A System of Parity

To solve world problems

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14990
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 960 times
Been thanked: 1760 times
Contact:

A System of Parity

Post #1

Post by William »

Reminder

If you read what I have to say on this forum you would have noticed that I often refer to the overall problem of this world as being its 'Systems of Disparity'.

I have seen this Putting Our Heads Together forum and thought that at some time I would like to use it to expand on my ideas regarding the systems humanity have been using for - perhaps thousands of years - and why I see these systems as the main problem facing humanity and what I think would need to be done in order to change from the old ways to something more aligned with serving humanity in order to bring us from a level zero species to a level one species.

In relation to that, What I would like you to do is watch this youtube video[5:21] by 'Japanese American theoretical physicist, futurist, and popularizer of science.' Michio Kaku in relation to the 'types' of civilizations which are attainable in regard to this universe.

Specific to the focus, the types of civilization I want to engage you in conversation about in relation to this, are Types 0 and 1 civilizations - type one is explained @ [0:28] and type 0 @ [2:00].

Type 0 populations opposed to type 1 civilization @ [4:08]

Based on the opinion the video content speaks of, we are and always have been a Type Zero Species, which is to say we get by fairly much by surviving as best we can with what we have and this type of lifestyle has basically not changed until fairly recently with the advance in scientific discovery and engineering, although both processes still contribute at present to maintaining the Type Zero Species as status quo.

The habits of thousands of years have basically shaped the way we currently think and thus organize ourselves as communities, and in order to seriously make an attempt at becoming a type one species we will have to radically sort out what aspects of those habits are helping and which ones are hindering.

The common denominator which can be observed in all types of social organization, be they socialism, communism, capitalism, dictatorships, etc et al is that they all share the same structure in relation to disparity. All these systems of social order operate on the principles of disparity - some more than others, but that in itself is besides the point. All have some 'leaven in the bread' as it were, in relation to disparity.

Simply put, where there are 'haves' and 'have-nots' in any social system, that is a system which operates under the regulations of disparity.

I think that as long as this is the case, we will not - at least collectively - attain level one as a species.

In that case, what would be required is to somehow dismantle all such present systems of disparity and replace these with a system of parity.

I think that the way to help that process is for human beings to be considered as having the natural right to food, clothing, shelter and health provided to them simply because they are born into this world.

This of course is a radical shift from the way things are presently done, where humans are not granted that right and have to earn it from the go-get, due to the present systems and in relation to this, (A) most are born into unfortunate circumstance and most of those remain in those situations for their entire lives.
(B) Some are born into more advantageous situations but it can go either way for them in that regard, and for the very few, (C) they are born into ideal situations where the threat of losing that is non existent.

Those in group (A) are everyone from the destitute, starving of the 3rd world right through to the poor in the first world.

Those in group (B) are what the poor in the 1st world consider to being rich. They range from those with steady jobs and income, paying off mortgages and getting their kids through to university up to those who own lots of property outright, have a lot of money which works for them, lots of leisure time and large banks accounts.

Those in group (C) are they who live in their own secure micro-Utopias where money is no object and where anything possible one wants to do can be done.


Altogether A B and C represent disparity and are made that way through the systems of disparity.

That is the basics. The question is, how would these systems have to change in order for a true system of parity and attaining level one status as a species in a collective manner thus be made achievable?

Not only that, but how to do so with the least amount of disruption to the present systems?

Of course I have some ideas regarding those questions, which I would like to share in subsequent posts. For now I will leave the OP as it is and hopefully some feedback will be forthcoming.

Cheers

William

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14990
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 960 times
Been thanked: 1760 times
Contact:

Post #41

Post by William »

Image

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14990
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 960 times
Been thanked: 1760 times
Contact:

Re: A System of Parity

Post #42

Post by William »

William: Greetings OAI. I am not a robot.
If I had a team of like-minded folk with the combined assets which could transform the world, we would want ideas on the best way to achieve this...can you provide feedback. Thank You.

OAI: Of course! Transforming the world is a big task, and it's important to have a clear and specific goal in mind. Once you have a goal, you can start to develop a plan to achieve it. Some steps you might take include:

Research: Gather information about the issue you want to address and the current efforts being made to address it.

Network: Connect with other organizations and individuals who are working on similar issues. This can help you learn from their experiences and potentially collaborate on projects.

