T and

THE UNIFIED THEORY

by

WILSON OGG

Biographical Data

An Unifying Approach to Consciousness and Matter

RADICALISM

Introductory Remarks

In General

The word radical is used in various senses, including senses that are directly opposed to one another. It is derived from the latin words radix, a root, and radicalis, having roots. Thus, as an adjective radical means pertaining to or proceedung from the root. The word also describes that which is original, fundamental, going to the ultimate source, affecting the vital principle, hence thoroughgoing and extreme. Yet going to the root of manifestation is generally not considered an extreme thing to do, and an extremist includes a person who loses sight of that which is fundamental in manifested reality as well as a person who goes to the very root of things.

Unified Theory as a Radical Theory

In the sense of going to the root of the complex of relationships underlying the fundamental principles of manifestation, the Unified Theory that recognizes the Enfolding Universe is a radical theory but is not an extreme theory in the sense of losing sight of the fundamental bases of phemonena. Extremism is often used in the sense of ignoring the most reasonable interpretation of phenomena, and the recognition of the Enfolding Universe is based upon a rigorous analysis of phenomena that many scientists and thinkers have failed to make, leading them to make extreme interpretations of what is actually going on. The Unified Theory avoids the effect of special intertests, prejudice, presuppositions, unproved assumptions, and unthinkingly accepted paradigms in furthering its discovery of the fundamental principles underlying phenomena.

The Word Radical as Used in Chemistry

The meaning of radical in chemistry has some connotation of the word refering to that which is fundamentsal. In chemistry radicals constitute a small ionized group of atoms bound together and that tend to function as a single unit in chemical transactions. They include the hydroxide, sulfate, and amonium radicals. Free radicals constitute neutral or non-ionized groups of atoms, with an unpaired electron, which makes them very reactive.

The Political Sense of the Word Radical

In England

British statesman Charkes James Fox first used the word radical in a political sense when he asked for "a radical reform" of universal manhood suffrage. Later on the word designated those interested in parlimentary reform. With the passage of the Reform Act of 1832, which benefited primarily middle class , a group of Radicals of the Whig faction in Parliament campaigned to extend the franchise to the working class, which was achieved by the Reforem Bill of 1867. The British Radicals. which included the philosopher James MIlls, the jurist Jeremy Bentham, and the political economist David Ricardo, formulated a philosophy based on Bentham`s principle of "the greatest happiness of the greatest number." They proposed the removal of all political and social restraints on economic relations, and treated freedom as the right of individuals to pursue their commercial life without restriction. Thus, British radicalism was the attempt to develop as the principle of the modern state private economic expansion.

In France

Before the Revolution of 1848, a radical in France was a person who supported universal manhood suffrage. Thus, the French meaning of radical was the same as that of British stateman Charkes James Fox. French statesman Georges Clemenceau was the keader of a radical faction discarding moderate republicanism, and his party called for sweeping reforms in 1881, which in 1901 led to the establishment of Radical-Socialist Party.

In the United States

In America the word radical is genewrally used to designate extreme liberalism, and the wordreactionary to designate extremwe conservatism. Neither the radical nor the reactionary movement, however, are radical in the sense of going to the root or to that which is fundamental. Both movements are based upon assumptions and presuppositions with little derivation from the underlying reality.

Distinguishing Geniune from Pretended Radicalism

In General

Most persons who consider themselves as being radical are in fact very far from really being radical. Very few persons have the ability of going to the roots of things and of recognizing the essential fundamentals of expansive-contractive forces. So-called political radicals are often very conformist in their thinking, and have conventional views that are devoid of original thinking. They may also be members of special interests groups, and their memberships in these groups may interfere with their ability to reach the roots of a problem. They carry with themselves too much luggage to objectively appraise a situation. Emotional or personality attrubutes often also interfere with a person1`s ability to objectively recognize the essential fundamentals of a situation. Those who are geniunely radicals are usually free from the effects of special interests groups, are inherently non-conformist in their thinking, have views that are not readily predictable, and do not have emotional hang-ups and luggage that interfere with their objective analyses of a situation.

Effect of Special Interest

In those areas where special interests have significant influence, those who are free from memberships in these groups are usually considered to be radical. It is not the inherent nature of their views that make these persons radicals but their unacceptance of views dictated by special interests. A very good example of this phenomenon is the accepted approach to banking by those who manage the Federal Reserve System. For a discussion of these special interests, see the zrticle on Economics. An approach ignoring the special interests of the bnking industry would be considered radical and far-out. An example from science would be the special interests of many scientists committed to the presupposdition that light, which is an active force, is radiant energy that travels through time and pace.

Radicals as Non-conformists

Those persons whose views and conclusions do not conform to the genertsally accepted views in an area of expertise are genersally considered to be non-conformists and radicals. Their views, however, may be extremely conformist to the experimental data in their fields of speciality, even though their views may differ from analyses made by other experts that ignore much of the experimental data and are based upon presuppositions that are not derived from the naked facts of experiments. Conformists are often very uncomfortable with persons whose views do not conform to existing paradigms. Conformists usually do not welcome the need to challenge assumptions underlying contemporary theory.

°Wilson Ogg