abrahamic family

America’s caliph as an equilibrial response to Islam 

Trump emerged to defend the West from Islam as a cultural balance. We chose a president and have given him the responsibility to protect the country from all threats. America has selected a fighter, a dictator, a caliph to fend off the militancy of the Islamic terrorism.

Trump is the last of the caliphs. He is the model of Islamic power management — identifiable as projecting his own aggression onto others and exceedingly determined to win. Both Trump and militant Islam are labeled by Moral Science as cruel and dominant antagonistic in their paths to conflict resolution; on either side, paranoia distorts reality and the predictable response is an ever-increasing militancy.

In Trump, this manifests in building walls, controlling immigration, and suppressing freedoms while introducing excessive controls; he is introducing Sharia-type laws into this country so that, paradoxically, America will experience the Islamization of the nation from within. The authoritarian rule is absolute control; dominance required cruelty and torture as an appropriate norm.

Ironically, the militant antagonism liabilities of Trump and militant Islam are the same. The six-role process explains their parallel patterns: seeking power while fearing the power of others. Both Trump and militant Islam suffer from the side effects of dominance: paranoid anxieties leading to defensive moves such as a surplus of controls and regulations. This self-reflective behavior arises from the fact that Trump and Islam have the same anxieties and defenses: fear of being attacked leads to preemptive strikes, suppressing civil rights, criticizing the media, censoring the press, suppressing the power of women and regulating the structuring of life.

The Islamization of America resolving Islam’s problems

Is it possible to appoint a dictator, an aggressive and paranoid thinking person, as the leadership style of the USA, the world’s most liberal country? We would have to conclude that this kind of personality may not set the pace within a nation that honors freedom. Yet, Trump was elected due to the threat of Islamic terrorism. He prevailed to assume the difficult role of standing up to Islam, but in the process he is creating the Islamization of America.

By its founding principles, America cannot be at a dictator’s mercy. This is a liberally thinking country that cannot be silenced. So, at this crucial moment there arises a process to resolving conflicts as the alternative to the Islamic/Trump dominance aggression.  In view of this scientific discovery, Trump’s presidency actually offers the opportunity for emotional and cultural growth. In the shock and incomprehension of his rule, there is psychic space created for generating internal growth. This potential for human evolution arises by a new method clarifying the psychology of power management.

A free-thinking culture is now experiencing the problem of dominant antagonism. This adaptation to an atmosphere of constant conflict comes with a complement of relational consequences: distortions of reality leading to draconian measures to protect this country from enemies. Trump perceives America as carnage; he subsequently invests national resources to engage the world as a military power. The firing of missiles in his third month in office was a clear sign of the potential global carnage that could result from his presidency.

As we have seen through the course of these nine segments, Trump and Islam are both determined by the same relational modality; a U.S. president who disparages the national intelligence, the free press and wellness while suppressing women’s rights and furthering religious impositions on the human body is expressing the traits of Islam. In Trump’s mentality America is becoming militarized by way of experiencing the problems of Jihadism.

America is bound to recognize the strange behaviors of its leader as the problem of dominant antagonism as one of four relational modalities. Experiencing Trump can help us to understand his personality and Jihadism as the same type of aggressive dominance approach to conflict resolutions. It has been necessary to appoint an aggressive person in the helm to make a stand to aggressiveness. However, the Moral Science stance is that what could not happen in the Islamic cultures forbidding free-thinking can happen in America: the recognition of the source of religion as arising from the essence of psychology addressing pathology of conflicts. Once people can think about psychology and religion together, a new discussion could arise questioning aggression and power in America.

We are all witnesses

In witnessing Trump distorting reality, we need to recognize the pathology of dominant antagonism determined by a personality type. America will realize the need to manage power as the rational alternative to inflicting relational modality-compelled prescriptions of power management. Trump’s draconian measures to protect this country from its many enemies is a reflection not of narcissism but of malignant dominant antagonism diagnosed as a curable power management condition.

America is prone to discover the solution to psychological and religion-related problems in dealing with Trump’s Islamization of the nation. The Moral Science demystifies both psychology and religions. This new scientific knowledge effectively addresses the problem of dominant antagonism as the sociological threat of poor power management. These insights could help America deal with Trump and all religions as unmasked wizards, who become less powerful in their militant self-righteousness stoking conflicts around the world.

The questions

Moral Science is offering insights to both personal and cultural psychology. The country needs healing of its president and the world’s religion-based conflicts through introspection and scientific education on the nature of moral psychology.

Can Moral Science’s understanding of the psychology of both Trump and Islam educate this free-thinking country? Can understanding psychology and morality scientifically diminish the divisive moral authority of religions and move the world towards diminishing the moral authority of religions?

I believe American can achieve this breakthrough, and must do so in order to evolve.

Moral Monopoly leads to the Moral Science

Moral Monopoly is a card game retracing the history of religions as cultural discoveries of the three principles of conflict resolution. The game identifies the four suits of the deck as four relational modalities associated with four cultures bound into a continuum of discoveries. It uses cards with episodes of cultural stories to educate on the six-role process and on the four modalities as the alternative types of conflict resolution evolving dialectically toward improving family relations. Players study  stories of each culture as manifestations of the alternative ways of resolving.

The succession of moral discoveries improve the family institution with a reflection on the divine attributes reflecting the features of the four modalities: Matriarchy of Mexico evolves to Patriarchy in Greece, Asceticism in India and Monotheism in Judea. Monotheism is the ultimate abstraction of the divine, but the Abrahamic religions evolved themselves along the three principles: submissiveness/dominance, cooperative and antagonistic. The challenge for the players is addressing the unresolved problem of the Abrahamic family as lack of mutual respect between the genders manifested as the inequity between men and women. Trump is offering us the unique opportunity to reflect on all that.


The game-board of the game Moral Monopoly (above) is the map of the unconscious. In the octopus design we recognize the concentric circles as portraying the alternative relational modalities as the four quadrants of the societal field. The sine curves in each quadrant correspond to the six-role states of the episodes of stories.The evolution targets resolving conflict and players have to figure out resolving the problems of the unresolved conflicts of the Abrahamic religions. The insight is espousing mutual respect in the gender relations.

The evolution targets resolving conflict and players have to figure out resolving the problems of the unresolved conflicts of the Abrahamic religions. The insight is espousing mutual respect in the gender relations.





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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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