The model of the eonic effect is a really stunning piece of evidence, but its overall structure is so elusive that we are pretty much prevented from producing a theory, one which will inevitably founder. Instead we can develop a chronological outline of a series of epochs with a set of observations about what history is doing and this with definite evidence of a dynamic at work. We don’t have to have a final conclusion about a theory because the model is based on a distinction of system action and free agency, or free action. The latter may or may not be ‘free will’ but it does show choice and allows the action of free agents to both realize and modify system action. Clearly we are in the presence of a mystery and it is better to take it this way since the attempts to produce a theory will founder in mystifications of teleology. We can empirically demonstrate directionality and thence infer a possible teleology but our free agency must also be taken into account. The paradox is resolved by two issues, first, that we are probably exiting from the ‘eonic series’ and thus our free agency takes over, and, second, that ‘teleology’ can do just this: lead a system to the developmental cusp of freedom, leaving its agents to realize or complete the action. That is the funny beauty of the eonic effect: you don’t see it until you exit from it, the reason in a way that kant projected an answer to his challenge into the future…
We need to wake up form bad theories whether of marxism or even worse of neo-classical economics. We are not bound to carry out historical or economic laws. Between these two everyone is so confused it is almost a pathetic case.
Let’s consider our position then: we are attempting (cf previous post) to realize the progression toward a perfect civil constitution and we can see the cogency (theories apart) of the socialist critique of democratic capitalism and we move toward the realization of a more perfect constitution…what we have is clearly most imperfect. We can propose that ‘real democracy’ must have elements of a communist theme, since in principle it has a potentially deeper justice to it. And the issue of primitive accumulation shows us that capital is based on the expropriation of nature form a ‘commons’, etc… We arrive via a new set of axioms at the juncture of free agents realizing the perfect civil constitution….\\
It is of course significant that the so-called kantian ethical socialists emerged to challenge classic marxism. So our analysis, which is of course different from that alternate classic, has its own legacy….
The issue here is an irony: really interpreting the eonic effect is HARD! We might constantly misfire with bad theories of garbage in and garbage out theories. But we can empirically more or less map out historical intervals and sequences and proceed as free agents to realize the elements disgorged by historical evolution into the common sphere.
We don’t have to realize a theory to proceed. This approach is far superior because it has its cake and eats it too: we can proceed with what we suspect: historical evolution is, say, teleological. Or not. We can operate with factual assistance and a rough calculation of a suspected dynamic as…what we suspect, on the way to knowledge. And we can always try to produce a theory! But that requires solving the riddle of the crypto-revelatory action of our macro sequence which suddenly spawns the starting intervals or transitions at the dawn of each new epoch.