It’s nice to be appreciated

In 2016 I was going to write a post about John C. Wright’s near incomprehensible scheme for categorising ideologies on two axes (original Wright post archived here). However, vanity and vainglorious aspiration required me to furnish the post with a better graphic. Having laboured on the graphic I realised I had very little to say, leaving the post as little more than my drawing of Wright’s windrose: https://camestrosfelapton.wordpress.com/2016/01/30/john-c-wrights-windrose-of-political-heresy/

Now Mr Wright recently reposted his essay on his scheme, and as with his previous essay, there was a graphic to accompany it…which looks more than a little familiar…

https://web.archive.org/web/20221027211833/https://www.scifiwright.com/2022/10/the-windrose-of-reality/

I can fault the substance of that windrose but I have to say I couldn’t have drawn a better graphic of it myself…

[Update: JCW has now added a credit to me on the graphic. So it’s all good 🙂 ]

Advertisement

30 responses to “It’s nice to be appreciated”

  1. Plagiarism is the sincerest form of flattery. Or theft.

    And isn’t this a rehashed version of Pournelle’s Axes with demicardinal additions?

    Liked by 2 people

  2. “We know where they are. They’re in the area around Theocracy and Classical Liberalism and in the direction of Pragmatic, Mystic, Ideological and Chivalrous somewhat.”

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Urp. I tried to read some of his essay to figure out what the hell any of it means… and I am stalled on him saying first that the right can agree to disagree within itself, then listing all the ways people who aren’t truly balanced members of the Catholic faith exactly as it is are flawed and fall into destruction then nihilism.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. “The real difference is the Right believes that we can agree to disagree. The Left doesn’t agree to that.”
    Wow, that’s bollocks to start with. 🙂

    (I have come to the conclusion that the proper ideological divisor isn’t any of these things. It’s “bigot or not bigot”. Because you can have people in all of those camps that are bigots and people in all of them who are not. And personally, I tend to think that it’s how an individual sees other people that generally determines my attitude towards them.)

    Liked by 4 people

  5. As Nicolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky said,

    Let no one else’s work evade your eyes,
    Remember why the good Lord made your eyes,
    So don’t shade your eyes,

    I am sure that as a good Roman Catholic, Mr Wright appreciates the biological teleology invoked.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. [Update: JCW has now added a credit to me on the graphic. So it’s all good 🙂 ]

    I’m not sure about “all good”. It’s still an illustration of something not too far from an ideological Time Cube.

    When JCW rags on monarchs, does he even remember that the Vatican is literally a monarchy?

    Say, I wonder if you could create a similar windrose for Timothy? The center; the ideological core of Truth and Orthodoxy and Right Thinking and Ideological Purity, is, of course, Doing What the Cat Wants, Especially Feeding. Deviations from the core are silly and/or degenerate failures to do What the Cat Wants, due to silly and/or degenerate selfish motivations like not owning the Cat, owning a dog or parrot or turtle instead of the Cat, not having the time or money or energy to do what the Cat Wants, having other things to do that are not what the Cat Wants, and so on and so forth. with the outer darkness being the depraved sickness of doing what the Cat Does Not Want.

    Liked by 3 people

    • I’m wondering what the difference between his Catholic Church and Theocracy is. A more plausible spectrum (not progression) is Catholicism -> Theocracy (as the church totalitarianises) -> National Monarchy (as the universal state breaks up) -> Feudalism (as the national states break up). History in the UK went the other direction (if you call the Commonwealth a Theocracy, which is a bit of a stretch).

      Perhaps it makes more sense if one reads the accompanying text.

      Like

      • //Perhaps it makes more sense if one reads the accompanying text.//

        Surprisingly not. However, the Church at the center is based on a romanticised view of the role of the Pope in pre-reformation Europe. i.e. the rulers of countries weren’t vassals of the pope but still required the pope’s blessing etc.

        Liked by 1 person

  7. In Sinclair Lewis’ novel about a hypocritical, lusty, unintelligent evangelical minister, the protagonist (Gantry) lazily plagiarizes his most effective sermon (which he uses in modified form throughout his life) from an essay by the atheist Robert Ingersoll. No one catches on.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: