"CULT OF THE MONAD:
In the Valley between Empirical and Logical"
– IAN ZACHARY
Summary: Elena Bartlett (1840-1849)
Background | Early Constributions | The Travel Periods Notes Structure | Places Travelled and Oddly Named Notes | Advises to Dorothy Atkinsons | Cult of the Monad | End of Part One
Background:
Ian Zachary (1801 – 1871) is one of the domestically considered “Big Five” thinkers, alongside Protoiridine Certusemorand, S.J. Brand, John Whetstone, and Howard Dinbar. Some replace Whetstone with Eric Xor because of Ians influence on John, but Xor stands out as he was also a practitioner. Ian Zachary is the first cosmopolitan-- much of the Monad was inspired upon travelling the world, translating foreign works, and systematically analysing different cultures. Seeing The South Pacific as a single civilisation by noticing that all cultures strive for the same two virtues, differing only on means to achieve them.
Most known for Chapters I and V of the Monad; where he asserts that once Austral Hegemony ceases, the vacuum will create a competitive war of Empires fighting to assert themselves. After the Monad this continues in “Advises to Dorothy Atkinsons” (1850). There, Ian proposes to Dorothy that she replicate the “Austral unmatched expertise in politics” if she wishes “for legacy and Nasphiliti interest”, as “Once the Hegemon finally slumbers and young Empires begin infighting, Nasphilitae must preserve peace by itself.”
Ethics take a central focus in Zacharys writings. As seen in his earliest works, one virtue he strongly values as being universal on all levels is “tranquillity within the individual human which must require peace among the nations, as the lesser always comes from the whole.” Ultimately rejecting the idea of “Imperialism and peace be compatible–as it is inherently anthropo-destructive”.
Early Contributions:
Revolutionary were his early essays, later compiled by Whetstone as “Ian Zachary:Foundational Essays” (1819-1825). Their contents deal with Logic, Language(s), Science(s), Arts-Aesthetics, and “fundamental laws of nature”. Prior to travelling the world, but upon earning his Masters degree in the University of Suhavenster with the thesis of “Comparative method:Theory and demonstration”, he spend five years along the coastline of Nasphilitae mostly talking to foreigners. At the same time, the five years were spent relentlessly teaching in Suhavensters University as well.
As for his contributions to the University of Suhavenster during these “latter five” years (1825-1830); He opened centers of studies for: “Methodology and Logic”, “Socio-physics and Culturology”, “Philosophies of Laws”, and “Political Macroeconomic Sciences”. The years were marked by his courses in the Liberal Arts major in “Methodics of Abductive Logic” and (perhaps most importantly) “The meta-systematic politicology”. Remember the latter, he would often repeat the phrase “Beauty is Wisdom is Knowledge is Virtue” (todays motto of Nasphilitae).
The lectures also seem to have first mention both “Monadic Methods” and “Systems Theory” in Suhavensters University.
The Travel Periods Notes Structure
Before beginning the Monad, Ian Zachary, following his own systemic logic; First insisted on travelling the world. He believed Young Goldmann to be mistaken: “To observe an Empire, one must look at its core, not its Crabyan peripherals.” Which he did, from 1830-1838.
Except for “Austra culture notes” (1831.), which has seven chapters and 35 pages; Every other collection of “Notes/Indice/Index” has 5 chapters, each chapter has 5 pages, all of them 25 pages long. Each chapter, regardless of culture, is of the same subject matter:
[1] “The deep culture as seen among commoners”
[2] “History, Geography, Language:As they are told or taught here”
[3] “Espoused views on virtue, laws, idols of these lands”
[4] “Who holds power, who decides and how, on wealth disparities”
[5] “The actual deep culture of these lands”
Places Travelled and Oddly Named Notes
– In Vixbridge: “Austra culture notes” (1831.)
– In Torielen, Brient, and Jensen Island: “Rugii-Burgundian cultures notes” (1832.)
– In Hagen, Atlantis, Larasin, Freudstadt, Kroefed, Munnich: “Equatorial Alman cultures notes” (1833.)
—> He would later return to Elbonia and Weisserstein: “Mountain Alman cultures notes” (1837.)
– In Ralton, Imperus, Aurora, Thermopetri, Cadmium, Xenia, Ypsilos, Archaios, Karelia, Ravneby, Tvillingelver: “Index of the Mountain cultures notes” (1834.)
– In Hai’Men, Almia, Tarvem, Grovne, Durivv, San Marco, Canna, Hanahi, Zholtograd, Makalis, Eastern State (Shtaad), Northern State (Shtaad), Mirrey: “Index of the Privateer and the Commerce cultures notes” (1835.)
– In New Mako City, Happelstein, Ricubai, London, Severin, Takara, Alkantara, Zhukantara, mount Makharat, and Karnetgrad: “The Proxima cultures notes” (1836.)
