East Meets West Logic...

[SteveA]

Good question, Lloyd.

To me it would almost be hypocritical to try to force the system to change.

There was a neat idea though that had some good potential but hadn't gotten enough people on-board http://www.freestateproject.org/.

If fact, I've personally been thinking of moving to New Hampshire (The State Motto is "Live Free or Die" ) eventually simply because the state is much freer and economically better of than California anyway. The tradeoffs are in weather.

But it does seem like problems at the federal level and similarly the weakness of having an economy of paper and credit will leak into anywhere in the country over time, but still "voting" with ones feet isn't too bad an idea (but it's a shame that things have moved toward the need to do that).

If you happen to find an island paradise somewhere in the world that needs an engineer let me know though. I'm all ears

It does seem that probably the most realistic thing to do is simply do some research on relative free and independent places to live that might weather through global economic problems better and it might be better to focus a bit more on what are the basics in life and a place where those basics are a bit more secure wouldn't hurt (for example, here in the Los Angeles area, if we had major problems to electricity, gasoline, transportation system, food or water ... well it could get nasty rather quickly whereas problems like that are less important in areas where there's more agriculture and water etc.).

Anyway, those are just thoughts.

[leskey]

My advice is to follow 'Mother Nature'__Nature's fundamental symmetry__She builds no armies_she takes only what she needs_she replenishes herself__Quite a simple model. Now look at the greater Universe__Another example of the continuing symmetry of the Galaxies__Now, look at what both have in common__Mathematics of a desirable spiritual symmetry... Don't you think we could all follow her example if enough minds are tuned to the central symmetrical geometry of the Universe and Mother Nature's self-endowed infinite mathematics of motions and spirits...?rrr


p.s.
The central 'Middle-Way' path is mathematizing morality back into its given geometrical symmetry's natural goal, satisfying all's given good intuitions__but the good must eliminate the bad, or the bad will forever rule the good__That's just an old fact from antiquity...

Hi, Llloyd.

Just pausing for a moment: invariance and intolerance only serve to repeat history - current day emperor, but still naked.

Isn't nature based upon asymmetry: change, growth, development, progress, motion? Isn't this the desirable condtion of the space afforded by time...the same condition that motivates mankind to thrive?

The perpetuation of the good vs evil scenario only serves to divide and conquer...again...and, again...Couldn't it instead be traded for a celebration of creative individuality expressed through innovation and productivity, within an holistic, overarching stewardship over sustainable natural resources?

BTW, Steve, I know of "a little island..."

[Mikal]

United we stand...divided we fall. Truer words were never spoken...


Regards Mikal

[labelwench]

Hello all,

Though we brainstorm and participate in dialogue through the marvels of modern technolgy, my inner thoughts are, that as rapidly as we have progressed, we may equally well regress even more rapidly, if any of our major infrastructure is burdened beyond capacity.

Nothing lasts forever, and history records the rise and fall of many magnificent dynasties before now, some of which, even today, we are unable to sort fact from myth.

We may be approaching such a threshold, and of course we are going to be in denial.

We are a species of procrastinators, and how we have ever made it this far along the path of evolution, is almost an argument in itself for divine intervention. The record shows that it is likely not the result of good management, lol...

Somehow, we must bring together, our scientific knowledge and our traditional knowledge, as it will require the combined skill and resources of both our 'left-brain history' and our 'right brain history' to pull us through.

Much has been documented and archived in various mediums, yet much traditional knowledge is oral in nature, passed on generation to generation, through lineage and calling, that it not be edited or used for unseemly purpose.

Susan Aglukark is a daughter of the land, and she has blended her traditional past with the modern future. Two of the songs from her first album are sincerely beautiful in their simplicity of message.

Song of the Land

and

Arctic Rose

http://www.susanaglukark.com/home.html

She now has six collections out, with selections of each available to listen to, and her music has evolved along her journey.

Regards,

Labelwench

[leskey]

That 'nothing lasts forever' is the current state of affairs: a given.

It's the possiblitiy of holistic, overarching stewardship over sustainable natural resources that's hypothesised.

The few tiresome pretenders will always perpetuate 'unseemly purpose,' but there's consolation in the inevitability that the evolution of consciousness leads to attitudinal conformity or redundancy.

[labelwench]

Hello Leskey,

The few tiresome pretenders will always perpetuate 'unseemly purpose,' but there's consolation in the inevitability that the evolution of consciousness leads to attitudinal conformity or redundancy.

An interesting comment.

Somehow, I am not much consoled, then, by the evolution of consciousness.

Attitudinal conformity or redundancy are both implicit with extinction, by my reckoning.

Perhaps that's the fate we deserve.

