In the Social Imagination, Balance does not mean Equality

In the social imagination, there is balance, but that does not mean equality. Because, in the social imagination, there is social hierarchy. This is in fact a requirement for there to be a legitimate value to be given to system function. Now, there are those who think that is not true. They in fact think that totally equality in a system creates legitimacy of the system. There is one raw fact that such people miss - the order of operations which means  the assignment of value to people, places and things. In a social system, we use signs and symbols to better understand the value of our social system... the total value of 'our' function in a system of operations.

In computational math,  this is a necessary procedure. In doing this, there are benefits. Such as system legitimacy. In society, this same order of operation applies. Group assigning is beneficial as long as the value placement (using signs/symbols) is well thought out, logical, and balanced which does not mean equal. If group assigning is unbalanced (in terms of value placement), then value function will be misunderstood as in illegitimate and the system of operations will deteriorate and or collapse.

In some social systems, corrupted operations have become embedded in the social imagination. There is a tendency then to over value certain groups; just as in math, a mathematician can over value one sign or symbol giving way to  inaccurate value placement.  Hence, we can observe this when a hypothesis fails. Social scientists are guilty of the same over valuing and this has led to corruption in the social imagination of some social systems.

There is the tendency to think that certain groups (what they consider to be suppressed in value; as for the mathematician - this would be considered an ignored or devalued signs/symbols) have a lower position in appearance when compared to others have a lower or lesser position regarding the value of system function. Some people think that certain groups should be weighted and the weight given to them is that they have greater value since their lower position regarding the value of system function appears to under value... their 'true' value. That somehow their 'true' value is suppressed. Thus, certain groups need such weight because they are suppressed the higher values in the order of operations. That is necessarily a wrong observation and or wrong assumption when attempting to better understand the total value of system function.

All members of the human body have a certain value in terms of system function. The brain could be and should be given total authority over the body, over the position of the feet. Yet, the brain would go no where without the feet. Virtually, I suppose it could. Yet, in comparison to a brain with feet, the brain with feet has better mobility.  At the same time, the feet would not even be conscious of moving without the brain. If the opposite end of the body fails, the top will fail. Does that mean that one should be given priority. No, but at the same time, it does not mean that the feet need more attention than does the brain.

If we think that by assigning  greater value to the extremities of the body, we neglect the brain. If we assign greater value to the brain, it will remain where it is and have no purpose as there will be no extremities to engage. Who benefits to assigning value to groups? Only those that seek to usurp the total value function of the system.  There is only equality in balance in regard to the order of operations when seeking toward the total value of the system function. This does not mean that every value placement was equal to acheive this nor does it mean that balance stands for equality.