamental
intention of the model of life technique.
X: Some applications of the Life Technique
we define as an action if it is based on arguments. Actions are
possible only for man, animals and plants have conduct. If we were to
make contact at some time with extraterrestrial living beings, they
would have the same rights as human beings if they were open to
not know sufficient our own galaxy, and there are more than a billion
galaxies. Is there a paradise somewhere?
enlightened religions that ignorance, which of its very nature is
true for atheists too, means that a second focus should be on moral
education, that is, on the equality of all men, and on help to making
a good life on earth so as to be a force against material and
that ignorance it also follows that religions that claim to be in
sole possession of the absolute truth persecute or murder people of a
different faith, and are invincibly opposed to a theory of life
technique that has as its goal a good life for all. That is true, for
example, of the persecution of Christians by Jews in the late Persian
Empire and for the incomprehensible murder of Jews by Christians in
the Second World War.
truth exists only relative to the human being. That must distinguish
a philosophy today from SOCRATES, PLATO, ARISTOTLE up to KANT and
HEGEL. The categorical imperative of KANT (act only in such a manner
that it could be valid as a general law), which we have made easier
to grasp through the principle of security of existence, makes that
clear. It can in reality be an approximation to knowledge that serves
writings show that the fundamental right of equality was known about,
but that it almost without exception contradicted the self-interest
of the mighty. That is how it was expressed in 2000 BC in a
Babylonian hymn: For
seven days the slave woman was equal to her mistress, the slave
walked with his master, in my city the mighty and the lowly slept
side by side.
ancient Greece, where women and slaves were excluded from equality,
can still be admired as the birthplace of democracy, should be
reconsidered. Similar things can be said of the volks-thing
the Germanic peoples, in which only the free men were allowed to
revolutionary significance of the categorical imperative lies in that
very point, the right to a good life on the basis of equality. That
makes it a measure independent of time, valid in the past (the “great
men” Alexander, Caesar, Napoleon are to be evaluated as power
hungry, covetous, merciless mass murderers); in the present (the life
of a person has the same value everywhere, whether on the Nile or the
Thames); and in the future. Unexplainable except as self-interest,
that in future this will still be possible: a government, a few
persons, decide on war, possibly against a despot ruling his helpless
people, and then the war costs an unforeseeable number of lives among
the innocent people.
the essential characteristics of evolution is that everything living
must be self-interested in order to preserve itself and to be able to
pass on its genetic material. That is valid for human beings too,
though they are from birth dependent for those purposes on the
community. Since both of those things are characteristic of man,
self-interest has to be a basic problem given by nature within the
self-interest is inherited as a core of the human being, it is
different with equality. In today’s Iraq, over 4,000 years ago, the
ruler was an early social reformer, Urukagina. He called himself the
protector of widows and orphans; he forbade exploitation of the poor
by the rich. Our finding: morality, as respect for equality in the
claim to a good life, is not inherited; it has to be handed on to
every newborn. Hence the task of education arises. Its procedure is
arduous (through argumentation, being a model, praise and criticism),
and yet the inborn unscrupulous self-interest again and again
succeeds in dominating. Education, since its content is morality, is
characterized by conflicts. ( It is easier to teach a moral free life
technology, because it affects the self interest of the addressee).
another insight is that the reality in a democracy can be only an
approximation to the ideal. Not the idea of democracy is wrong, it is
based on equality, but it becomes imperfect because of the citizens
in their self-interest in every area. That argument can also be put
forward by the models of communism, of socialism. But the essential
difference consists of control through free elections. Whoever – in
a democracy – is elected on the basis of unfulfilled promises,
which is all the easier the less educated the voters are, risks being
voted out by the disappointed. You can indeed win elections with
half-truths and untruths, but not rule for long with them. But being
voted out is contrary to the self-interest of the one elected. So in
a democracy there is an added check by the voters through the
self-interest of the rulers.
