< < <
Date Index
> > >
Stream and Sequence
by Nemonemini
17 September 2002 01:05 UTC
< < <
Thread Index
> > >
You might consider the relation of stream and sequence (cf. previous post) in 
terms of the issue of the World System analysis of the rise of the modern 
taken as the 'early modern' (1500 to 1800) and its outcome the period 
starting in the nineteenth century after this transition, the 'modern as 
such', as described in the eonic model. 

The phenomenon is the global evolving via the local and right on schedule 
after the the period of 'phase' (the rise of the modern) taken at the 
intersection of the 'eonic sequence' with the temporal stream (European 
field) we find the question of globalization arising, that is the 
relationship of the whole to the flagship part. 
We derive from this model very easily the reason why the emerging 'bourgeois' 
system, which more or less is  'an' if not 'the' outcome of the phase period 
is confronted with its opposition, generating its own collision. 

It is simpler to see in the classical case where the system of Greek city 
states yields to the Hellenistic. And so on. 
These terms of 'stream and sequence' have applications fairly close to home. 

If one can visualize the data in this way so that it becomes intuitive. 

But most analysis is stuck with the 'causal sequence' type of analysis. We 
thus see the hopeless tangle over when the modern started, and the puzzle 
over when feudalism stopped, or whether the rise of the modern is economic, 
etc, etc...

We need a higher level 'time and motion' analysis to clarify what the overall 
system is doing, and this without worrying at first about the how in the 
sense of reducing it to some causal regime, which makes no sense. At what 
level does the 'cause' of the 'rise of the modern' operate? The statement 
doesn't even make sense. 

John Landon
Website on the eonic effect

< < <
Date Index
> > >
World Systems Network List Archives
at CSF
Subscribe to World Systems Network < < <
Thread Index
> > >