Word of Hegel: An Analysis of the Word of Blake's Philosophy

[CarcosanDawn]

Section 1: Hegel and Blake
A critical figure in philosophy, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel is often misattributed the “Hegelian Dialectic” – thesis, antithesis, synthesis – which is a dramatic oversimplification to the point of failing to reflect Hegel's ideas. Hegel’s more nuanced view is more related to the trajectory and course of history in a human world, rather than argumentation on specific topics. If I have my understanding of him correct (always contestable!), Hegel’s claim requires a bit of specific analysis. Bear with me as we discuss his premises in summary:

• The world is “that which is the case” – when Hegel discusses the world, he means more than just “reality” as a concrete, physical, materialist truth. He also means socio-political structures, systems, products of human endeavor, etc. that are all very human and not always physical.
• All worlds (world-structures) have internal contradictions. Because humanity is intimately entwined (inseparably so) with the world, then natural human tendencies – everything from cognitive dissonance at the individual level to societal clashes about meaning at the planetary level – have real existence in some sense (the geist). This means that contradictions are an inevitable fact in a Hegelian world. (There's also more to be said about structured systems and the Second Incompleteness Theorem but that is not worth pursuing here).
• Contradictions eventually destroy the world. The contradictions inherent to a Hegelian world build up as problems are solved; the more problems that are solved in the world (apparent contradictions resolving via human action and effort) the more stark the real, unsolvable contradictions become. Eventually, they grow to such magnitude that the world decays. This decay is typically fairly catastrophic – more like the decay of a radioactive atom. Some examples from human history are the Great Depression, the Bronze Age Collapse, the violence of the post-enlightenment revolutionary period, etc.

A key Hegelian corollary (though I confess I do not remember if he himself said so) is that the definition of good (as in, ethical) is the preservation, through these world-decay events, of the good things of the world that came before (even as the bad is discarded).

If, by now, you don’t understand how the Blakists have radicalized this view, then let me dissect it further. The overall philosophy Jerome Blake espoused is, essentially, that Hegelian corollary: it is an ethical good to preserve the positive parts of what came before, through catastrophe or decay – and furthermore, it is necessary that the bad be forgotten or discarded. This, originally, was simply a product of Jerome’s secular views, and did not have a religious connotation. However, (if Toyama is to be believed) Blake came to realize that the best way to preserve this view is through religion-ifying it. Thusly, the first stages of C* as we know it, and the Religion without a God emerged.
Section 2: Secularization and the Word
Viewed through this lens, it is no mystery to see how C* arrived at the policies that defined its shadow-tyranny over the Inner Sphere throughout the Succession Wars. The world has collapsed, they reasoned. The Star League is gone, riven with contradiction, and we alone are left to continue its tradition. We must take all things that are good and preserve them, and dispense with all things that are bad. We will find the Star League in Exile, and we will see what they, themselves have preserved. The Inner Sphere must remain dark, until we become the only light of Mankind.

It is also easy to see why Operation SCORPION made so much sense. The World is riven again, the Clans delivering to us the cataclysm that marked the end of that world. Now, let us ignite our Light, and set about remaking the world by purging the bad and retaining the good. Of course, Primus Waterly’s vision, while naturally emergent from the philosophy of C* as radicalized over the centuries since Blake enshrined radical Hegelianism, was incompatible with the truth: the cataclysm had not arrived, and the world was not yet broken. The tragedy of C* at Tukayyid was that it, ironically, became the stalwart defender of the World-As-Is, and failed to usher in the World-To-Come.

This misstep by Blake’s followers caused a schism – Focht perceived the flaws in the radical Hegelian religious doctrine of C*, and so secularization seemed natural. But one may be able now to see why others did not see the flaws of radicalized Hegelian extremism – however true they might be. So they broke away, and became the Word of Blake.
Section 3: From Lightbringers to Doombringers
The Word of Blake heralded the reconstructed Star League as the arrival of the World-To-Come - whatever Primus Waterly's failure. To them, the reborn Star League that emerged from the wreckage of the Old was greeted with fervor, even if they did not have the leadership role as the sole light as Waterly sought. Their hatred of the Clans in this context is obvious – Clans are emblematic of the evils of the Old World, and their very existence provided a contradiction in the New World that emerged. The only question the Word needed answered was whether it was an inherent contradiction they presented, or a resolvable one.

