>From David Richardson
My fellow social scientists, discussing the question of
Eurocentrism (the West as premier hegemon), presuppose
the civilization or world system. David Wilkinson's model
puts Eurocentrism in the context of Central Civilization,
now Global. Hence, Magian Culture appears in a new
light, as I explain below.
On the Role of Worldviews in World Systems
Spengler's Magian Civilization (Near Eastern ecumene)
appeared in 1 AD et seq. Toynbee never recognized
the Magian Civilization, though his scheme of civilizations
fairly well fits. I first called the post-1 AD Magian society
"Magian II," in order to account for its long life prior
to 1 AD. But I now believe civilizations often decline
without perishing. David Wilkinson (bibl. below) also
asserts the surviving quality of long-lived civilizations.
Wilkinson's Central Civilization is, at least, coterminous
with my idea of Magian Civilization during the first
fifteen hundred years (1500 BC-1 AD). Wilkinson is
one of the few who see a single Near Eastern civilization
in that time period. He justifies his theory by a stuy of
transactional networks. War itself signifies and causes
an intersocietal system.
His key idea of Central Civilization is compatible with
my theory of the Magian Civilization. David views Central
Civilization forming from Egypt and Mesopotamia around
1500 BC. And his Central Civilization resembles my
worldview model. Two approaches bode well for the ancient
Levant being an ecumene.
Like sociologist Chase-Dunn, historian McNeill, and
scientific philosopher Thos. Kuhn, David adheres to the conscious
acts of history. Kuhn, Chase-Dunn, McNeill, and David avoid
the worldview approach to history. Kuhn implicitly assumed that
paradigms presuppose an intuitive origin. But, under intense
pressure from fellow historians of science, he gave up his paradigm
theory of scientific revolutions. Like Wilkinson and McNeill, Kuhn
finally saw worldviews (paradigms) as intuitive. Yet, unfortunately, he
decided to regard history not from a paradigm (worldview) model.
His readers often prefer Kuhn's earlier paradigm theory.
C.G. Jung's Psychological Types gave me a scientific approach
to worldviews. My view agrees with Wilkinson, McNeill,and Kuhn's
idea that worldviews are intuitive. C.G. Jung came close to my
position. He was perhaps influenced by Wilhelm Dilthey's theory
of worldviews. All types of worldviews are non-intuitive. Jung's
"Weltanschauung" (in a long essay, so titled) means "worldview-
consciousness." In the same essay, however, Jung held that
"attitude" is all-important. "Attitude" is close to my (and Jung's) idea
of unconscious intuition. Intuitions, for Jung, are naturally
unconscious. Sometimes, less naturally, intuitions are conscious.
They include feelings, values, reasons, sensations, and intuitions.
Neither Jung or his followers have applied (psychiatric) analysis
to civilizational worldviews.
But Jung was a scientist. He determined the unconscious
intuitions of his patients scientifically. He studied their unconscious
feelings, reasonings, and sensibilities. I determine some
unconscious intuitions composing a worldview scientifically.
Thus, I study some unconscious feelings, reasonings, and
sensibilities of the Magian worldview. From Max Jammer I
learn, Magian space is the place of God; from study of law,
Magian law is the absolute law of God; from John Hord and
others, covenants were all-important for ancient Levantines;
from study of Near Eastern religions, Magians give high
value to emoton. That Magians felt at home with the Roman
arch, while Indians, Chinese, and Japanese avoided the
Roman arch, can be interpreted.
That an Indian fifth century Jain monk discoursed on a dozen
different infinities, and that Georg Cantor and Dietrich
Dedekind used transfinite (infinite) numbers to create set
theory, can be interpreted rationally. Both instances throw
light on the Indian worldview and the post-Faustian worldview.
I have examined methodically and with empirical historical
study, the putative thesis: "Indian Buddhist point-instant theory
affected the world's greatest mathematical discovery, the
calculus." To do this last, I studied the Baghdad school's
eighth century Mutazilite theologians and the tremendous
effect, via Maimonides' report, on Renaissance natural
philosophers and mathematicians. This was not, by far, the
first Indian influence on the West.
Wilkinson's, Frank's, Chase-Dunn's, Wallerstein's, and
Sanderson's claims for binding contacts between
civilizations reinforce my theory that the West was Sinified
from 1600 onward and Indianized after 1790. Georg
Cantor read Indian literature, but Indianization began in
Alexander's time. China's cultural reputation in Europe
reached a never to be exceeded peak in the eighteenth
century. William McNeill's claim that China was paramount
in the world from 1000 to 1500 supports my view of
Europe's Sinification.
Worldviews lack hegemons' brute strenght. As McNeill
says, few citizens participate aesthetically in a society's
history. "I fall back on 'style of life,'" writes McNeill, "a
metaphor borrowed from art history." He thus recognizes
worldviews' (secondary) importance. Yet, Western
mechanics (hence, mechanical technology) came from the
Faustian worldview. My idea of worldview-intuitions
(archetypal exemplars, a Kuhnian term) in civilizations mostly
agrees with with Wilkinson's different idea of Central
Civilization. ##
K. Sanderson, editor _Civilizations and World Systems:
Studying World-Historical Chane_ (Alta-Mira Press: Sage
Publications, 1630 N. Main St., Walnut Creek, CA 94596,
1995), pp. 46-74. William H. McNeill, op cit, "The Rise of
the West _after_ twenty five years," pp. 308-9.
Sincerely, David Richardson
compciv@msn.com