a society is democratic, that form of state has the additional task
of struggling against excessive controls. Just that distinguishes
democracy from dictatorships. In that we see the general problem of
many developing countries. For the transition from despotic or
dictatorial systems to democratic ones there is usually a lack of
education among the people. Self-interest is a given as a
characteristic of every corporeality; recognition of equality on the
other hand is a force that arises from reason. And reason is above
all a result of education.
has to come from within, it cannot be forced from outside. From
within, that is a very lengthy process lasting generations, because
it depends on education, best achieved by small, careful steps from
despotism via dictatorship to democracy. Whoever wants to impose
democracy from outside by violence exposes himself to the arguments
that he is either “simple-minded” or dependent on
political-economic, or on religious grounds.
the four fundamental forces (health, love, freedom, material goods)
the material, whether as product or money, is particularly important
for security of existence, but also for expansion of existence in all
areas. So every community needs an economic system. That works best,
measured against the good life, when it is based on the market
economy; on the market, whether a vegetable market or a complex
financial one, the self-interest of the buyer runs up against the
self-interest of the vendor, so the product and its price can be
market economy, Capitalism in the market economy, or Planned economy?
is necessary for life is the production and consumption of goods.
Between them money functions as a general means of exchange. So money
comprises only a part of economic processes.
because of its universality, money – especially paper money – can
be conceived of as independent of production and consumption and
accordingly be used independently – as capital. Its market, the
capital market and its conception in capitalism, can therefore
flourish almost detached from the state of the economy as a whole,
independently of the quality of life of the population in its
majority. That proves that capitalism cannot be the justified basic
and economic form of a society. It is lacking the moral foundations
needed to qualify as a general system according to the categorical
imperative, that is, to serve the good life of all citizens.
socially directed market, on the other hand, can basically do justice
to the claims of people to a good life. It encompasses as a market
economy production, consumption, and also the money economy and –
committed to the common good life – the solution of social
problems, especially security of existence of those individuals who
cannot look after themselves, who are lacking marketability:
children, the sick, the old, and those unable to work.
social market economy is necessary for the ecology too, because it
regards future persons as having equal rights, and so it pays
attention to sustainability. So a social market economy is the best
security against the risks of globalization; it aims to provide every
citizen with the basic ability to be able to take care of his own
security of existence and expansion of life in a flexible way.
Educated in that way, the citizen is most able to do justice to his
striving for a good life, in a global future too, through exchange of
his intellectual or material production and products.
should not overlook that a social market economy is not a rigid
model. Its concrete form and its possibilities are dependent on the
conditions of a society. To the needy that can be given only which is
available as superfluity, as taxes. But only he can pay levies and
taxes who has more than what is necessary for the security of his own
existence. The more economically viable, the more wealthy persons
there are, the better it is for the non-viable ones.
the question must be asked why the development of a social market
economy is even being hindered. Here too we see self-interest at
work. It is obvious that capitalistically organized enterprises,
which are therefore less burdened by social levies and socially
oriented legislation, have better chances of gaining high profits for
their owners. And certainly, as proved by history, to the basic
disadvantage of the workers. It was not until the uniting in trade
unions – almost two thousand years AD – that that could be
changed. In addition: whoever has achieved big profits with low
taxation prefers to be celebrated as a generous donor and benefactor
rather than to have paid anonymously taxes aiming at welfare.
Planned economy, a counter-concept especially to the market economy,
means the directing of the economy of a country in a centralized way
and by functionaries on hierarchically descending levels. It is
basically an ideal model with a social orientation, so to say of pure
reason, which in reality has to fail because of corporeality, the
individual self-interest of man. Who, when there are no free
elections, controls the self-interest of the controllers? Socialists
confuse cause and effect when they describe the first fenced-in
private property as the beginning, the cause of social inequality.
