What came first: The Human Species as we know it, or the U.S. Constitution?
Language has a physiological component, which develops based on environments:
For more information on this, I invite you to listen to Translation Podcast 1: Language Is CoCreation or read the text here.
In this analysis, we move into how the U.S. Constitution has shaped our methods of communication.
The Constitution maintains an environmental structure by acting as a guidepost for social reasoning. Said in another way, it fosters a psychological environment.
It has been said that in order for the Constitution to be an effective set of principles, the public must be educated and moral.
What exactly did the Founders of the U.S. Constitution mean when they say the public needs to be moral?
This is not religious dogma. Freedom of Religion still stands. Contrary to popular definition, moral or morality is not even a simplified understanding of good and bad. Concepts like good or bad are subjective, especially under additional concepts like personal liberties.
Something standing as moral in terms of social principles, defined under disciplines of thought such as Civics or Sociology, is action taken based on expected agreements. Norms are patterns that are thought of as usual and established. Norms and expectations have their value forgotten the longer they stand as the agreement; This is unless a remembrance for the value is routinely or ritually practiced. Doctrines taught in educational systems are examples of this routine-ritual practice.
To mark the introduction of this extended Linguistics-Civics conversation, we can use the significance of morality to transition into the larger discussion of how the U.S. Constitution has shaped methods of communication.
Morality as a communication tool is to act within agreed upon conditions.
How many synonyms do we have for the word agreement? There is consent or consentual, the descriptive established as mentioned before, an understanding, a reconciliation, a concession or compliance. There are various paths to describe an agreement’s nature. Each agreement has a nature and has a history behind it.
To be able to consciously participate in a society guided by Constitutional principles, a person must accept that they are likely to give their consent to one or multiple entities each day. A human being is a social creature at the physiological core. Unless a person wants to spend each and every day in constant combat, they are going to consent to giving their energy and focus to other people and established norms. And in our modern society, we have a list of personality types that describe persons based on their consentual habits: Examples would be Entrepreneurs, Diplomats, and People-Pleasers.
When persons are selective about who and what they consentually give their focus to, or in some cases extra selective to exclusionary, we get into a side discussion about the placement of education in a society that… must be moral.