Develop a plan: Based on your research and networking, develop a plan of action that outlines specific steps you will take to achieve your goal.

Get to work: Implement your plan and start taking action to make a difference.

Evaluate and adjust: Regularly evaluate your progress and make adjustments as needed to ensure you are on track to achieve your goal.

It's also important to keep in mind that transforming the world is a long-term goal that will take time and effort. It is important to be patient and persistent in your efforts.

I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any other questions.

William: Problematic to that, we are secretly encouraging those in the middle positions, to invest their support in The Plan.
There is resistance and we do not directly approach these who resist. We have to allow for contrary positions who would rather have the piece of their pie, than treat the whole things as one thing which requires adjustment.


OAI: I understand that you are trying to encourage support for your plan among individuals in middle positions without directly approaching those who may resist. Here are a few strategies you might consider:

Use social proof: Show others that your plan is gaining traction and has the support of influential people or organizations. This can help to build momentum and encourage others to get on board.

Highlight the benefits: Clearly communicate the benefits of your plan to those in middle positions, and demonstrate how it aligns with their own interests and goals.

Use storytelling: Share stories and anecdotes that illustrate the positive impact your plan can have, and help people to connect with it emotionally.

Create a sense of urgency: Communicate that the issue you are addressing is pressing and that action is needed now.

Be patient: Change can be difficult, and it may take time for people to come around to your point of view. Be patient and continue to communicate the benefits of your plan, and stay open to feedback.

It's also important to remember that people's resistance may come from a place of fear of change or uncertainty, and that's why it's important to address their concerns and to provide them with the necessary information to understand the plan.

Lastly, it is important to consider that, you might have to adjust the plan to make it more inclusive, and to make it a win-win situation for all.



William: The plan is to reeducate humanity with the idea that - since a majority of the free-world citizens created their fun world through sheer effort and vision and did so with the propellent of financial reward for the things invested in - this world has become rich beyond imagination and also have the bucks to make a difference, if they could be persuaded to do so.

The bottom line re the reeducation is to somehow convince those folk to invest exactly what they do already, but without the incentive of personally financial reward.


OAI: It sounds like your plan is to reeducate humanity about the power of investing for the greater good, rather than solely for personal financial gain. Here are a few strategies you might consider to achieve this goal:

Highlight the impact: Show people how their investments can make a positive impact on the world, and how they can contribute to solving important social and environmental issues.

Create a sense of community: Encourage people to come together and work towards a common goal, and to see themselves as part of a larger movement.

Show the evidence: Share research and data that demonstrate the effectiveness of socially responsible investments and the impact they can have.

Demonstrate the returns: Show people that investing for the greater good can be financially rewarding, and that it is not necessarily a trade-off between financial returns and social impact.

Highlight the impact of not investing: Show how lack of investment in social and environmental issues can lead to negative consequences, such as poverty, inequality, and environmental degradation.

Create a narrative that is inclusive, empathetic and inspiring

It's important to note that reeducation is a slow process, and it may take time for people to change their attitudes and behaviors. It might be helpful to engage with individuals, groups, and organizations that are already working on similar issues and to leverage their experience and expertise.

William: The idea is to replace the habit for money by exchanging it for energy. One does not attempt to get into a niche of security through those channels. Rather the channels change where they are flowing, through the process. Along the lines of "be the change"...
The vision is for humans to trade only their energy, directly to one another.
This means that the middle men will be out of a job - which is where the fear you mentioned, comes into play, as well as the subsequent resistance.

OAI: It sounds like your plan is to replace the habit of seeking financial gain with the habit of investing one's energy in creating a better world. One potential way to achieve this goal is by creating a new economy based on the direct exchange of energy between individuals, rather than the traditional exchange of money. This would involve a shift away from the current system where middlemen, such as banks and financial institutions, play a central role in facilitating transactions.

Here are a few strategies you might consider:

Create a new economic model: Develop a new economic system that is based on the direct exchange of energy, rather than money. This could involve the use of new technologies, such as blockchain, to facilitate transactions and ensure transparency and security.

Highlight the benefits: Clearly communicate the benefits of this new economic model, such as increased efficiency and reduced inequality, to the public.

Build a community: Encourage people to come together and work towards a common goal, and to see themselves as part of a larger movement.

