Chapter 14 Part 1

Internal Archives of the Star Tribunal 045678tuy

Subject: Council of Shapers

begin file

History: The Star Tribunal is a committee of concerned individual citizens who have convened to consider the future of civilization. The chief appointed architect of civilization, has, at this point, been reduced to one person that has been designated a Shaper. We feel that no matter how great the character of this Shaper, it is simply too much responsibility for one person to hold.

As the philosopher Hegel point out long ago, most statements that are considered fact are actually a dialectic that contain their own refutation. Upon asserting the sky is blue, the simultaneous assertion is being made that it is not any other color. Suppose someone else were then to suppose the sky were some other color. Two points would arise--one would be that the sky is blue--the other would be that it is not. The resulting dialog that would take place would see one claim attain a dominant position over the other. This position would, through the purposes of this dialectic convention, be seen as factual, whereas the other contrary statement would be seen as non-factual. Without the background dialectical discussion, however, either situation may lay claim to be factual. Without a reference point in the form of a dialectical discussion and consequently annihilation of one side of the dialectical duality, fact cannot be ascertained. 

Hegel concerned himself with the formation of the state, and so too do we. We feel that it is impossible for a dialectical annihilation to take place with only one Shaper present. Perhaps the Shaper in question is one of dialectic skill and argues with themselves quite well, but we fell that without other people with other perceptions the task that has been required of them will be impossible.

Findings: The advantage of having one Shaper is that they are not bogged down by other considerations, bu so too is this the disadvantage. We dissent with Hegel in that we fell that a monarchy is not the best form of government, but rather a limited, representative democracy. With more Shapers involved, it becomes possible to have more divergent perceptions evolve in the discussion. The dialectic that we propose above cannot help but take place, unless of course all Shapers become corrupt. If this happens, then there is no form of government that can help anyone as the main purpose of government in such a situation has been lost. If the service of the government becomes to itself rather than the people, that government eventually fails. If the Shapers do not take their task seriously enough to consider all that are involved, they they will have doomed civilization.

It is our belief then that a council of Shapers need to exist as opposed to an independent Shaper that is tantamount to a monarch.