previous.gif     next.gif    

August 1, 1966

I have been thinking, and writing, for a decade that natural science and social sciences are indistinguishable. At least I believe that I have been saying so. Now I think that social science and the humanities are indistinguishable!

By indistinguishable I mean roughly that most of the most "important" distinctions carried in the typical authoritative literature do not exist, and that in some new basic ways, similarities exit.

Let us take up most abruptly the core subjects of the humanities, putting aside history, art criticism, costumery, and many other areas whose nature as a subject of science is altogether obvious (even though hotly denied by a crowd of scholars who should know better). The core consists of fiction, the painting, the song, the [dance pretty]. As wide-ranging their manifestations, their quality and existence as symbolism is clear. They bespeak, well or badly, incorrectly or correctly, a truth to the hearers, they illuminate a truth to the beholder. In every detail, the artistic production is like the scientific production. But wait! Not in one regard -- not in fact it was "made up" in cold blood, or not blood! Wrong. For the fiction of a story lives in a context, which when incomplete, is like an incomplete study, is partial and abstract, but so is scientific description of generalization, is even absurd -- but when absurd is like the scientific study of the exception which is "absurd" unless it was a statistical footnote attesting to its oddity. The world is one, all science one, all knowledge one.

August 14, 1966

Last evening, on her patio, Laura Bergquist Knebel and I talked of what work we most liked to do while Jill and Fletcher played ping pong downstairs. When it came to me, the question proved so complicated that I could not answer it before the game finished and we got onto our more generally amusing subjects.

Now it seems to me that I should be able to provide some logic that embraces the various ways I am using my energy and time. At present I am engaged in the following activities and justify them as follows:

Three-Year Plan

Days Total time = x weekly time averaged per first year: (t) 1,500 (10) 1248 (8)

1) Book on A New World Order: Justified as the most important work that I could conceivably devote myself to as a political theorist.

2) Writing memos, consulting on research for AEI, and following up studies -- all in relation to Congress. Justified as influencing at an important historical juncture the organization and operations of the key institution of the American Republic.

1248 (8) (Allow 3 years)

3) Designing an Information Retrieval System for the NAM to use in attracting companies and foundations to more and better forms of welfare activity. Justified as possibly helping to initiate a) New forms of thought and organization in welfare; b) new trends in non-governmental welfare; c) improved systems of information in welfare.

4) New American Government Department. Justified largely as income potential with a small element of recapturing prestige and teaching young students.

720 (6)

5) Poetry. Justified as highest form of expression of self in relation to world, for which no substitute exists..

350 (2)

6) Fiction: novels, plays. Same as poetry. Add interest in the technical possibilities of fictional expression (2 novels, 1 play in process)

1600 (6)

7) Teaching:

2 graduate courses, on scope and method of political science, social invention, and theories of world order

a) The subjects interest me strongly.
b) Each year I meet a few students whom I help or who help me.
c) They connect with other work.
d) Teaching brings income without which life of the family would be difficult.

1100 (9)

8) Representative government Research Program is important theoretically, gives me facilities and income that are helpful, extends the possibility of setting up a new old field of political science..

1000 (6)

9) The science of science of reading, writing and organizing = Marvelous problems of reality, truth, human intellectual-social relations. The highest area of social science in my present hierarchy.

450 (3)

10) College of Voyagers: fun and money. also Pedagogically Constructive.

1900 (12)

11) Pictorial History of Human Sciences. Fun and money. Also creative problems of considerable interest.

100 (1)

12) Universal Reference System. Money at this point, but possibly scientific interest will again become main motive if new activity can be finance.

300 (2)

13) Journal. A place for thoughts about people and science, myself, intimates, ideas, arguments and other material that belongs to the processes of time and cannot fit well elsewhere anyhow.

625 (4)

14) Publication of my unpublished past writings and out-of-print works. To get them out of my way and care and place them, for what they are worth, where they may be useful to others.

  Total Time to Conclusion
or 3 Years (hrs)
Time per Week lst Yr (hrs) read:Comment 3-year Income from
1NWO1,50010  2,000
2Congress1,248 ?86 18,000
3Welfare IR1,248 ?86 21,000
4AG7206  20,000
5Poetry350 ?2  100
6Fiction1,6006  6,000
7Teaching1,10098 48,000
8Rep. govt1,0006  15,000
9Sci. of sci450 ?3  --
10College of voy1,9001210 15,000
11Pict. Hist.1001  1,000
12URS3002  15,000
13Journal6254  --
14Coll. works4004  --
 Total9,245 + 3,30081  161,000

12,500 hours = 80 hours / week
14 = 11 hr day, 1 hr phys. ed. 2 hr misc. pers.
16 hrs + 8 sleep = 24

In addition, several projects await a place in the proceedings:

15. The "American Image Project" Most important and largest survey research project of all.

16. "Newspaper of the Social Sciences" to supply the need to tie together the social science community of the world

17. Additional poetry and fiction

161 + 6,000 / 3 (from pre-67)

Gross Receipts

 1966-7 1967-8 1968-9
 43,000 52,000 72,000
Tax8,000 11,000 18,000
 35,000 41,000 54,000
# Shd 20,000 20,000 21,000
Surpl. 15,000 21,000 23,000
Savings 5,000 It Hs 10,000Sav 20,000
16LL3,00016LL 1,0006LL 2,000
ItHs7,000SV.10,000Other 1,000

August 15, 1966

Meeting New York City - NAM



2.Explanation of work

3.Obtaining of materials - books, etc.

4.Introduction to the person who will be doing clipping and purchasing

5.ho will do screening?

6.Payment -- not discussed

7.Visited NU information retrieval project in comp. government literature (Report)

Readers - Add: De Huszar; Dworkin

    of What

Note that this is often obscure. Subjects are often described as "sick, aggressive, delinquent".