Operations BULLDOG and SERPENT decided that question rather decisively. The Clans, with application of sufficient unity and force, became a resolvable contradiction in the new World.

For a time, while C*’s secular half warred with the Word of Blake and the Allied Mercenary Command was assembled to try to prevent their rise, there was an air of hope. From the Word's radicalized Hegelian perspective, these “small” conflicts and oppositions were the natural process of an emerging world resolving its resolvable contradictions, and were simply to be expected.

Then, however, their new world, barely formed, shattered. The “No Confidence” vote and the dissolution of the Star League (revision 2.0) may have just been “business as usual” for most Inner Sphere folk at the time, but to the Word, it was the end of a stillborn era, a World killed before its time. And worse… there was no cataclysm; it died with a whimper. So, of course, they had to make one.
Section 4: Neo-Blakism and “The Promise”
According to Ghosts of Obeedah, the Word of Blake preserved some of the complexity of Hegel’s philosophy. They were radical, but they did not forget the core tenets of it. The Master, and some of the higher echelons of the Word of Blake, seemed to view themselves as a ‘necessary evil’ – the natural endstate of this philosophy, it would seem. If world-ending was to be cataclysmic, and if the new world was to be reborn from the ashes, then the Word needed to provide a cataclysm and make those ashes – and fight hard and long enough to ensure that a Non-Old-World entity was the entity that emerged from the chaos to rebuild the world. Neither the Clans nor the Houses could be trusted.
Conclusion
In some ways, Neo-Blakism is both a supreme hypocrisy and an inevitable worldview. Hegel’s characterization of the way worlds exist, decay, reconstitute, and exist again is not necessarily wrong, even with the fall and flight of the Word of Blake. But Neo-Blakism is also clinging fervently to something many would consider a great evil of the World Before, and in that way, Neo-Blakists violate the very word they claim to follow.

Certainly they disagree – they are a ‘good’, even if others don’t see them that way… and thus we reach the most inherent contradiction of all: the apparent subjectivity of morality. Still, it remains to be seen if the Inner Sphere can throw off the ilClan’s ascendancy – and none would be more suited (nor more willing to do so) than the Word of Blake’s cybernetic monstrosities, equal in measure and capability to the Clanner gene-modified warriors.

Of course, they’ve fled the Inner Sphere, taking their advanced technology with them to parts unknown. It is unlikely we will ever see them again – after all, history never repeats itself, and worlds aren’t just cycles…. right?

[Tegyrius]

I am not sufficiently well-read in philosophy to provide a thoughtful response from that perspective, but I will say that this is one of the most interesting and thought-provoking posts I've seen on this forum in a while.  I hope somewhere there's a writer or line developer seeing this and going, "yes, someone finally grokked my subtext."  Nicely done.

[HABeas2]

I hope somewhere there's a writer or line developer seeing this and going, "yes, someone finally grokked my subtext." 

Mmmmmmaybe!

- Herb

[shopsmart]

This has been a good read.  I will be reading this again to understand more as i have absorbed alot of wob thought to apply to my writings.  The trajectory of ilclan and the writings of blake seem wholey obvious to me what should happen, but doubt will be pursued.  This article i might need to meditate on.

[CarcosanDawn]

I am glad I can provide some thought-provoking material. C* and the WoB fascinate me - a religion without a god, built around nothing more than "seems like a good idea" and faith.

I think the Word is (was?) very nuanced for a religion - not a 40k type "kill the thing because thing is bad" - indeed, to sit in a chamber and debate philosophy with a Manei Domini leader is probably quite a fascinating time, ar least if they have the time for Frails!

