LOGINOMY - a logical approach to politics?

LOGI- (ancient greek: logiké) "thinking in a linear, step-by-step manner about how a problem can be solved" -NOMY (ancient greek: nómos) "a system of rules, laws, or knowledge about a body of a particular field" LOGINOMY finding a system of Law through a step-by-step, logical approach

Welcome to Loginomy, a unique approach to political organising - logic! A bold statement, but consider any political organisation you know, and judge which of these alternatives it falls closest to:

A: Is a mix of the values and interests of the people involved in that political organisation. B: Tries to view life on Earth in a scientific perspective, and from here seeks to pursue an altruistic purpose in a principled manner.

In the past, no political system made overall sense to this author, and it took me a while to figure out why: political organising evolve from a myriad of subjective values and interests, and political life is naturally a battle between these values and interests. Such dynamic might occasionally churn out some good results, but while we rationalise the beliefs we already hold, we remain ignorant of what could be more objectively rational (for humankind). And as my notion of politics existing in a rational vacuum grew stronger over the years, I felt compeled to develop the philosophy of Loginomy - not reinforcing what we already believe about politics, but contemplating what to believe.

Ideological belief <---know---> TRUTH!
Loginomy ---find---> TRUTH?

So the idea of Loginomy is to approach politics as logically as we can. But the initial obstacle is that everyone already knows their political views to be correct! ...have we maybe forgotten the lesson of Socrates, a founding father of western civilisation?

(From Plato's Apology of Socrates:) I went to one of those reputed to be wise, on the ground that there, if anywhere, I would refute the divination and show the oracle, 'This man is wiser than I, but you declared that I was wisest.' So I considered him thoroughly. I need not speak of him by name, but he was one of the politicians, and when I considered him and conversed with him, men of Athens, I was affected something like this: it seemed to me that this man seemed to be wise, both to many other human beings and most of all to himself, but that he was not. And then I tried to show him that he supposed he was wise, but was not. So from this I became hateful both to him and to many of those present. For my part, as I went away, I reasoned with regard to myself: 'I am wiser than this human being. For probably neither of us knows anything noble and good, but he supposes he knows something when he does not know, while I, just as I do not know, do not even suppose that I do. I am likely to be a little bit wiser than he in this very thing: that whatever I do not know, I do not even suppose I know.'

Let us be a little bit wiser than the other apes around us, and admit that there is a lot we do not know about solving political problems. And if you can muster this humility, then I will be glad to bring you on a journey through a different approach to political organising! First of all, I claim that we need to thoroughly examine our environment (anything that affects us), including what we - the advocates of political systems - are. Knowing how the world works not only changes our view on how to accomplish something, but changes what we want to accomplish, as what we want to accomplish is based on what we know about the world. (If I am busy making dinner, but learn that the building is on fire, I find that what I make for dinner is irrelevant.) The next step is to identify the overall altruistic purpose of our freshly examined environment. This assumes that we want to make a political system for more than to benefit our personal ego in the immediate future. We will investigate for whom or what a grander "objective purpose" might exist. Lastly, we want to try craft a viable path forward by the conclusions we have made. I have formulated this approach as axioms (self-evident or necessary truths) that will be used as the basis for my further investigation. I offer more reasoning for these axioms, and for how I have forumlated them, in consecutive chapters, and hope to convince the reader that this really is the logical approach to political organising.
First axiom of Loginomy (Reality): To create a logical political system, we must first identify how our environment works, using collectively verifiable theories. Second axiom of Loginomy (Purpose): Based on what we know about our environment, we must identify the larger purpose of things, which gives the purpose of a logical political system. Third axiom of Loginomy (Path): We must explore what kind of system serves our larger purpose, together with how political organising can possibly be influenced.
This "objective approach" yields many surprises, since we are ordinarily affected by whatever sociocultural milieu surround us. When our 'political intuition' is heavily coloured by the milieu we live in, our views might be objectively erroneous. So in the following, we will look at the question of politics systematically, starting with a reflection of what is unfolding on this planet of ours, from a bird's-eye view. --I recommend that you engage yourself by jotting down your thoughts while reading. It is you who are looking at things anew; not these symbols on a screen. Loginomy is the subjective attempt at an objective approach - not a finite answer - and to really engage your powers of perception, you must express what you think about the subject matter. I also encourage to initially prime your mind through this exercise:

To move more deeply into your ability of perceiving your larger environment, it is helpful to first close your eyes and become aware of your body. Smoothly inhale as if you are about to yawn, then exhale and let any trace of stress disappear from your body. Good, you are now ready to proceed. First, as you read this, is anything bothering you in the back of your mind? ...notice and touch where this come from in your body... ...try to describe what the actual physical sensations are... Who am I, the person who seems to have written these words? ...am I really someone else, or am I your own thoughts? Now think about yourself... ...how is the idea of 'you' represented through feelings and sensations? Think about your home town or city... ...what are the images and feelings representing this? Take a moment to imagine there was never a universe, and nothing ever existed. ...why is there a universe instead of nothing? ...what is a solar system? ...are the animals on this planet, including ourselves, suffering or at peace? What would you rather do, if you had to pick? - be miserable solving your problems "the way you should". - ignore your problems, and try to enjoy life. - play around with and enjoy solving your problems. What do you see as the biggest problem in your corner of the world? ...imagine how this trouble will be taken care of... What do you see as the biggest problem of the entire planet? ...imagine how this trouble will be solved... What are some of the most wonderful things you know of on Earth? ...imagine some really rewarding things you like to do... How may society as a whole experience a minimum of the bothersome stuff, and a maximum of the wonderful and rewarding stuff? ...what purpose is society currently arranged to serve?

'Pale blue dot' - photo of Earth taken by Voyager 1.

If you did the exercise above, you now have a juicy framework in your mind for looking at reality anew. A hidden message in the exercise is that how we perceive our environment is simultaneously the only environment we know! This suggests that we check ourselves - are we receptive and contemplative of how the world works, or are we just reinforcing and projecting what we already believe about it? Cause if our beliefs about the world result in our political thinking, and our political thinking result in our political organising, and our political organising largely run society and our lives, then it surely matters what we believe about the world in the first place! models of reality --> political models --> political organising If our political organising is the operative system of our society, on what pattern is it taking our global village? Does the concoction of subjective values and interests on the political scene solve the major problems of humanity without these problems' thorough contemplation? What if we instead start from scratch, and ask: What is Reality, and herein our Purpose? Can a self-evident purpose be found, and, if so, how can we approach it politically? Please read on if you find these questions relevant.

I Reality

To create a meaningful political system, we must identify how society and its larger environment works in a manner that is collectively verifiable - using the scientific method. We create a taxonomy of Science, and from this draw conclusions in regard to human organising.

II Purpose

To accomplish anything, we must at least exist. In our current environment, the primary altruistic purpose of a political system is to ensure the survival of our species. We find that the biggest threats to our survival are major conflicts of interest caused by a heteronomous organising of society.

III Path

To interact purposefully with our environment, we need to perceive it accurately. We see that the fundamental solution for moving in the right direction is our own enlightenment.


Having approached the question of political organising through Logionomy, this thinker's best answer is moving fromward heteronomous (externally ruled), toward autonomous (self-ruled), organising of society. We use what we have found in previous steps to develop a political model for an autonomous society, for the sake of our continuation and prosperity.