Now, even if the adjective can be attached to a value, e. g. aggressive: safety, is "safety" social safety or subject's safety. Actually, society is getting too little safety and therefore gives subject something (health) or deprives subject (prison).

e. g. 2 formulations:

A. Boy too aggressive, for reasons unstated and unknown, judged by tests, and therapists at hospital propose many extraverted activities guided by councillor.

b. Society gets uncooperative aggressiveness from boy judged by tests and therapists propose many extraverted activities guided by councillor.

Abstracts for Soc. Waken, I # 1, 107

How: councillor) directs

new organized

activities) of aggressive boy

until well.

Time and Expenses:

9 days to July 31, 1966$1800.00
secretarial to July 31, 1966150.00
Phones to July 31, 196610.00
Cabs to July 31, 196620.00
Res. Assistant (150 paid)200.00
OH general200.00
August 1 - 16 (2 days)400.00

August 16, 1966

How   B   Who will use them?

A.   Factors to be used    Use Subject Code)

1. Human resources

2. Financial Resources  C.  In connection with whom

     (Use Subject Code)

3. Organization

    D. Duration Proposed

4. Procedure

5. Ideological

6. Law.

August 26, 1966 Barnegat Light, N. J. Shore

Colette's Autobiography bought in New York yesterday. She was very much like Jill. She had one child. It strikes me that biographers are little interested in their heroes' children. I cannot make up my mind whether childlessness -- one or no children -- makes for greatness or just for fame. I think for example, that John Maynard Keynes, whose biography I read the other day, gained disciples, a following, fame, because in part he could move freely about and be brother, father, jolly bachelor friend, and so on to many students and associates, Pater familias -- a limiting role often. Pater Familias -- "Why attend to X? He has his brats close to him; the real tie must be there."

Also Lasswell -- he means something -- not much -- to a great many men and women, because he never turns a familial and not even quite a familiar side to them. So they can read the hero into him and place themselves in the proper role vis-à-vis.

I think, quite in another vein, that fame creates genius. If two men start together, create equally, but one is pushed forward into view by a public he begins to think and act in larger terms. His ideas, seined through a crowd, actually sharpen and improve. They bounce off others and back at him, to change the metaphor, and since they are "public" ideas, not those of his few cronies or family, they are more lasting, universal, clearer, communicative and are so turned back again upon the public. I believe that such happened with both Keynes and Colette. (Kant, by the way, whom I used to conceive of as quite isolated in his genius, was, Livio told me once, a convivial host with an established coterie.)

Livio S. himself is of the genre of people who might well have moved his genius into a series of creative productions if he had been steered by a public sonar system. I know others like him who remain forever anonymous despite great and even amply displayed talents because people were not watching them. So they quit or slowed or made tentative efforts in too many directions.

August 27, 1966 Barnegat Light Saturday

Carl is working at the Villa as a dishwasher, together with a thirteen-year-old friend Steen. He grumbles over his pay but is much pleased to be an oppressed child laborer.

Ronald Watkins expounds, in his book "On Producing Shakespeare," the view that the Globe Stage was intended to be all things to all plays (iii). Its fixtures were reemployed many times for different ends: "The Trap-door has led to a convivial cellar, or been haunted by ghosts -- and this afternoon Ophelia will be buried in it. All dramatic life, therefore, must be committed to the framework of the theatre, even the specific theatre. And a playwright should be attached to a theatre and come to exercise his imagination upon the limited set of objects and points granted him. Then, if he is to be played elsewhere, he must be less good. (Good after all being determined by ideas working harmoniously with tools) or he must be rewritten (never completely successful by definition), or he must have replicas of his theatre built elsewhere.

Watkins' bare statement leads one along intriguingly. Can all reality be reduced to some fixed points? Do integrated societies have theatres that are alike? Do fixed-core theatres determine what type of playwright can succeed? What kind of acting? Do fixed-core theatres grant great stimulus to the imagination of author, audience, actors, society, even while they tie these imaginations to a central core of belief, idea, interpretation of reality?

August 31, 1966

In re my theory of + r between ignorance and use of party label as a cloak for ignorance (cf. Rep. in Crisis):

This is difficult to get at, as Appel is discovering. However, a change from statistical measures might help. Suppose one analyzed protocols of open-ended interviews with congressmen to see how often and under what circumstances the word "party" was used. Same with people of the general public.

August 1966

How Collectivistic Society Develops From Liberal Society.


1. Does development takes place via massive plasma mechanics?

The plasma consists of a number of levels of transforming structure. Probably Not! Too complete a segregation. Origins of the plasma layers questionable.


2. It does not occur by decisions of a Present crossroads kind which "rationally"


conveys us towards collectivism. Resembles the old "political historiography"

3. Rather: Old decisions (choices) are made less and less in an old setting and new types of decisions in different newly-formed settings. The two areas are largely segregated

But what allows and encourages the growth of the collective behavior>

1. New ideas and ideology

2. Generational revolts

3. Social stratification with hyper-growth and some mobility in the collectively inspired context.

Increasingly, perspectives of choice in C context ignore (consciously and unconsciously) perspective of the L context.

As nears peak, the C context mobilizes.

Call this all the Segregated Context Model

Struggle occurs only in the marginal areas, the marches. No use counting these skirmishes as decisive victories or defeats.

What sectors of society require planning or change to alter development of C?

1. Legislative - Exec. Area.

2. Capital formation

3. Organization of industry

4. Position and operation of labor

5. Federalism

6. Localism

7. Education

8. Welfare and economic Legislation

9. Religion,

i. e. practically all areas.-

previous.gif     next.gif