I almost wonder if their cybernetics affect their cognition, giving them a look at the "long game" in ways we Frails can't grasp. On a long enough timescale (in a sufficiently predictive, if abstract, model), it becomes almost fatalistic, consumed with inevitability of decay and rebirth. It is not so absurd to understand why Hyperpulse Tech (and KF drives) became a specialization of the Word... How better to build a better world than to issue a batchall to the laws of physics themselves?

[shopsmart]

I studied WHY the Word did the jihad, or at least the MDs of them.  Practically forcing a union of the entire inner sphere and birthing a new nation state due to failure of 2nd SL.  The alternative was I believe a 5th succession would have gone down or they thought it was going to go down.  Now imagine the clans involved.  I might be wrong, getting head cannon and writing fanfic can certain twist some cross over thinking.

The one thing that Blake and Blakist do have is the long sight of time.  Owing to their use of HPG most the time, the living in the afterlife waiting for the sign, and other such things.  They do seem to have humanity at heart rather than squabbling state wide wars and territory.  Granted a few NBC get tossed into the mix.  They get framed as the ultimate bad guys while SS and clans smoke more into oblivion over time instead of a fraction of a second.

Then there is the MD accepting what they do is monstorious and being the ultimate reset button.  It makes them unique.  I am astounded by how many people just write them off.  I stumbled into them when I learned the RotS was getting axed when I came back to BT.

HIS WILL BE DONE!

[NUT-BUSTING TORQUE]

I haven't read Hegel yet, or that tier of philosophy, but this is really well done and what I feel is "missing" from the crunch of most of the factions of battletech. Some will likely post (and complain) that this sort of didactic was added after the fact- that is absolutely true, but I would argue that's still a great thing because not only does it add such an intelligence and depth to a faction and it's principles, but it can also add reasons to why certain ones are beginning to see serious issues with rule or crumbling power bases. Already, I could see people making writings on the current state of the Lyran Commonwealth partly because of the loss of "the state" and it's legitimacy, and partly because the faction has always focused on mercantilism above anything else, is part of the cause of it's failure (the other obviously being bad leadership, inability to remove bad leadership, and inviting the clans for dinner).

[butchbird]

What's the story again? One day, one of Hegel's students comes to him to declare how he's inspired him to specialize in philosphy, which prompts Hegel to retort: "My, why would you do that? There's nothing left to delve into now that I've done my part." (not only I don't remember it correctly, but my translation is lacklustre. Stilll.)

Quite the interesting article, warrants a discussion, so I'll give what counter arguments I can (which is not much, never read much "pure philosophy" past the renaissance).

after all, history never repeats itself, and worlds aren’t just cycles…. right?

Shame on me to mostly argument on the "conclusion's opening", but still.

From our (read: the inheritors of "hellenistic" human science) point of view, history is mainly seen as linear. But the middle empire used to espouse an all together different position with a purely cyclical view. A dynasty would rise, strong and vigorous, then gradually erode and fall to be replaced with a new dynasty. This viewpoint would be heavily shaken with the contact of gunboat diplomacy and its fallout, to ironically be re-adapted follow the introduction of vulgarized dialectic (thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis). Mao Zedong rehash of words, speaking more the Hegelian words of contradictions rather then anti-thesis, would nonetheless give rise to a view more akin to a wheel: it revolves around itself, but advances in a linear way nonetheless. Its rotation is that which makes it go forward.

But then, the fact that history repeats itself in a way has always been a more or less accepted fact for all. Reading Churchill's works on the second world war, I was most amused how he constantly compared the opening stages of WW2 to his glorious forefather's (the famous 18th century Duke of Marlborough...Malborough s'en va-t-en guerre, mironton-mironton-mirontaine) campaing during the war of spanish succession. As he said: History never repeats itself entirely, but human actions never offer all that much innovation in their execution from one era to another, its in the details that things have differed thrioughout history, not in the outline itself.