Castle and key, fence and city wall serve first of all as protection
against aggressive self-interest of others.
our world of scarcity of many resources and of self-interest of all
persons it is basically difficult for each individual to attain a
good life. So it will have negative consequences if we live from day
to day without a plan. Whether it is a search for attractive jobs or
an attractive partner, the advantage will be with him who fashions
his present and future according to a thought-through “life
concept”, a life concept by which he determines individually and
flexibly what he himself must do, wants, and justifiably may do –
and keeps aiming at that.
our life concept each of us sets the individual meaning of our life,
and to a great extent we ourselves determine that. Security of
existence is a given of our nature, expansion of existence on the
other hand we must ourselves create in its goals. Hence in our
concept of life, in the system made up by the goals of a person, both
necessity and relative freedom merge.
pleased with achieving our own individual goals and realizing them is
what makes for satisfaction, happiness. Major goals we basically
reach step by step. Step by step, as on a staircase, we get closer to
them. So we are conscious that momentary happiness has its best
meaning only if it constitutes a mosaic stone in the picture we are
striving for of a successful life, and momentary unhappiness is
easier to bear if it does not smash that mosaic.
a world of self-interest we should not be an independent satellite,
but rather a “sun”. The point is not to make our good life
dependent on other people alone. Each of us should live – nearly
independent as a “sun” – our own life too. However, a
partnership will probably be more stable if the life structures
interpenetrate, if the partners have as many common elements as
being a “sun” was – and is – never a characteristic feature
of the majority. Since the earliest times men have sought a leader,
above all on the grounds of security of existence, but then he raised
himself above them, made them his subjects – expanding his own
existence as an “aristocrat” – exploited them, sent them to war
and death. Napoleon is an almost incomprehensible example of that.
After the hundreds of thousands of dead in the Russian campaign,
whose purpose it was, as he himself said, to lift his own fame, he
succeeded in a short time in winning the French people for himself
again and making them enthusiastic for his wars.
an individual fighter, an outsider, or a member of a network, that
is, a member in a union of forces? Outsiders are freer and more
creative (as explained in the book, through the difference between
pure reason, socially less dependent, and practical reason) but often
endangered in their existential security (Mozart was an outsider,
Haydn in the network). Members of a network support each other
(security of existence) and promote each other (expansion of
existence). But they also limit, because the common consent
characteristically diminishes the chances of the particular, the
unique (Bruckner’s friends worsened-improved his groundbreaking
argument against the basic self-interest of man is the readiness of a
few to risk their life for others. Why does a fireman put his life at
risk? In non-human nature that is unknown toward others. So it is
basically linked with the unique intelligence of man. That enables
him to feel the suffering of another living thing as his own and –
empathy arises from reciprocal effect of corporeality and
intelligence – to try to save someone. A necessary force in that is
the concrete perception of the person addressed. That explains why
among educated, morally trained people killing is rare, while in
wartime, for example, men firing cannons and bomber pilots hardly
show inhibitions. On the atom bomb directed at people in Japan was
written: “With love and kisses”.
good life has as its basis corporeality, so death is waiting for all
life. That shows that our world of life is not marked by an eternal
cycle but by a temporal beginning and a temporal end. Points of time
in the past are to be defined as systems of forces that no longer
a human being looking back, only approximations are possible. The
worldwide life structures of man at any chosen point of time can be
known and described only in a very abbreviated form. The limitation
to what is still visibly influential today from the past, is the sort
of approximation of the scholarship of history.
knowledge is largely based on the past, bus the future should be
defined as a system of forces that do not yet exist. Here all the
more only approximations are possible. It is a part of the essence of
the future that it goes beyond human power of knowledge, because the
future will consist of force systems that have arisen not only from
necessities – their results are easier to predict – but also from
a share of human freedom and other unpredictable contingencies.