Regards,

Labelwench

[Mikal]

Do you realize LW, that the evolution of consciousness is one's consciousness being lifted up out of the collective, mass mindset that is now pushing us towards the edge of a cliff...one is either pushed and pulled in this collective force or exits from it to see our society with full clarity and cognition so as to begin to think for themselves, to own one's own mind...to innovatively and creatively function outside the grip of mass, collective thought presently pushing our society....


Regards Mikal

[SB_UK]

Great posts

:: Leskey ::
Imagine if we could award a point to every house which an individual builds for another -
- and then tell the individual to be as greedy as he wants and to get as high a score as possible
- to build as many houses as he can
(whilst teaching other people at the same time (people who'd then go off and build houses for other people))

- if the need for greed (prior to it burning out) could be re-directed towards community friendly pursuits
- then we'd be better for it.

Not so much encouraging bad greed -
as feeding (to the point of implosion ) good greed.
Good in the sense of the nature of the consequences of the application of human greed.

Human greed is with us to stay until we reach our approximately mid-30's education and pair-bond permitting
- and so we have to work up a mechanism for dealing with it.
Human greed serves to drive the individual towards wanting to stand out from his fellow man -
- there's an in-built module (within the greed clouded mind) which serves to deflect the individual away from group behaviour.
Greed isn't necessarily a community defeating characteristic - is only a community destructive attribute when it's allowed to define its own agenda.
Re-direct greed and we might (potentially) all actually benefit from that urge to single oneself out.

~*~

More simply (to address the issue of whether greed is good or bad (which is not clear from the section above))

• Greed is always bad because it represents a lack of conscious control over behaviour.
• Greed though is an inevitable part of our life cycle (explaining why the old testament followed up the story of Adam and Eve with Cain and Abel -
  two tales of the actual incapacity of man to shield himself from greed.
• Greed may only be overcome in our mid-30's at the earliest - partner + education permitting.
• We need to learn how to redirect greed so that its mindless application doesn't destroy community.
• Greed may be paraphrased as an individual's desire to stand out - to be considered better than others
  - better than others for some particular reason.
• Standing out is not (unless we're real smart) compatible with standing in .
• Greed finds its simple outlet in pure consumerism (purchasing items exclusively for personal adornment)
  - however I strongly believe that this form of greed can be redirected by society into pursuits which we may all benefit from.

A simple example would be the Prince of Wales scheme we have for venture scouts -
- a scheme in which people gain useful community-friendly skills and gold, silver and bronze awards for their achievments (to appease their savage within)
as the kids progress.

Back to Leskey's original point -
- we're not trying to encourage bad greed to become ever more uncontrollably bad -
we're simply trying to find smart ways of working with an inescapable aspect of human nature such that when the time comes
- the individual finds release from its up until then effectively strangle hold on sense.

If an individual seeks to become known as the man who fed a thousand others -
then at least let him feed a thousand others.

Corporate culture reflects the application of negative greed -
- a thousand less are able to feed after the corporate entity has plundered local resources.

The story (previously featured in a thread with Mikal) of 3-6 times greater need for water than volume of coca cola produced resulting in depletion of resources in the local environments of poorer countries.

Presumably poorer countries don't have the infrastructure to monitor practice sustainability -
where the corporation may simply up and leave (like locusts) -
when the time comes
- leaving the local people to suffer the costs of their own exploitation.

[SB_UK]

:: labelwench ::

Can we insist that each region becomes locally sustainable (able to survive without any external trade) prior to external trade being permitted -
- it's just that any form of actual survival level dependence has a habit of starting wars.

What happens when the crop importing export partners have a poor harvest and have just enough food to feed their own people ?

~*~

The idea here is simply aimed at local sustainability in the most basic of survival level products (water,wood,flour,milk is all) -
- not fancy schmancy stuff -
which can come later if we so (ughhh!) desire.

~*~

What happens if there's no method for a local region to attain autonomy in the very few items which are required for survival?

Change.

Population reduction, migration most likely.

But won't this idea have severe implications on the ultra- high concentration of people within urban settlements?

absolutely yes -
- a return to the country

'... ... back to the garden'

The images of those villages from the recent Lord of the Ring movies over a huge dirty great fat invisible virtual wireless information pipe.

In the Lord of the Rings - the hobbits were forced to leave their happy home existence to defeat the ring -
the ring representing a metaphor for bad greed -

- the journey of man -
to reach an understanding of the need for control of and then the personal quest to overcome greed.

In LOTR -
the transition which is being described is of the life cycle of man

1. The ascendancy of the parasympathetic nervous system (at birth) -> hobbits at home
2. The ascendancy of the sympathetic nervous system (at mind) -> hobbits leaving home
3. The return of the parasympathetic nervous system at wisdom -> hobbits returning home victorious

The Lord of the Rings is the individual at state : wisdom
- Prof Pat's avatar and Prof Pat's post to Frederick in 'An idea' (based upon his avatar) leaps to mind.