But on the WOB and Hegelianism more specifically (do note my mastery of both subjects is inadequate to properly hold my ground), I would argue that while Hegel viewed the current state of human affairs in his time as nearly having obtained the Platonical "Beauty-Truth-Good" through its liberal institutions, the WOB wholly believes in shattering the current system and instituting a system more akin to that which was "before Hegel". One can talk about neo-feudalism, but the fact is (most of) humanity as a whole has kept liberal institutions alive and well (or institutions akin to it). What would the WOB keep of that with its godless religion? Hegelian thought requires liberalism, dialectic is basically prepped to explain how its the logical ultimate step in humanitys development (hence the marxist critique about stagnation, passivity and fatalitism).

Indeed, what exactly, except in a somewhat mystical viewpoint, is it that the WOB desires to bring back from a by-gone age, or institute in its view of a new-world? A somewhat unified humanity, perhaps, as the star-league can more or less be qualified as, but then their view of it is completely disconnected from what existed prior to the Usurper's coup d'état. So essentially, while the argument that the WOB espouses a Hegelian dialectical logic of action is a very solid case, they completely (again, to my limited knowledge) ignore the rest in favor of a viewpoint that is incapable of tuning to Hegelianist ideals. Essentially, their dialectic is more grounded in the thesis and so forth then the abstraction and so forth.

*Add-on*

Thought about this while walking the dogs, felt I'd push a bit further.

Now, Hegelian tought espouses liberalism probably in large part through the fact its the system best tailored (as of now) to offer an abstract state of affairs in the political (in a very broad sense) sphere, and hence to live out its contradictions and have them be "resolved" "in the open". This vision proposes a wholly unified power structure.

But, considering the abstraction of political affairs in the known universe (of the BTU), its quite interesting to note that the WOB and C*, while being part of the power structure are also removed from it. They basically run parallel to it. The whole system depends on the technologies controlled and maintained by C*, giving C* much sway in affecting states policies, but also making them incapable to enact said policies. And this state of affairs seems to suit them well. The WOB was perfectly content to remain in that role in the 2nd star league.

In a sense, the workings of C* run contrarily to all applications of the dialectic in relation to the state, which, from what I know and understand, is the whole point to Hegel.

This also begs the question just how "the state" would be reorganised by Waterly's C* or the WOB. Don't remember the jihad books (or comstar sourcebook) commenting on the subject, but then its been a while...But also the relation to transhumanity (meaning cybernetic enhancement), which is seen with suspicion in the BTU, which, I suppose, IS the major break with the current state of affairs and is linkable to the "golden age of technological advancement" that is the old star-league...for aren't the WOB a traditionalist movement even without considering the schism and its issues?.

[CarcosanDawn]

Wow, butchbird, thank you for a great reply! I'll give my $0.02, but I appreciate it.

What's the story again? One day, one of Hegel's students comes to him to declare how he's inspired him to specialize in philosphy, which prompts Hegel to retort: "My, why would you do that? There's nothing left to delve into now that I've done my part." (not only I don't remember it correctly, but my translation is lacklustre. Stilll.)

That's not one I've heard before, but it is worth noting that there's a cogent argument to be made that Hegel is the last great metaphysics "system-builder"... haha!

Quite the interesting article, warrants a discussion, so I'll give what counter arguments I can (which is not much, never read much "pure philosophy" past the renaissance).

Shame on me to mostly argument on the "conclusion's opening", but still.

From our (read: the inheritors of "hellenistic" human science) point of view, history is mainly seen as linear. But the middle empire used to espouse an all together different position with a purely cyclical view. A dynasty would rise, strong and vigorous, then gradually erode and fall to be replaced with a new dynasty. This viewpoint would be heavily shaken with the contact of gunboat diplomacy and its fallout, to ironically be re-adapted follow the introduction of vulgarized dialectic (thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis). Mao Zedong rehash of words, speaking more the Hegelian words of contradictions rather then anti-thesis, would nonetheless give rise to a view more akin to a wheel: it revolves around itself, but advances in a linear way nonetheless. Its rotation is that which makes it go forward.