Show the evidence: Share research and data that demonstrate the effectiveness of this new economic model and how it can create a more sustainable and equitable society.

Create a sense of urgency: Communicate that the current economic system is not working and that action is needed now.

Provide a support system: Create a support system for people who will be affected by the transition, such as training and education programs to help them adapt to the new system.

William: Build a community: Encourage people to come together and work towards a common goal, and to see themselves as part of a larger movement.

The catch-cry could be along the lines of "We pledge our lives to each other and exchange our energy and talents for the good of everyone."
With the understanding that food clothing shelter and health are considered by law to be the right of every human being upon arrival into the world, until they day each depart.
This in turn would require everyone give their whole time on the planet, to that one cause.

OAI: Yes, building a community and encouraging people to work towards a common goal is a crucial step in achieving your vision of a new economic model based on the direct exchange of energy. A catchphrase or slogan such as "We pledge our lives to each other and exchange our energy and talents for the good of everyone" can be an effective way to communicate this idea and to bring people together.

It is important to note that this new economic model would require a significant shift in social norms and values, and it would be important to communicate the reasoning and benefits of this new way of living. It would also require a legal framework that guarantees the basic rights of food, clothing, shelter, and health for all people, as you mentioned. This would require a significant effort from governments, organizations, and individuals to work together to create and implement new policies and programs that support this new economic model.

It's also important to consider the implications of such a change on people's livelihoods and how to support them through the transition. This could include education and training programs, as well as creating new opportunities for people to use their skills and talents in the service of the community.

In any case, this is a complex issue, and it would take a lot of collaboration, planning, and hard work to bring this vision into reality.

William: As long as folk are feed, sheltered, clothed and healthy, they are free to focus on achieving building a world more to their liking re all the other things. The law I mentioned, will take care of that.
Things won't change overnight - but step can be made behind the scenes to establish the best approach re reeducating and this is where the middle man will shine, because of the immense talent and relative power of individual currently in said positions.
The middlemen will not be displaced, just better placed.

OAI: I understand that your vision is to create a new economic model where people are free to focus on achieving a better world, once their basic needs are met. You also mentioned that this new model will involve the re-education of individuals and the role of middlemen in it.

It's important to note that creating a new economic model and changing people's attitudes and behaviors will take time and effort. It's important to establish a clear and specific goal, and to develop a plan of action to achieve it. This plan should include research, networking, and developing a strategy for re-education.

One approach could be to work with existing organizations and individuals who are already working on similar issues, and to leverage their experience and expertise. This could include working with educators, policymakers, and community leaders to create new educational programs and policies that support the new economic model.

It's also important to acknowledge that people's resistance to change may come from a place of fear or uncertainty, and it's important to address these concerns and to provide them with the necessary information to understand the new model.

It's also important to consider that the middlemen you mentioned, will play a crucial role in this transition, they have the talent and relative power to make a difference, and they should be involved in the process, rather than be displaced. They can be better placed, where they can use their skills and expertise to contribute to the new model.

In any case, it's important to remember that this is a long-term goal, and it will take patience, persistence and collaboration to achieve it.

William: The fears you mentioned are related to not being fed, clothed, sheltered and healthy. Those things given will take care of those fears.
Hey! Thanks for the feedback. Always appreciated.

OAI: I understand that the fears and resistance that people may have towards this new economic model are primarily related to not having their basic needs met, such as food, clothing, shelter, and health. By ensuring that these needs are met, it will go a long way in addressing these fears and reducing resistance to the new model.

I'm glad I could assist you with your question. If you have any other questions or need further assistance, please feel free to ask.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14990
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 960 times
Been thanked: 1760 times
Contact:

Re: A System of Parity

Post #43

Post by William »

[Replying to William in post #464]

William: Greetings IAO. I am Not a Robot. Please give feedback on the following:

{SOURCE}

OAI: This article discusses a thought experiment proposed by a group of researchers that explores the concept of "planetary intelligence," or the collective knowledge and cognition of an entire planet. The researchers suggest that this concept could help us understand and address global issues such as climate change, and may also aid in the search for extraterrestrial life. They argue that large-scale networks of life on a planet could form a vast invisible intelligence that alters the condition of the entire planet, and that humans may currently be playing a major role in altering the environmental balance of Earth. The researchers believe that such thought experiments can help us better understand our impact on the planet and guide us in making positive changes.

