Under Construction @ Keele 2017 Under Construction @ Keele Vol. III (3) | Page 39

four bipolar dimensions map the conceptual space which pacifism occupies. 19 The
first, ‘principled vs. strategic’, describes whether a given pacifist position is held for
deontological reasons or consequentialist ones. The second dimension differentiates
between a repudiation of force under (supposedly) all circumstances and all less
thoroughgoing forms – which merely limits its severity or scope of application.
Thirdly, the ‘separatist vs. integrational’ axis refers to the external societal
interconnections of the group in question, and lastly, the ‘communal vs. universal’
dimension distinguishes between pacifism applied to everyone and an identical level
of pacifism but only applied within a particular group.
Yoder is unique in the field of analysing pacifism, in that he identifies 20 more
forms than anyone else researching in the same area. 20 Many of his categories
overlap rather than being genuinely distinct forms, but – rather ironically given the
subject matter – as an example of brute-force thoroughness it is unlikely that he has
missed much out. His approach does provide an excellent illustration of a problem
relating to “nominal level data”. This term refers to qualitatively described data which
cannot be meaningfully ranked into an ordered sequence, yet can be consistently
delineated as separate data points. For example, an apple and a pear are readily
distinguishable, but it is not meaningful to assert that an apple is greater or lesser
than a pear, as the data is purely descriptive. Why does this matter? Surely the
descriptions are useful, so in what way is this a problem? My interest in “absolute”
pacifism is in attempting to demonstrate that it is, in reality, a very extreme form of
contingent pacifism – that is: that it is still dependent upon other factors. In order to
do this, ordered sequences of progressively more extreme forms of pacifism are
needed, and then these sequences can be used to explore what happens when the
limiting case is imagined in each series.
Ordinal level data is the next higher level to nominal level data, permitting an
ordered sequence of data elements, but not implying an even degree of separation
between them. For example, the Mohs hardness scale ranks minerals in an ordered
hierarchy based on which type can scratch or be scratched by another. On this scale
there is a difference of 1 between gypsum (with a value of 2) and talc (with a value of
1) and also between diamond (with a value of 10) and corundum (with a value of 9).
However, this difference of 1 represents differing amounts in the respective
19
20
Clough, “Understanding Pacifism,” 375-378.
Yoder, Nevertheless, 33.