Yes, Hegel said much the same - you mention it later but Hegel does believe history has a teleology. I omitted that in my summary of his work because it wasn't important, though now that you mention it, we could probably frame the WOB's way of thinking in terms of a historical teleology. It is interesting you would mention Mao Zedong, as Karl Marx is profoundly Hegelian; his work tears at Hegel's more metaphysical components and tries to shear them away (the geist and the human-mindedness) and replace them with the materialist dialectic - which is just Hegelianism but grounded in the material (resource consumption, distribution, and possession; inherent vs. instrumental value; etc.) rather than the metaphysical.

But then, the fact that history repeats itself in a way has always been a more or less accepted fact for all. Reading Churchill's works on the second world war, I was most amused how he constantly compared the opening stages of WW2 to his glorious forefather's (the famous 18th century Duke of Marlborough...Malborough s'en va-t-en guerre, mironton-mironton-mirontaine) campaing during the war of spanish succession. As he said: History never repeats itself entirely, but human actions never offer all that much innovation in their execution from one era to another, its in the details that things have differed thrioughout history, not in the outline itself.

But on the WOB and Hegelianism more specifically (do note my mastery of both subjects is inadequate to properly hold my ground), I would argue that while Hegel viewed the current state of human affairs in his time as nearly having obtained the Platonical "Beauty-Truth-Good" through its liberal institutions, the WOB wholly believes in shattering the current system and instituting a system more akin to that which was "before Hegel". One can talk about neo-feudalism, but the fact is (most of) humanity as a whole has kept liberal institutions alive and well (or institutions akin to it). What would the WOB keep of that with its godless religion? Hegelian thought requires liberalism, dialectic is basically prepped to explain how its the logical ultimate step in humanitys development (hence the marxist critique about stagnation, passivity and fatalitism).

Indeed, what exactly, except in a somewhat mystical viewpoint, is it that the WOB desires to bring back from a by-gone age, or institute in its view of a new-world? A somewhat unified humanity, perhaps, as the star-league can more or less be qualified as, but then their view of it is completely disconnected from what existed prior to the Usurper's coup d'état. So essentially, while the argument that the WOB espouses a Hegelian dialectical logic of action is a very solid case, they completely (again, to my limited knowledge) ignore the rest in favor of a viewpoint that is incapable of tuning to Hegelianist ideals. Essentially, their dialectic is more grounded in the thesis and so forth then the abstraction and so forth.

*Add-on*

Thought about this while walking the dogs, felt I'd push a bit further.

Now, Hegelian tought espouses liberalism probably in large part through the fact its the system best tailored (as of now) to offer an abstract state of affairs in the political (in a very broad sense) sphere, and hence to live out its contradictions and have them be "resolved" "in the open". This vision proposes a wholly unified power structure.

But, considering the abstraction of political affairs in the known universe (of the BTU), its quite interesting to note that the WOB and C*, while being part of the power structure are also removed from it. They basically run parallel to it. The whole system depends on the technologies controlled and maintained by C*, giving C* much sway in affecting states policies, but also making them incapable to enact said policies. And this state of affairs seems to suit them well. The WOB was perfectly content to remain in that role in the 2nd star league.

In a sense, the workings of C* run contrarily to all applications of the dialectic in relation to the state, which, from what I know and understand, is the whole point to Hegel.

This also begs the question just how "the state" would be reorganised by Waterly's C* or the WOB. Don't remember the jihad books (or comstar sourcebook) commenting on the subject, but then its been a while...But also the relation to transhumanity (meaning cybernetic enhancement), which is seen with suspicion in the BTU, which, I suppose, IS the major break with the current state of affairs and is linkable to the "golden age of technological advancement" that is the old star-league...for aren't the WOB a traditionalist movement even without considering the schism and its issues?.

I think you hit the crux of a critical issue here - what does C*/WoB want? What exactly deserves preservation and elimination and why do they get to decide? Well, I think you'd probably get different answers from a Neo-Blakist, a Protetorate Militiaman, a Manei Domini at the front, Apollyon, and the Master, so I am not sure there's a coherent, unified answer that has any detail.