As previously mentioned, these aren’t travel guides. Ian seems to present each culture(s) in a very dry tone. With the exception of “Austra culture notes” – Where the additional two chapters are:
[6] “Empires In General” (Where he compares the Boreal and Austral Empires, along with noticing a difference in their demise).
[7] “Empire whose expertise is politics”. This chapter was copied over as the introduction to his “Advises to Dorothy Atkinsons” (1850.)
Namely, Zachary observes that:
"Hegemons reach a peak and then their knights in armour turn to rust because their paper heroes have turned to dust; Always sudden and quick, as we’ve seen with the Boreals. However, the Austral Empire:
“Lost both knights and heroes. It is an old woman preparing tea before slumber. YET, this Hegemon is falling with no noise, slowly, almost willingly.”
Zachary attributes this to “Imperial or core Australs, are political masters. Aware that every Hegemonic Empire must demise; They’ve prepared. Knights are not needed, gold suffices; Heroes are pointless, diplomacy will be our assurance.”
It’s important to mention that Ian seems to use “diplomacy” in a more negative connotation. All he ever specifies about diplomacy:
“It is a very subtle art of deception where the deceived are convinced to be enlightened.”
Ian equates diplomacy with what is now called “sharp power” and “cross-cultural understanding and applying”. The University of Suhavenster, to this day uses this understanding in “International Relations”, as does the RANASA.
Advises to Dorothy Atkinsons
Written after the Monad and mostly includes what we’ve covered previously. One paragraph stands out due to lack of specification and still causes confusion among scholars:
“Regarding the Nasphiliti and the Australs, when I was in Vixbridge, writing the last seventh chapter, I’ve come across a book in their great Library… “Names of Greater and Lesser Houses”, which I’m sure you’re familiar with.
I see a pattern which keeps us atttached.
THE SILENT HAND.
, a guiding force which appears to emphasise politics above all else. All of it is done very subtle. Impressive.”
The reason why this is puzzling is that the Royal Anthem of Nasphilitae carries the title “THE SILENT HAND”, albeit dating back to 1664.
Cult of the Monad
Previous context is necessary for this work to even be structurally understood. It has Five Chapters like his travel notes do. The first and the last chapters are seemingly in a dialectical opposition to one another.
Ian elaborates why The South Pacific is a single civilisation (Ch. I), sees that Nasphiliti express oddities in culture compared to the rest (Ch. II), warns other cultures of falling too deep into either the “empirical” or “logical” traps (Ch. III), warns the Nasphiliti that these traps carry with them necessary departmentalisation in economics (Ch. IV), predicts that once the Austral Hegemony slumbers, a Great War will emerge, and Nasphilitae must preserve peace by itself (Ch. V).
I “The South Pacific is a single civilisation with countless cultures […] A civilisation shares fundamental virtues. Cultures differ on ways to manifest these virtues:
(1) The same idea that virtue is that which betters the human life; Both materially and in spirit-will-knowledge.
(2) Other cultures are examined and sorted by criteria of how well the above virtue is achieved.”
II “Nasphiliti are anomalous in three aspects.
Firstly, for insisting on universal ideals of the Renaissance.
Secondly and as a result; Nasphiliti have never separated philosophies (which others now call “social sciences”), the sciences (by which they mean studying nature), and the arts.
Lastly and most oddly to foreigners, Nasphilitae never addressed positive-negative rights dispute proper. It uses this idea of a ‘collective singular’ to protect and ensure the value of Freedom. It doesn’t distinguish between ‘freedom from’ or ‘freedom to’ – To the Nasphiliti mind, it is freedom-as-it-is.”
III “Other cultures seem to lack extensive focus on ‘systems’, instead educating experts in specific fields…”
IV “Advantages of such human fragmentations […] are obvious […] I am filled with premonition for a time in the future […] Where Nasphilitae will suffer the consequences for no choosing empiricism of logic.”
V "As the Hegemonic Empire nods into sleep, the civilisation will enter a period of highly destructive wars. The two virtues cannot be achieved outside of peace. Wars are led by Empires seeking to dominate their own ways in achieving the human virtues. Imperialism is incompatible with any human virtue, while it relies on instruments of human destruction; It may become compatible, if the instruments change.
End of Part I
With Ian Zachary, we conclude Part I, which we’ve begun by Protoiridine. Part I’s authors seem to focus solely on Nasphilitae, which makes sense. DO NOT expect this in Part II, which is determined by Whetstones “fourth level of analysis”, it is more ideological and versatile. Cosmopolitanism of Ian Zachary opened the floodgates of much more imported ideas, which take on these bizarre forms of themselves when used domestically. For legal philosophy, Zachary recurses back to Protoiridine, but expands, and births this weird notion of “Universal-Fundamental Rights/Virtues”.