[SB_UK]

:: Steve A ::

The idea of freedom to up and move seems (at first consideration) to be good -
- however I wonder whether we're missing out on the nature of man (here).

Each and every baby is pretty much the same -
very small differences exist at the anatomical level -
- translated onto the mental level -
finding it hard to shake the idea that we all actually want the same thing

- and that the same thing is realised not when we separate society into expertise -
instead when we permit all communities to contain all expertise
- giving the local individual greater choice.

The internet allows this to happen.

~*~

Using only your examples of alcohol, smoking, marijuana, same sex marriages
- a scientific argument which defines why we engage in these behaviours and whether they're damaging or not helps us to reach a state of understanding which shapes policy.

Following a scientific understanding of homosexuality -
same sex marriages are designated as outside of the scope of law -
- the law has no right to prevent people from forming alliances based on natural human behaviour
(attraction between mental level opposites regardless of physical level designation)
- and those other behaviours (the addictive set) are defined as necessary (though damaging) for stimulation in an unstimulating world -
- in a world where money buys stimulation and where poor people (as do all people) need stimulation
- not being able to satisfy one's own mind leads to whichever behaviours are possible (regardles of legality) to satisfy that not negotiable desire for neural stimulation.
For instance - why do pretty little Hollywood actresses who have everything shop-lift?
The need for speed- which (from her behaviour) it looks as though even money (beyond a threshold) cannot even buy.
Money appears to work only up unto a point; that point is reached more quickly with proper education
- is the reason why education brings the desire for activism
- to change things around for the better for all.

from Mikal
'all for one ... ... ...'

~*~

Summary

An attempt to suggest that we need to understand why people engage in certain behaviours prior to segregating society based on engagement.
If we attempt to understand behaviours -
then we'll find that we can partition them into effectively good or effectively bad.

If they're effectively bad (addictive behaviours for instance)
- then we need to work towards them no longer being attractive; telling people not to engage under threat of reprisal (the legal system) just can't work.

'Greed clouds better judgement' is the very simple - perhaps only idea I'm expressing here.
Tackle the underlying problem and we're there -
the underlying problem is that greed ain't going no place -
and that it needs some place nice to play; that need for speed until we grow to both feel and understand our context.

If we attempt to understand behaviours -
then we'll find that we can partition them into effectively good or effectively bad.

If they're effectively good (aspects of nature) (physical level independence in marriage) - then we should encourage these behaviours to be incorporated into all
and not just selective
communities.

~*~

This post is nothing more than an attempt (from ADDF::~Boots~) to identify whether it's in our species' best interests in allowing people to have a favourite colour.

It's OK to have a favourite colour in pants (if you must)
- not OK to have a favourite colour in people.

The important question though being why do people feel as though they need to have a certain colour g string?
favourite colour in people?

- because no matter how much one tells another that they're not allowed to be racist -
racist they will be until they understand themselves sufficiently
- in the specific case of racism -
the urge to be a part of society which turns from being a part of society into attacking those who aren't a part of one's immediate society
is all.

The answer (almost across the board) appears to be to form a global community -
- global community in which maximal permissible diversity is permitted homogenously in all regions

- complete freedom for a local community to do as it will (although initially attractive as a model)
will fail unless we can ensure that the local communities are shaped by wisdom.

Construct local communities with local freedom to determine policy -
- and one ends up with what we have currently

- countries fighting wars.

Does the parent repress his child through taking the role of policy setter in his children's early years?
Would we want a society run by the worst of immature minds (ref. Lord of the Flies) on equal footing with more sophisticated models for internal community interaction.

~*~

Summary II

Answer the question of
'Why ? do people want to do {insert everything}'
- and we've a basis for stratifying behaviours into
good for all
versus
bad for all.
Allow all to be given access to 'good for all' and give people sufficient information to understand why they want to engage in behaviours which're bad for all.

Cigarette smoking is a perfect example of a poor addictive behaviour which people cannot turn their back on regardless of knowing that it's destroying their health -
- it's a classical addictive behaviour which societal change and societal change only will solve by delivering a parasympathetic nervous system conducive environment where exogenous nicotinic receptor agonism is no longer required due to endogenous activation of our parasympathetic nicotinic Acetylcholine receptors.

The same goes for all addictive behaviours
- the EndoCS for instance.

We need to understand the association between addiction, greed and societal repression.

Society currently serves to place barriers in the way of the life cycle of man.

Imagine man to be a caterpillar (locust) -
in a living prison thanks to society cementing him into his pupa -
- preventing him from escape to life.

As every butterfly knows -
- life truly begins at 40

... ... ... at least if we (society) let it.