I'm not really able to be specific (not being an in-universe wobbie, haha!) but if I had to guess, there's a threefold desire the WoBBies hold, some of which you have already brushed:

• The promise of technology: I believe that the zeitgeist of a "new and better future for us all" was the Star League's unifying message, and there are many, many examples of technological life-easing that disappeared because of the rancor and power-grabbing of the Great Houses and the Clans. Everything from, yes, Battlemech technology to water purification, world-terraforming, and communications was better, and there was hope for the future. The WoBBies may not want to replicate the technologies themselves, but rather, the sense of hope and progress that such technologies gave (the spirit of that world, rather than the form of it).
• Unity of Mankind: Say what you will about the current way of the Houses and the Clans, but given that the houses and their governments were able to survive the dominion of the Star League relatively unchanged, it's likely that the Star League was a much more liberal state - even as it unified and direct humanity's energies to wondrous works in the aforementioned technological achievements. I think it is remiss to say that even now, in the 3150s, humanity has achieved the quality of civilian life that most enjoyed under the Star League. Just ... don't talk about the periphery states.
• Directive but not oppressive bureaucracy: This is the part where I congratulate you for mentioning the teleology of history. I think the WoBBies viewed the Star League as 'taking the reins' of history - the Wheel turns ever on (to push the metaphor into my post), and is even moving rapidly now that the shadow-tyranny of C* has ended. But what direction is it moving in? What experience is the holistic human geist enduring, what is it learning and teaching itself? The turning wheel needs to be steered and given direction - just course-corrections, not life-controlling dictates from 'on-high'. And, I think, the WoBBies and many folk besides (if they care at all) view the original Star League in this light. Just... don't talk about the periphery states.

[butchbird]

I guess your right on the different points of view even whithin the WOB, but the question that strikes me here is : What is the terran hegemony? What is the star league?

From what we know of it, its quite plain the star league itself was a confederation (in the true sense of the word...looking at you capcon!), hence not so much liberal as decentralized. But inevitably, the heart, soul and most of the brain of the SL resided within the terran hegemony. So where does one political entity start and the other end?

This then links to the WOB, would they have been Terran centric, the protectorate being simply a wider ressource base, or would a reborn Star League necessitate a Terran Hegemony of some sort? How would the "hands-off" philosophy of governance of the past star-league be affected by the spiritually distorted new Terran based state (or mini-state)?

Also...

I think the WoBBies viewed the Star League as 'taking the reins' of history - the Wheel turns ever on (to push the metaphor into my post), and is even moving rapidly now that the shadow-tyranny of C* has ended. But what direction is it moving in? What experience is the holistic human geist enduring, what is it learning and teaching itself? The turning wheel needs to be steered and given direction - just course-corrections, not life-controlling dictates from 'on-high'. And, I think, the WoBBies and many folk besides (if they care at all) view the original Star League in this light.

And this leads to the position of the traditionalist political nature of the WOB, altough more in a confucian point of view then, say, a Carlist or Groulxist one.

If your historical teleology resides in ages past rather then present, then you're forever yearning for a lost golden age. The conception of a cyclic history inevitably needs to see the past as superior to the present, and an ideal future as merely "going back" to a idealised past. Succeeding dynastys will, theoretically, always fail to "catch the momentum" of the "original" dynasty.

This being considered, taking into account the techno-centric tought movement of the WOB, could it not be that we would be witnessing a sort of counter to the clan way? I don't want to necessarily point out to the star trek borg as such, but an emphasis on cybernetically improving humanity, brigning a sort of osmosis between man and its creation, instead of trying to obtain the "perfect pure homo sapiens" through the creation. This also ties into the inherent opposition between WOB and clan and, as you pointed out earlier, the clans as a contradiction that can be resolved.

The wheel turns, advances forward, but what if this forward movement is contained whithin technological development and not that of man and its institutions? Where does the geist reside in that? Now I'm really not up to date on that sector of philosophy, but how can mind/spirit operate and be the determining factor in human actions  when its, not necessarily subdued, but partly dominated by non-human (and non-cosmogonic in a very broad sense) elements?

*Small add-on*

But then I suppose the WOB and the "old" C* had a techno-cosmogony, is that where the geist resides in? But then cybernetics become all the more dominant in the equation.

