As a software engineer, particularly as an object-oriented programmer, I classify things: I suspect this is an endemic behavior in the profession; certainly it is a key activity for scientists.
Once classification occurs, then those characteristics which differentiate one thing, tangible or not, from another may be examined and used for constructing hypotheses. The classification is important, among many reasons, for clarifying how a thing differs from other things in a possibly more general classification.
Measurement is critical to science. While theoreticians may construct theories that explain observed laws, it is the measurement (of reality, in this case) that falsifies (or fails to falsify) the theory; I write this sentence with extreme care only to satisfy the professional proponents of science and logic who prefer that hypotheses are never proven, but merely that they are or are not falsified. The selection of one or more metrics is a matter of meticulous and continual concern, for otherwise there is a risk of having one be labeled ‘a damn statistic.’
(At this juncture, we should note that human constructs modeling nature are merely that: constructs, representations, even simplifications. So, in confusion, below I will omit an artistic sector as it may fit within another sector, it may overlap several, and it is not without an element of mystery: to borrow the hoary old phrase, I may not be able to define art, but I know it when I see it.)
So, with no academic preparation in the subject area, and no doubt adding to the amusement of true experts in the area, I propose to apply the above to the general subject of human culture, with, being of the nationality, an emphasis on American culture.
First, the objects in our culture and their classifications. I observe the following: public sector, private sector, religious sector, educational sector, family sector. More familiarly, government, business, religion, schools. As a citizen, no matter of what culture, excellence should be a key goal in each sector.
So the definition of excellence must be clarified. I suggest it will depend on the sector, and thus will postpone any exact declaration until then. But I will immediately require that excellence be measurable in some sense; and that measurement will help define the uniqueness of the cultural sector such that using another sector’s metric will be considered with suspicion.
Public sector
The public sector is responsible for the creation and application of the law, both civil and criminal, to which all, including the public sector, is subject; national defense; public health; management of monetary supply; creation of a civil society conducive to peaceful interactions both internally and externally. The final clause justifies the public sector conducting basic research necessary for military products, as does the national defense clause.
The metrics in this area include incidence of crime (although this may also be applicable to other sectors), recidivism rates, resolution rates, civil disturbance rates, standard public health measures, and incidence of foreign invasions; whether measuring foreign adventuring is relevant is problematic.
Excellence: low or lowering rates of crime, peaceful society not dependent on force; lack of war without loss of interests in the greater world; improving public health.
Private sector
The private sector is responsible for general production of things of value to the citizenry, tangible and intangible.
While it is tempting to use money as a metric – and often, it is, in the form of GNP, GDP, and allied metrics – the general economic health of a country is perhaps not entirely captured simply by these metrics, for the metric should also indicate the probable future indicated by various sub-measures.
Excellence: a prosperous citizenry is the traditional sentiment, and, if taken literally to mean everyone, it suffices for a statement.
Constraints: the public sector neither has a moral code nor should it have a moral code specific to it; the moral codes generated by other sectors should apply to this for reasons of public peacefulness, since citizens participate in all sectors and may interact in many modes and contexts. A changing moral code is an invitation to strife and confusion.
Religious sector
The religious sector (which may be considered the philosophical sector by agnostics & atheists) can provoke emotions as it is, indeed, concerned with emotions, the hard questions of why are we here, what should we be doing. For our purposes, we may state that the task of religion is to inculcate a generally acceptable moral code which controls behavior, a code recognizable and respected by the enormous majority of citizens. Moral codes which negatively impact the goals of the public sector are unacceptable, as are those which negatively impact the individual citizen, keeping in mind that contributions need not have direct consequences, but indirect may be more valuable. It should not be necessary to state that a religion or philosophy that results in the premature deaths of its adherents is an inferior system.
Since religion is expected to modify the behavior of the great mass of citizens, thus a meter is obvious: frequency of inimical or anti-social behavior. While crime rate may have some applicability, the range seems wider.
