33 Pages Posted: 2 Nov 2010 Last revised: 7 Nov 2010
Date Written: November 1, 2010
This article presents what we hope can be a philosophy and methodology of globally valid utility, suitable in particular to an Honor-Dignity binary which we likewise advance as appropriately adding to or replacing dimensions currently favored in sociological work. We will demonstrate with the new methodology why we believe the typology will be discovered to be valid, reliable and global. Parts II and III will introduce the top tiers of the assessment tool (the full treatment will appear in book format) and part IV will compare and contrast the typology with others in past and current use.
An introductory overview begins with the use of honor and dignity cults to illuminate the rationale for a reprise of theory, concluding with a brief review of current ‘soft science’ methodologies as inadequate to that task. The bulk of the paper is in two parts, in the first of which the current use of ‘dimensions’ is examined from a theoretical view followed by our recommended modifications in the use of variables; the second introduces modal philosophy and its methodological arm ‘paradigmatics’ to defend our interpretation as well as justify the use of templates in typological theory and practice. In the final section we briefly introduce the assessment tool by which any investigator can gauge the validity and reliability of dimensions, apply them in ‘typing’ societies, and test their predictive value.
Keywords: Culture, Cultural typology, Methodology, Dimension, Honor, Dignity, Modal philosophy
JEL Classification: A13, B25, C81, D21, D63, D84, H30, K10
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Herrman, C. S., An Honor-Dignity Binary, Part I - Cultural Typology and Modal Philosophy (November 1, 2010). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1701004 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1701004