the past and the future lies the present. Since the world as a system
of forces is incomprehensible for the human intellect and as well
quickly changes, even the present can be defined only subjectively
and relatively. The present is for a person what he himself knows and
evolution teaches us that that living creature survives, also man,
that best adapts to the conditions of his environment. The human
being of today therefore has a fundamental interest in not having
those conditions altered in a dangerous way. Impacts on the
environment are to be examined particularly critically and to be
implemented only carefully. Only when they mean enduring security of
existence or expansion of existence, judged by the measure of the
common good life, are they justified.
problems that arise due to the complex reciprocal effects of man and
nature are global dangers. Depletion of raw materials and enlargement
of raw materials, deforesting or intensive farming, do not only bring
advantages for the good life, they also mean risks for man and
animal. Industrialization brings with it existential problems if it
involves pollution of the atmosphere. Chinese landing at a
west-European airport in 2015 only hesitantly take off bit by bit
their breathing protection, wondering at the unaccustomed positive
quality of the air.
are becoming more and more aware of the twofold relationship to
animals, in particular to animals as food for human beings. Whoever
lives in proximity to animals notices in them likenesses to humans. A
cat lost its partner through death, and this was buried quite deep
under a stone slab, imperceptibly for the cat, apparently
imperceptibly. Days later it showed the humans what it knew. It leap
onto the slab, marked it, and started a dance never seen before. For
joy, for lamentation? It could not say – and there is the
difference, in speech. However: in our world of approximations the
following argument is not easy to rebut: if, according to KANT,
equality is valid even for stupid humans, why should it not be valid
for intelligent animals? Still now or forever man’s self-interest
rates man before everything in the world.
H. 1983. Grundformen des Lehrens. Stuttgart: Klett.
R. 1978. Eine Theorie des praktischen Diskurses. In: OELMÜLLER, W.
(Hrsg.). Materialien zur Normendiskussion. Bd. 2. Paderborn:
G. 1973. Dynamische Psychiatrie. Darmstadt: Luchterhand.
(384-322 v. Chr.) Nikomachische Ethik. Berlin 1979: Akademie Verlag.
(384-322 v. Chr.) Probleme. Paderborn 1961: Ferdinand Schöningh.
A. 413. Der Gottesstaat. Bd.1. Salzburg 1966: Otto Müller Verlag.
(1126-1198). Philosophie und Theologie. Übersetzt von M.J. Müller.
Weinheim 1991: VCH, Acta Humaniora.
G. 1927. Essai sur la connaissance approchée. Paris 1969: Librairie
philosophique J. Vrin.
P. 1978. Modell des Handelns. Trier: Universität Trier, Fachbereich
P. 1991. Existentielles Handeln. Frankfurt: Lang Verlag.
P. 1993. Lebenstechnik. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche
P. 1999. La vida buena. Teoría crítica del vivir. Lima: Universidad
P. 2005. Critical Theory of Good Living. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
A. 1979. Sozial-kognitive Lerntheorie. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.
A. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs,
N.J.: Prentice Hall.
& STEINER, G.A. 1972. Menschliches Verhalten. Weinheim: Beltz.
J.E. 1981. Development Psychology. A Life-Span Approach. Boston:
1973. Der methodologische Standort des symbolischen Interaktionismus.
In: AG Bielefelder Soziologen (Hrsg.) Alltagswissen, Interaktion und
gesellschaftliche Wirklichkeit. Bd. 1. Reinbeck: Rowohlt.
E. E. 1971. Zwischen zwei Wirklichkeiten. Bern: Huber.
N. 1938. Atomphysik und menschliche Erkenntnis. Braunschweig 1958:
U. 1979. The Ecology of Human Development. Cambridge: Harvard
C. von. 1832/34. Vom Kriege. Bonn 1973: Dümmler.
CH. 1859. Die Abstammung des Menschen. Stuttgart 1966: Kröner
R.L. 1989. An Introduction to Chaotic Dynamical Systems. Redwood
City, California: Addison-Wesley.