Excellence seems best defined as a low rate of inimical behaviors in the general population; perhaps a certain individual industry should also be measured, although the current American tendency towards overwork makes such a specification suspect.
Educational sector
The educational sector’s responsibility is straightforward. It should prepare students with facts and the ability to make reasoned judgments, and to this mission it should adhere to a study of reality; strictly religious sensibilities should be excluded as they are entirely subjective, and will lead to civil strife in a public setting. Philosophy, while subsumed under religion in some ways, is of educational interest since it asks important questions about reality and the study thereof.
Metrics should cover the knowledge base and reasoning capabilities of students and citizens.
Excellence is indicated by the continual progression in the efficiencies of everday activities.
Family Sector
Here I am hesitant. My Arts Editor suggests a healthy, happy family is the metric and the excellence; family wealth not an applicable metric. Children are raised, yes; but a stable society requires other duties, such as establishing roles for those not interested in children which they find rewarding. This is a sector that requires books; I shan’t assay it here.
So what?
A careful understanding of the purposes, relationships, and operationality (most importantly) of societal sectors will give us the opportunity to properly evaluate proposals and performance, giving proper weight to the various facets of same. Relationships could be an entire post (or book), but we can summarize: the public sector, as administrator of the law, is paramount, but is required to show great leniency towards the other sectors. The others have various influences on the others: moral code should influence the conduct of the citizenry in the other spheres; the currency administered by the public sphere and used by the private sphere is also used to compensate those working in all the sectors; etc, open to discussion. But keeping these distinctions, these separate metrics, shines new lights on old topics.
For example, this recent discussion of the North Carolina educational system by James Hogan is interesting. First, and superficially, Hogan states that the Legislature was correct in claiming …
Republicans defended these austerity measures by saying that lower taxes would eventually yield fiscal growth. And they were right. This year, the government is enjoying a $445 million surplus–a clear victory in light of those multi-billion dollar deficits of yore–but still a statistically small number in light of the state’s $21 billion budget (about two percent), especially after considering that our state budget is still smaller than it was in 2011.
So the educational sector, dependent on the public sector for funding, finds its metrics of excellence discarded, while the Legislature permits the (suspect) metrics of the private sector to drive its priorities. This misguided sense of priorities, in which the sector most responsible for the future of society is most drained of necessary funding merely to satisfy the metrics of today’s societies – which should only apply minimally to other sectors. The foreign metrics twist the educational sector until this most important of sectors is in distress. And this is not a hypothesis or a forecast – it’s happening in real time for all to see.
But more interestingly, from the quoted article:
But the legislature has also weakened oversight at public charters–introducing legislation this year to remove them from the Department of Public Instruction’s management altogether. The result is a diminished accountability for tax payer dollars spent in schools–the exact opposite of what the legislature said was important when it came to public schools originally.
(And aren’t you curious why the legislature has been so kind to charters? It isn’t hard to figure out when you follow the money. Apparently if you have a lobbyist group that isn’t a teacher’s “union,” nothing is impossible in Raleigh.)
Follow the money. We’re talking about the educational sector, while chanting the metric of the private sector – this should be a clue: when one sector’s jargon becomes common in another, something’s gone wrong.
And the application of one sector’s operationality to another sector’s goals … this is a sentence we can write with confidence once we classify and characterize. The motivations and methods of one sector, no matter their success within the sector, have little native applicability within another. Today we see the educational sector struggling on multiple fronts: schools in trouble are not flagged for help, but deprived of vital nutrients. Invading ‘charter schools’, if religious in nature are siphoning off resources from the professionals, and if otherwise, they operate in an environment where success is measured by dollars, not by student attainment. And the beliefs of the religious sector, lacking any evidence, and, in the best-known case, facing convincing counter-evidence, still continues to attempt to inject its beliefs into a system that vitally must present reality – not arbitrary beliefs.
Once we understand that different sectors have different goals and methods, then we can discuss the cross-applicability of one sector’s to another – or better understand why they will not work.