[CarcosanDawn]

In brief, to answer your question, I think the WoBBies / C* before them believe that the geist lies in progress and its antithesis is in... well, un-progress; backsliding. In other words, the geist is autotelic, and the only reason the wheel needs steering is so it doesn't roll into mud or water or fire and just stop (to stretch the analogy a bit far).

Preservation of what came before makes sense only in the context of 'not-backsliding' - that's why the Wobbies "leapt forwards" when there was no more danger of backsliding. They don't necessarily "yearn for the good old days" so much as "want to make sure the next world preserves the positive attributes of the world before". The Cybernetics are sort of a natural extension of that - transhumanism is a progressive movement (in a certain sense; one can always debate whether transhumanism is politically progressive and this isn't the thread for it). I think in this way they're like Kerensky's Mirror, if I might posit a state of being; both Kerensky (Sr.) and Blake wanted to progress mankind - but Nicholas made Kerensky's vision warped and confused and focused almost creepily on genetics and eugenics, while it's anyone's guess whether Blake would approve of the techno-terrors unleashed by those who claim to follow his Word. I conjecture, though, that he'd be less disappointed in them than Kerensky would be in the Clans - but that's just a guess. *shrug*

[CarcosanDawn]

I haven't read Hegel yet, or that tier of philosophy, but this is really well done and what I feel is "missing" from the crunch of most of the factions of battletech. Some will likely post (and complain) that this sort of didactic was added after the fact- that is absolutely true, but I would argue that's still a great thing because not only does it add such an intelligence and depth to a faction and it's principles, but it can also add reasons to why certain ones are beginning to see serious issues with rule or crumbling power bases. Already, I could see people making writings on the current state of the Lyran Commonwealth partly because of the loss of "the state" and it's legitimacy, and partly because the faction has always focused on mercantilism above anything else, is part of the cause of it's failure (the other obviously being bad leadership, inability to remove bad leadership, and inviting the clans for dinner).

Also not to double-post but great point; there's probably some philosophy to be found in all the factions! Unfortunately I'm an FWL-ite, so not exactly ready to talk about the failure of the state; arguably we didn't really have a state to begin with (bahaha ... ha...).

[nerd]

Man, this is good stuff. Much better than the takes generated by writers who had intro to Philosophy and try and work it in.

I don't have the background to make much judgement on this for it being good philosophy. However, it could also to be from the writers trying to make a setting where the players act like people, and it could be a result from that. There's a lot of indirect philosophy going around from the educational implementation. "I didn't take a lot of this, but my professor did." or else "I found this cool idea in a story, can I implement it?" style.

Hegelianism could have crept in, and also from the preference to describe reality and stories (which should reflect something about reality), so there's multiple ways to see it.

[butchbird]

In brief, to answer your question, I think the WoBBies / C* before them believe that the geist lies in progress and its antithesis is in... well, un-progress; backsliding. In other words, the geist is autotelic, and the only reason the wheel needs steering is so it doesn't roll into mud or water or fire and just stop (to stretch the analogy a bit far).

Preservation of what came before makes sense only in the context of 'not-backsliding' - that's why the Wobbies "leapt forwards" when there was no more danger of backsliding. They don't necessarily "yearn for the good old days" so much as "want to make sure the next world preserves the positive attributes of the world before". The Cybernetics are sort of a natural extension of that - transhumanism is a progressive movement (in a certain sense; one can always debate whether transhumanism is politically progressive and this isn't the thread for it). I think in this way they're like Kerensky's Mirror, if I might posit a state of being; both Kerensky (Sr.) and Blake wanted to progress mankind - but Nicholas made Kerensky's vision warped and confused and focused almost creepily on genetics and eugenics, while it's anyone's guess whether Blake would approve of the techno-terrors unleashed by those who claim to follow his Word. I conjecture, though, that he'd be less disappointed in them than Kerensky would be in the Clans - but that's just a guess. *shrug*

Guess I'll be nitpicking a bit here but this is just too interesting and a very enlightening take on the question.