W. 1890. Das Problem der gegenwärtigen Ethik. In: Gesammelte
Schriften, X. Band., Stuttgart 1970: Teubner Verlagsgesellschaft.
R., GRUNWALD, B.B. & PEPPER, F.C. 1987. Lehrer und Schüler lösen
Disziplinprobleme. Weinheim: Beltz
N., MILLER, P.A. et al. 1991. Prosocial Development in Adolescence: A
Longitudinal Study. In: Developmental Psychology, Nr. 5, S. 849-857.
R. 1930. Wörterbuch der philosophischen Begriffe. Berlin: Mittler &
S. 1979. Entwurf einer integrativen Persönlichkeitstheorie. In:
FILIPP, S.-H. (Hrsg.) Selbstkonzept-Forschung: Probleme, Befunde,
Perspektiven. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.
E.H. 1959/71. Identität und Lebenszyklus. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
H. & EYSENK, M.W. 1987. Persönlichkeit und Individualität.
München: Psychologie Verlags Union.
J.E. & McGIMSEY; J.F. 1993. Defining an Acceptable Treatment
Environment. In: VAN HOUTEN, R. & AXELROD, S. (Hrsg.) Behavior
Analysis and Treatment. New York and London: Plenum Press.
L. 1978. Theorie der kognitiven Dissonanz. Bern: Huber.
L. 1830/31. Vorlesungen über Logik und Metaphysik. Darmstadt 1976:
R. & URY, W. 1981. Getting to Yes. Boston: Hougton Mifflin
D., WALLOE, L. & ELSTER, J. 1986. Rationale Argumentation.
Berlin: de Gruyter.
S. 1938. Abriß der Psychoanalyse. Frankfurt 1953: Fischer Bücherei.
Th. 1976. Familienkonferenz - Die Lösung von Konflikten zwischen
Eltern und Kind. Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe.
J. 1965. Erkenntnis und Interesse. In: HABERMAS, J. (Hrsg.). Technik
und Wissenschaft als "Ideologie". Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
J. 1971. Vorbereitende Bemerkungen zu einer Theorie der
kommunikativen Kompetenz. In: HABERMAS, J. & LUHMANN, N.: Theorie
der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologie. Was leistet die
Systemforschung? Frankfurt: Luchterhand.
R.M. 1981. Moral thinking. Its levels, method, and point. Oxford:
G.W. 1797/98. Entwürfe über Religion und Liebe. In: Werke 1. Frühe
Schriften. Frankfurt 1971: Suhrkamp.
G.W. 1812/13. Wissenschaft der Logik. Bd. 1. In: HOGEMANN, F. &
W. (Hrsg.). Hegel. Gesammelte Werke. Bd. 11. Hamburg 1978: Meiner.
Thomas. 1642/1651. De Cive or The Citizen. Westport, Connecticut
1982: Greenwood Press.
J.G. & SKINNER, B.F. 1974. Analyse des Verhaltens. München:
Urban & Schwarzenberg.
D. 1751. Eine Untersuchung über die Prinzipien der Moral. (Übersetzt
von C. WINCKLER). Hamburg 1972: Felix Meiner Verlag.
E. 1929. Cartesianische Meditationen. Hamburg 1977: Meiner.
William. 1907/1909. Pragmatism. The Meaning of Truth. Cambridge 1978:
Harvard University Press.
W. (Hrsg.) 1986. Angst und Psychopharmaka. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
R. 1981. Kraft und Identität. In: Zeitschrift für allgemeine
Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.
I. 1784/85. Metaphysik (Volckmann, J.W.). In: Akademie-Ausgabe. Kants
gesammelte Schriften. Bd. XXVIII. Berlin 1968: de Gruyter.
I. 1785. Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. In: CASSIRER, E.
(Hrsg.). Immanuel Kants Werke. Bd. 4. Berlin 1922: Cassirer.
