Socio-political landscapes – our social 'playing field’ - where domain contributions via ethical dynamics, come together to create evolving and potentially relevant landscape realities. Specifically, this Chapter addresses our socio-political structures: • Domains – Structures that give social relevance to our cognitive potentialities – an ‘intentionality’; • Institutions (Individuals and Societies) – Our core socio-political ‘relational’ structures; and, • Socio-political landscapes – Our ‘playing field’ for the creation of ‘landscape realities’. Here, ethical dynamics are viewed as dependent on the dynamics of authority and power, those dynamics that reflect our socio-political instincts for survival and growth on our many socio-political landscapes. Overall, ethics will be viewed as a competitive phenomenon where the ethics of the individual as an example, are mediated on an ongoing basis via the individual’s institutional participation, and similarly for institutions between themselves and, on a broader stage, for our different societies via as an example, international institutions.

1. November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 1

2. November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 2

3. Socio-political Structures:
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 3
Domains
Individuals
Institutions
Societies
Socio-
Political
Landscapes

4. November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 4

5. November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 5

6. November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 6

7. Socio-political landscapes and ethical dynamics…
More open, shared and responsible ethical dynamics will aim to
mutually:
 Grow individual, institutional and societal domain
contributions,
 Grow the individual and the institution's influence - their
authority and power - on their various landscapes; and,
 Create ‘landscape’ opportunities for increasingly meaningful
and relevant realities.
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 7

8. Socio-political landscapes and ethical dynamics…
Towards those goals, we will examine how:
 Ethics are dependent on the dynamics of authority and
power,
 Authority and power dynamics may come to serve the goal
of more open, shared and responsible ethical dynamics;
and,
 Ethical tensions are the manifestation of our socio-political
instincts for ‘our’ survival and growth on our many socio-
political landscapes and, for the survival and growth of our
landscapes themselves.
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 8

9. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ … ‘Background -1’
“Authority and power: the capacity to inspire and control other
individuals and institutions.”
 Authority - landscape legitimacy to decide what is ‘right’ e.g.,
the Church, the state and, parents… and,

 Power - ability to control the behavior or contribution of
others – individuals and institutions alike.
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 9

10. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ … ‘Background -2’
Socio-political landscapes, via the dynamics of ‘authority and
power’, provide individuals, institutions and societies alike
with the opportunity to participate in a world of synergy
comprised of – as examples:
 Our individual or institutional sense of vision and its
embedded sense of beauty and meaning; and,
 Our individual or institutional transcendental relationships –
those that take us outside of our selves (institutions
included) - and which provide for us and our institutions the
potential for a sense of ‘faith’ and, ultimately, ‘hope’.
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 10

11. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ … Background -3’
Authority and power are evolving phenomena dependent on:
 The ability of authority and power dynamics to mediate
landscape relevant realities on the basis of multiple as an
example, institutionally driven domain contributions or, more
simply,
 Their ability to contribute to the landscape's effectiveness in
bringing about valued landscape realities.
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 11

12. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ … Background -3’ (institutions)
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 12
Domain
Contributions
Institutions Institutions
Domain
Contributions
Authority /
Power
Landscape
Realities
Socio-Political
Landscapes

13. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ …
In summary, while ‘institutional’ domain contributions:
 Participate in the creation of the landscape’s authority and
power reality -
 They are dependent on the landscape’s authority and power
reality for their legitimacy and for their landscape
effectiveness.
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 13

14. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ … Ethical tensions
Institutions (individuals and societies) are dependent on the
landscape’s authority and power reality - structure - for
effectively coupling their domain contributions to other
institutional… domain contributions towards the creation of
relevant institutional / landscape realities.
Hence,
Ethical tensions have their origins in our human ‘social’ dynamics –
in our individual, institutional, and societal competition for
authority and power – e.g., whose vision will ‘carry the day’ and
who controls the ‘money’?
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 14

15. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ … Ethical tensions
At the outset, ethical tensions are driven by those forces that provide the
basic energy for bringing about our world (from Chapter 1).
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 15

16. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ … Ethical tensions
Ethical tensions are also driven by our core social potentialities – forces
(Chapters 6, 7 & 8) e.g., by our different capacities, accountabilities
and sense of destiny...
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 16
Social
Potentialities
Empathy /
Belonging
Capacity
/Contribution
Connection /
Synergy
Accountability /
Destiny

17. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ … Ethical tensions
‘Ethics’ - the arrows in the graphic - aim to create an ‘ethical’ synergy
between these forces – creating the possibility (+ or -) for each to
become more of ‘that’ which it is capable of becoming -.
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 17
Core
Individual
Potentialities
Core
Institutional
Potentialities
Core
Societal
Potentialities

18. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ … Ethical tensions
Societies help individuals and institutions to resolve ethical tensions
- issues of authority and power – via (individuals and institutions
do so also):
Their core ‘human’ potentialities, those that pull together
individual and institutional contributions into relevant
societal contributions via e.g., a shared societal identity
and sense of hope and,
Their ethical structure i.e., hierarchy of core values usually
complemented by a framework of ethical principles and
norms, and preferred relationship commitments and
qualities.
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 18

19. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ … Ethical tensions
Issues of authority and power and landscape ethics also result from
institutional (individual or societal) interactions embodying and
enacting the cognitive potentialities and characteristics of the
institutions involved e.g.,
 Institutions do not have similar social and historical realities or
stories that make up their universe or ethos, or sense of beauty
and,
 Meta institutions e.g., church or state have cognitive
characteristics – ideology … -, that impact on landscape
authority and power and ethics affecting myriad institutional
relationships.
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 19

20. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ … Ethical tensions -
In the world of individual and institutional
cognitive potentialities -
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 20

21. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’ … Ethical tensions
Ethical tensions also stem from the landscape’s preferred hierarchy of
institutions - some institutions have the authority and power to
impose their own ethical framework and,
 Institutional actions are contingent upon their landscape’s ‘historical’
authority and power structure and, its own ‘historical’ authority and
power e.g.,
 The importance of the Catholic Church in medieval Europe and of
media and financial institutions in our world and their impact in
shaping their society’s ethical framework.
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 21

22. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’… Resulting challenges
A paradox -
Societies (or landscapes) have always sought via their institutional
framework - hierarchy of institutions -, their authority and power
structure -
 To channel individual and institutional domain contributions towards
valued societal realities -
 Those that contribute to the growth of their core societal
potentialities e.g., societal identity and vision.
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 22

23. November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 23
Landscape
Institutional
Framework
Landscape
Authority
/
Power
Landscape
Ethics

24. Socio-political landscapes and the dynamics of
‘authority and power’… Resulting challenges…
Resolving the paradox – “tensions” – The ‘practical challenge’ –
Mutually growing the individual and the institution's influence – their
authority and power – via ethical dynamics aimed at:
 The growth and relevance of their core human and social
potentialities e.g., for consciousness and sense of hope, and
their cognitive potentialities e.g., ideology and knowledge,
 Via domain contributions aimed at the creation of increasingly
relevant landscape or societal realities.
November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 24

25. November 2010 © Abraham Chiasson 25