Abstract
The purpose of this paper, which is part of a more general research, is to investigate the determinant factors that often influence or control the changes in the organization of society.
The “paradigms” of social structure are three: nomadic life, city-state and state-empire. All of them co-existed and were dominant in the greatest part of world history. The development of social systems moves reciprocally between these three paradigms. In this framework, it is possible for the political regime, in each paradigm, to vary. However, the trend towards the “whole” (globalized society) seems to be something “natural”.
The method employed is based on the analysis of historical development, while it attempts to estimate the trends.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
This would efficiently result from the constant expansion in the area of Mesopotamia: Acadians, Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Medes, Persians and Macedonians. Each empire tended (or had the endogenous trend) to become greater than the former. In each stage, part of the heritage was destroyed. The vision, nonetheless, remained the same, i.e. the trend towards the whole. The administrative structures, despite the various regressions, still remained. In the times of Darius, organization reached its highest point. The empire was divided into satrapies, and the King himself as well as inspectors will centrally control this peripheral structure. Later on, Alexander tried to “inoculate” the Greek spirit with the Eastern practice. This interaction lasted for a long time (nearly one millennium), until the arrival of the Arabs.
- 3.
See in detail: Darwin (1871).
- 4.
For a more in-depth analysis, see the classical work of Georgije Ostrogorski (Ostrogorsky 1940).
- 5.
One who has no motherland.
- 6.
So Brutus and Cassius were never justified, just as Harmodius and Aristogeiton.
- 7.
Theseus in Athens, who is the reason why the Panathenaea were celebrated as the most glorious celebration of the Athenians. Remus and Romulus in Rome, etc.
- 8.
Herodotus put emphasis on the three facts that united the Greeks: one blood, one language, one religion.
- 9.
Even the war technique was differentiated and supported the glory of the city-state. Empires, nonetheless, had a modern appreciation of war, resembling that of today.
- 10.
According to Max Weber, the three types of authority are the charismatic authority, the traditional (patriarchal) and the bureaucratic (Weber 1922).
- 11.
For some historians, the future of the Medieval West constituted the reflection of the developments in the East and more specifically, the descent of the Arabs (see Pirenne 1937).
- 12.
After the seventeenth and the eighteenth century it started declining (Ostrogorsky 1940).
- 13.
The noble, since he was only occupied with the art of war, aiming at the perseverance of his hegemony (or his ascension), had a disregard for the bourgeois professions (i.e. that of the lawyer, the doctor, the merchant etc.). Most of the cities, not belonging to a certain fiefdom, developed nearly independently (see Bloch 1940).
- 14.
“The war of the Roses” that followed in England was of a local interest.
- 15.
Le Goff (1964).
- 16.
The French Huguenots found shelter in Prussia, the Low Countries etc.
- 17.
More analytically see Braudel (1949).
- 18.
Anderson (1974).
- 19.
Vryonis (1971).
- 20.
See the conflict between Bettelheim and Emmanuel Arghiri in Monde (1969). The relevant literature is included in the book of the latter “L’échange inegal”.
References
Anderson, P. (1974). Passages from antiquity to feudalism. London: New Left Books.
Aristotle. (1998). The politics. Translated by C.D.C. Reeve. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.
Bloch, M. (1940). La Société féodale, Paris.
Braudel, F. (1949). La Méditerranée et le monde méditerranéen a l’époque de Philippe II.
Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man and selection in relation to sex.
Emmanuel, A. (1969). L’échange inégal: essai sur les antagonismes dans les rapports économiques internationaux. Paris: Maspero.
Le Goff, J. (1964). La civilisation de l’occident Médiéval. Artaud.
Ostrogorsky, G. (1940). Geschichte des byzantinischen Staates.
Papailias, T. (1999). The defining factors of globalization. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference in Messologi, Greece.
Papailias, T. (2002). The community in the framework of globalization. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference in Messologi, Greece.
Pirenne, H. (1937). Mahomet et Charlemagne (p. 224, 1re édn.). Paris: Les Presses universitaires de France, 1992. Collection Quadrige.
Vryonis, S. Jr. (1971). The decline of medieval Hellenism in Asia minor and the process of Islamization from eleventh through the fifteen century. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Weber, M. (1922). Die drei reinen Typen der legitimen Herrschaft. Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Papailias, T. (2019). The Three Paradigms of Social Organization. In: Sykianakis, N., Polychronidou, P., Karasavvoglou, A. (eds) Economic and Financial Challenges for Eastern Europe. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12169-3_27
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12169-3_27
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-12168-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-12169-3
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)