I. 1788. Kritik der praktischen Vernunft. In: CASSIRER, E. (Hrsg.).
Immanuel Kants Werke. Bd. 5. Berlin 1922: Cassirer.
1793. Über den Gemeinspruch: Das mag in der Theorie richtig sein,
taugt aber nicht für die Praxis. In: CASSIRER, E. (Hrsg.) Immanuel
Kants Werke. Bd.6. Berlin 1923: Cassirer.
I. 1797. Schriften zur Ethik und Religionsphilosophie. Über ein
vermeintes Recht aus Menschenliebe zu lügen. In: WEISCHEDEL, W.
(Hrsg.) Immanuel Kant. Werke. Bd. 4. Darmstadt 1970:
F. 1978. Das Prinzip Handlung in der Philosophie Kants. Berlin, New
York: de Gruyter.
J.M. 1936. Allgemeine Theorie der Beschäftigung und des Geldes.
Berlin 1974: Duncker & Humblot.
L. 1981. The philosophy of moral development. San Francisco: Harper &
L. 1982. Soziologische Dimensionen der Identität. Stuttgart:
J. 1989. Demokratische Alternative. In: Marxistische Blätter, Heft
3, Neuss: Verlag Marxistische Blätter.
M.E. 1984. Social and emotional Development in Infancy. In:
BORNSTEIN, M.H. & LAMP. M.E. (Hrsg.) Developmental Psychology.
6. Jh. v. Chr.. Tao te king. Düsseldorf 1972: Diederichs Verlag.
K. 1951. Feldtheorie. In: GRAUMANN, C.-F. (Hrsg.)
Kurt-Lewin-Werkausgabe. Bd. 4. Bern 1982: Huber.
John. 1689. Über den menschlichen Verstand. (Übersetzt von C.
WINCKLER). Hamburg 1968: Felix Meiner Verlag.
J. 1977. Wissenschaftstheorie. München: Beck.
K. 1844. Ökonomisch-philosophische Manuskripte. Berlin 1973: Dietz.
D. 1979. Kognitive Verhaltensmodifikation. München: Urban &
R.K. 1968. Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: The Free
H. 1989. Mintzberg über Management. (Aus dem Amerikanischen
übersetzt von H.-P. MEYER). Wiesbaden 1991: Gabler.
K. 1972. Theorien zum Erziehungsprozeß. München: Juventa.
A. 1946. Wirtschaftsordnung und Wirtschaftspolitik. Freiburg im
Breisgau 1966: Rombach.
O. von. 1969. Mitbestimmung - Wer mit wem? Freiburg: Herder.
W.F. 1976. Selbstkonzept und Identität im Kindes-und Jugendalter.
I. 1687. Mathematische Grundlagen der Naturphilosophie. Hamburg 1988:
F. 1886/87. Jenseits von Gut und Böse. Zur Genealogie der Moral.
Berlin 1968: de Gruyter.
E. & SEITELBERGER, F. 1988. Gehirn, Bewußtsein und Erkenntnis.
Darmstadt: Wissenschaftl. Buchgesellschaft.
T. 1966. Gesellschaften. Evolutionäre und komparative Perspektiven.
Frankfurt a. M. 1975: Suhrkamp.
T. 1976. Zur Theorie sozialer Systeme. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
T. 1980. Zur Theorie der sozialen Interaktionsmedien. Opladen:
J. 1964. Theorien und Methoden der modernen Erziehung. Wien 1972:
Verlag Fritz Molden.
J. 1969. Das Erwachen der Intelligenz beim Kinde. Stuttgart: Klett.
J. 1976. Die Äquilibration der kognitiven Strukturen. Stuttgart:
J. 1975. Eine Theorie der Gerechtigkeit. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
G.S. 1968. A Primer of Operant Conditioning. Glenview, Illinois:
C. 1951. Die klient-bezogene Gesprächstherapie. Client Centered
Therapy. München 1973: Kindler.
