Values of Closed Society
| Author | Anthony Parel |
| Published date | 01 April 1982 |
| Date | 01 April 1982 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/019251218200300210 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
230
VALUES
OF
CLOSED
SOCIETY
ANTHONY
PAREL
The
premise
of
this
essay
is
that
although
there
can
be
a
certain
degree
of
openness
in
a
good
political
society,
the
idea
remains
valid
that
all
political
societies,
without
exception,
are
fundamentally
closed
systems.
This
means
that,
no
matter
how
progressive
a
political
system
believes
itself
to
be,
it
exists
ultimately
for
the
protection
and
advancement
of the
values
and
interests
of
a
particular
exclusive
group
and
not
for
the
defense
and
advancement
of
the
values
of
humanity
as
a
whole.
The
demonstration
is
based
on
Bergson’s
thesis
on
the
elan
vital
and
on
social
obligations
immanent
in
the
individual.
Hence
the
specific
impact
of
Bergsonian
evolutionism
on
the
debates
in
political
theory:
(1)
war
and
violence
seem
to
be
the
most
fundamental
issue
of
political
theory;
(2)
any
exaggerated
confidence
in
the
strength
of
the
intellect,
viewed
separately
from
intuition
and
love,
does
not
offer
a
solution
for
the
issue
of
war
and
violence;
and
(3)
modern
technology,
if
it
is
not
guided
by
intuition
and
love
for
mankind,
can
destroy
life.
Consequently,
the
necessity
arises
for
a
political
organization
of
the
values
of
an
open
society,
under
conditions
of
the
continuation
of
the
manifestation
of
the
values
of
the
closed
society.
--------- --- ------------~-~-
In
this article
I
wish
to
discuss
briefly
the
values
underlying
closed
society.
In
recent
decades
there
has
been
much
discussion
and
debate
on
the
nature
of
open
society,
based
on
the
assumption,
it
seems,
that
a
good
political
society
is
or
ought
to
be
an
open
society.]
This
assumption,
I
think,
is
open
to
legitimate
doubt.
Be
that
as
it
may,
even
if
there
might
exist
a
certain
degree
of
openness
in
a
good
political
society,
it
can
still
be
validly
maintained
that
all
political
societies,
without
exception,
are
fundamentally
closed
systems.
By
this
I
mean
that,
no
matter
how
progressive
a
political
system
might
believe
itself
to
be,
it
exists
in
the
last
analysis
for
the
protection
and
advancement
of
the
values
and
interests
of
a
particular,
exclusive
group,
not
for
the
protection
and
advancement
of
the
values
of
humanity
as
a
whole.
The
group
in
question
may
be
formed
on
the
basis
of
some
such
social
category
as
the
nation
or
class
or
ideology
or
culture
or
race
or
language
or
religion.
Even
the
relatively
inclusive
concept
of
citizenship
is
really
not
a
fully
open
concept.
Citizenship
by
its
nature
is
limited
to
members
To continue reading
Request your trial