5732 - On time and space in strategy

N. Lygeros
Translation: Paola Vagioni

If we examine the phrase of Spinoza, uniquely on a religious level, it seems isomorphic to a truism. However, on a philosophical level, it is not less representative of a mental schema of rare efficiency. It is in the area of geostrategy though that it acquires all its strength if we associate it with another mental schema, namely that time is the space of resistance. Indeed, in the framework of attraction that domination produces and which creates the context of strategy as a tool of intelligence for fighting against the strongest, space plays a primary role for all empires. Nevertheless, this same space causes deterioration over time because it is necessary to maintain it. So, the simple preservation of a status quo obliges an empire to manage numerous problems both internal and external. It is in this field that it is possible to discern the true role of strategy. This also establishes a certain number of opposite pairs like, humanity/society, man/individual, time/space, strategy/domination. But also complementary dipoles like master/disciple, topostrategy/geostrategy. The powerlessness of society opposite time comes from its relationship with humanity. The power of society lies solely in the present where individuals evolve. This is why it does not operate with strategy but with domination. Strategy by nature, contemplates in the past to act in the future. Also for strategy, the present of society is nothing but an intermediate, a stage to overcome like an obstacle but which has no meaning per se. Otherwise we might ask ourselves what is the nature of this difference between space and time since in the framework of General Relativity we have a dimensional equivalence. It is necessary to realize the fact that this equivalence is not consistent except only in a universe with an imaginary part for describing time. Indeed, space exists in 4 dimensions but these do not have the same index in its signature. So time and space are nothing but opposites as we apprehend them on a first level of analysis. In a broader framework, this opposition is transformed into a complementarity under the influence of the action of strategy. Because this one has implications on both. This complementarity is of course visible in the Heisenberg inequalities. It generates therefore a strategic choice for achieving a meta-strategic objective. And it is exactly this action that causes the process of resistance opposite the attraction of domination.