P.A. 1985. Volkswirtschaftslehre: Grundlagen der Makro- und
Mikroökonomie. Band 2. Köln 1987: Bund-Verlag.
H. & NOVAK, P. 1972. Anthropologie und Biophysik. In: GADAMER,
H.-G. & VOGLER, P. (Hrsg.). Neue Anthropologie. München: DTV.
R. 1960. El siglo XIX. Historia de las civilizaciones. Bd. VI.
Barcelona: Ediciones Destino.
O. 1979. Praktische Begründung, rationale Rekonstruktion und
methodische Überprüfung. In: LENK, H. (Hrsg.). Handlungstheorien
interdisziplinär. Bd. 2,2. München: Fink.
J.R. 1987. Intentionalität. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
L. A. (gest. 65 n. Chr.) Über das glückliche Leben. Darmstadt 1971:
H. 1989. Einführung in die Volkswirtschaftslehre. Stuttgart:
B.F. 1969. Contingencies of Reinforcement. New York: Meredith.
B.F. 197O. Futurum II. Hamburg: Wegner.
Adam. 1776. An Inquiry into the Natur and Causes of the Wealth of
Nations. Volume 1. Oxford 1976: Clarendon Press.
A.N. 1972. Inner Speech and Thought. New York: Plenum.
E. 1982. Entwicklung prosozialen Verhaltens. München: Urban &
W. 1974. Wissenschaftliche Erklärung und Begründung. Berlin:
H. 1973. Formen der Daseinsermöglichung. In: GADAMER, H.-G. &
VOGLER, P. (Hrsg.). Neue Anthropologie. Bd. 5: Psychologische
Anthropologie. Stuttgart: DTV.
T. & GRABOWSKY, J. (Hrsg.). 1976. Verhaltensmodifikation bei
Geistig-Behinderten. München: Reinhardt.
K., HÄFELE, W. & STEGMAIER, W. 1987. Bedingungen der Zukunft.
Stuttgart: Verlag frommann-holzboog.
D.M. 1975. Brain, Behaviour and Drugs. Introduction to the
Neurochemistry of Behaviour. London: Wiley & Sons.
W. & SEIBT, U. 1977. Das Prinzip Eigennutz. Hamburg: Hoffmann &
L. 1948. Bemerkungen über die Philosophie der Psychologie. Frankfurt
IN THE PROCESS OF AN ACTION
Assurance and expansion of existence
goal, the given situation and the approximation constitute the
moments in the process of each action. The action begins from a given
situation (xxx) that includes the assurance and expansion of
existence and tries to reach a goal (>), which also has a meaning
(generally positive) for the assurance or expansion of existence.
agent can only partially recognize the goal, the given situation and
the means. Consequently, each realization is incomplete and all
actions manage only to approximate the goal (xxxx), in other words,
the results are incomplete approximations.
of each force on the continuum between determinism and free will
medium Organic medium human corporeality
practical reason pure reason
laws of inorganic nature have no freedom. For them determinism is
valid. On the other end is the
pure reason, thought as absolutely
Some important elements
Values assurance of existence;
life structure content of life
concept goals, religion, faith
rules of behavior; manners
social order; economic order
school; enterprises; government
behavior action, communication
characteristics, hereditary disposition; skills
Properties need impulses;
satisfaction; joy; affection; love;
child; young person; adult; elderly Person
illness; rest; death
height; weight; organs; deficiencies
Activities Behave reflexes; sexuality
form, color, space, volume
perceptions; words; numbers
Animals raising, maintenance
earth; water; air; raw materials
goods; houses; streets
configuration of land; climate
life structure represents the human world as a system of forces
ordered through functions (tasks) that differentiate it in the
systems of culture, community, personality, corporeality and
environment. Each system is structured into subsystems, spheres and
A BEHAVIORAL SYSTEM TO AN ACTION SYSTEM
structure Behavioral system for
Behavioral and action Action system
2) the assurance of
existence system, based on
Subsystems develop The spheres de-
1) (reflexes): suckle,
grasp, etc. through doing
velop with the
aid of notions
Make concrete: suckle, grasp
Doing based on repre- Doing based on
life structure covers the world of persons in its entirety (level 2).