While I can consider the WOB as seeing progress (at least on the technological side) as both a state of being and a purpose, and can buy that this was (is) their geist, too many factors lead me to recoil when it comes to the old C*.

After all, they openly (amongst themselves) aimed at gimping the successor states technological level, their "shift of the wheel" was purely of a disruptive kind aiming at having other factions (and hence ex-constituants of the star league) back-sliding and they didn't seem to develop anything by themselves from the fall of the star league to the schism. They seem far more intent on conservation and "yearning for the good old days" then on progress, to the point of hampering all progress. Heck, they even upheld the belief that they should wait on the collapse of the successor states as a whole before exploding on the "international" scene.

Thats quite the change in approach, not all explainable by a sudden opportunity at leaping forward, said opportunity being notably brought by the ceasing of their own disruptive actions. I suppose contact with the clans was the major factor for this shift in philosophy, quite the trauma really, but surely there's other reasons to consider?

Also, reading the small section on the different WOB factions in the old comstar sourcebook, its apparent there was a true "vibrancy" (don't like the term but its the best translation I found for effervescence) in regards to the different conceptions of the teaching of Blake and how to apply it to the movement. I don't really know where to look to delve into it, so this point and question is a bithaphazard but... While the element of technological progress is apparent and progress of man is...not really the focus of the universe ('xcept for eugenics, in a way, if a distorted way), but where does that leave the institutions? Is progress to be merely technological? That has implications.

[idea weenie]

Very good article about the Word's Philosophy, its religion/philosophy, and how they tried to apply it.

Thank you for posting it

[CarcosanDawn]

Guess I'll be nitpicking a bit here but this is just too interesting and a very enlightening take on the question.

While I can consider the WOB as seeing progress (at least on the technological side) as both a state of being and a purpose, and can buy that this was (is) their geist, too many factors lead me to recoil when it comes to the old C*.

After all, they openly (amongst themselves) aimed at gimping the successor states technological level, their "shift of the wheel" was purely of a disruptive kind aiming at having other factions (and hence ex-constituants of the star league) back-sliding and they didn't seem to develop anything by themselves from the fall of the star league to the schism. They seem far more intent on conservation and "yearning for the good old days" then on progress, to the point of hampering all progress. Heck, they even upheld the belief that they should wait on the collapse of the successor states as a whole before exploding on the "international" scene.

Thats quite the change in approach, not all explainable by a sudden opportunity at leaping forward, said opportunity being notably brought by the ceasing of their own disruptive actions. I suppose contact with the clans was the major factor for this shift in philosophy, quite the trauma really, but surely there's other reasons to consider?

Also, reading the small section on the different WOB factions in the old comstar sourcebook, its apparent there was a true "vibrancy" (don't like the term but its the best translation I found for effervescence) in regards to the different conceptions of the teaching of Blake and how to apply it to the movement. I don't really know where to look to delve into it, so this point and question is a bithaphazard but... While the element of technological progress is apparent and progress of man is...not really the focus of the universe ('xcept for eugenics, in a way, if a distorted way), but where does that leave the institutions? Is progress to be merely technological? That has implications.

I think C*'s biggest issue was they weren't really able to progress. Having control of the comms networks means it is easy to cut off information flow, but that doesn't necessarily liberate scientists, etc.. But you're right; I imagine there must've been factions within C* - some more progressive, put into developing new and improved stuff, and some more conservative, wishing to preserve what came before but seeing no end besides simple preservation. Primus Waterly clearly wanted to change things though; Operation SCORPION is hardly the act of a hidebound, conservative organization that wants nothing to ever change.

The WoBbies were the progressive side, wanting to push the limits; I can see how Focht's secularization sidelined them. And to be frank, I think they did want the institutions, not just the technology, to change. That's why they were so supportive of the Second Star League; comfortable with provisional status... I don't actually think they wanted to ignite the Jihad. I think the Jihad came about because the institution showed signs of degenerating back to the Bad Past, instead of the Glorious Future, and they figured causing a cataclysm from which something new could emerge was the best way to avoid the backsliding. YMMV. ALSO HAPPY THANKSGIVING for the Americans out there!