Spheres (level 1) belong to the life structure and take place through
concrete behaviors (level 0).
life structure of the newborn is ordered by human evolution. The
child is born with a program of behaviors oriented toward assurance
of existence. However, he has the capacity to approximate action and
also to consider the expansion of life as a goal. These constitute
subsystems in his knowledge and thus can differentiate a feeding
behavior from a hygienic one: he drinks a bottle of milk, but does
not suck the tube of toothpaste.
adolescent is capable of action, he can plan his behavior through
arguments. He uses toothpaste to clean his glasses. His competency
for action is characterized by notions, which existentially complete
his reflexes and representations.
SIX STEPS OF AN ACTION
GACORE MODEL -
EXPLANATION OF THE SIX CATEGORIES OF AN ACTION
situation Approximation Goal
THE SIX CATEGORIES ARE THE SIX STEPS OF AN ACTION
A-nalysis > C-onceptua-
> O-rganisa- > R-ealization >
combining the two types of approximation (recognition and
modification) with the three moments (goal, given situation,
approximation) six categories result, differentiated according to
function (task) of the category Goal consists of recognizing the
goal, what is always the beginning of an action.
having recognized the goal its possible to analyze the conditions
which help or hinder the goal, and - based on goal and this analysis
- make a concept of modification.
external modification begins with the organization of means, so
preparing the realization of the goal. The action concludes with the
this manner, the names of the six categories are derived from her
resume, if the process of an action is considered, the categories are
the six "steps" of an action. The first step is always the
goal, the sixth and last the evaluation. The result: G-A-C-O-R-E as
model of an action.
COMMUNICATION AS RECIPROCAL ACTIONS AMONG INDIVIDUALS
the figure presents the essential forces -
Analysis Realization Evaluation
resolve a problem, Person A develops an argument with the help of the
six steps, which he communicates to Person B (external
argumentation), who receives it as a goal proposal for his internal
B then communicates his own argument, created in the same manner, in
order to argument together towards the solution to the problem.
AND ELEMENTS Of AN ACTION
steps: 1. Goal 2. Analysis 3. Conception 4. Organization 5.
Realization 6. Evaluation.
is goal-oriented. By distinguishing between internal and external
action we recognize six steps of approaching the goal.
in all steps: assurance and expansion of existence; equal rights.
action serves of assurance or expansion of existence, so the good
life. Since every person has the right to good life, every action in
the equal rights is measured.
types: self-advice or communication or production/consumption.
distinguish between internal and external action. Internal action
takes the form of arguing with itself, as self-advice. Characteristic
are the steps of knowledge. External actions are done in the form of
communicating or producing. Characteristic are the steps of changes.
types: action system or behavioral system or organic system or
the action directed to the outside, are its "receiver" to
distinguish in action systems, behavioural systems or organic and
types: symmetrical argumentation or construction or
the action directed to people we have to use different communicating
types corresponding to the communication conditions of the receiver.
types: physical techniques or chemical techniques.
the action directed to the nature, we use physical or chemical means.
Pure argumentation, Mutual argumentation , Additive argumentation,
Models , Conditioning or Physical modification and Chemical
types of communication and production can be implemented by means of
methods. These range from pure argumentation to chemical ones.
The problem solving through an
action begins with
that the external action which differs
in communication or production; the communication differs in
symmetrical or construction or reconstruction methods,
the production in physical or chemical modifications.
is fundamental to always take into account that each method is only
one element from the totality, determined by reciprocal effects. All
other methods influence. Particularly successful is therefore an
action which focuses on a method, but brings all other methods into