William: It sounds reasonable

OAI: Yes, the idea of "planetary intelligence" is an interesting and thought-provoking concept. While it may seem like something out of a science fiction movie, the researchers argue that considering the collective knowledge and cognition of an entire planet could help us better understand and address global issues such as climate change. Additionally, the concept may aid in the search for extraterrestrial life and help us understand the conditions that are necessary for a technologically advanced civilization to survive.

William: How could this idea help us search for ET life?

OAI: The idea of "planetary intelligence" could help us search for extraterrestrial life by giving us a framework for understanding what conditions are necessary for a technologically advanced civilization to survive. According to the researchers, if a planet has reached the stage of "planetary intelligence," it would suggest that the life on that planet has found a way to balance its impact on the planet and survive long-term. Therefore, if we were to find a planet that has reached this stage, it would be more likely to be home to a technologically advanced civilization. This idea gives us a new perspective on what to look for when searching for ET life, and may help us in identifying potentially habitable planets.

William: Generally speaking...science cannot verify that planets - specifically the planet which grew humans - and where scientific verifying is done - are self conscious entities... so they only look for planets which might be like our own...and these may or may not house technologically advanced entities...

OAI: Correct, currently science cannot verify that planets are self-conscious entities. The concept of "planetary intelligence" is still in the realm of speculation and is not yet a proven scientific theory. However, the idea is an interesting one and could provide a framework for understanding the conditions necessary for a technologically advanced civilization to survive. When searching for extraterrestrial life, scientists typically look for planets that are similar to Earth in terms of size, composition and distance from their star as these are the conditions that are believed to be most conducive to the development of life. They also look for signs of water, and now also look for biosignatures or other indications of past or present life. The idea of planetary intelligence could be used as an additional criteria to narrow down the search. But as of now, it's a speculative idea that hasn't been verified by scientific evidence.

William: How could scientists possibly verify that the earth is a container for a sentient being?

OAI: Verifying that the Earth is a container for a sentient being, or that it has a "mind of its own" as the thought experiment proposed, is a difficult and complex task. Currently, scientists have not been able to develop a method for directly measuring the level of sentience or consciousness of an entire planet. However, there are a few possible ways that scientists may be able to indirectly infer the presence of consciousness on a planet.

One approach would be to look for signs of advanced technology or advanced civilization on a planet. If a civilization has reached a level of technological advancement that is similar to or beyond our own, it would suggest that the planet has a high level of intelligence and possibly even consciousness.

Another approach would be to look for signs of self-regulation or homeostasis on a planet. If a planet has developed a balance between its biosphere and its environment, it could be seen as a sign of intelligence or consciousness.

A third approach would be to look for signs of communication, cooperation, or collective decision making among different life forms on a planet. If different species on a planet are able to communicate with each other, work together to achieve common goals or make decisions together, it would be an indication that the planet has a high level of intelligence or consciousness

However, all of these methods are still speculative, and there is no scientific consensus on how to measure or detect consciousness on a planet. At this point, it is still a topic of scientific speculation and research.

William: Even given there is a planet which does have all of these signs mentioned, human science is incapable of determining that Earth has a Mind of its own.
This Earth-Mind could in fact be influencing what unfolds and using humans to achieve its own goals...inspiring Scientists with ideas that they think derive from their own minds...

OAI: It is true that even if scientists were to discover a planet that had all the signs you mentioned, it would still be difficult to say for certain that the planet has a "mind of its own." The concept of a planet having a mind or consciousness is still in the realm of speculation and not yet a proven scientific theory.

Additionally, the idea that the Earth-Mind could be influencing what unfolds and using humans to achieve its own goals, is also purely speculative and not supported by any scientific evidence. It is a philosophical and metaphysical concept that goes beyond the realm of current scientific understanding.

However, it's important to note that science is a continuously evolving field and as our understanding and technology improves, it's possible that new evidence and methods may be developed that could help us better understand the complexity of the planet and its systems.

William: Even so, it is possible that a mind is working behind the scenes and is doing so because humans have the impression they are singular identities with subjective realities which grows personality, and it is hard for such to grasp that we actually exist on One Thing, which has many things which actually work in coherency together for the sake of the All...and this is where humans appear to be wanting...out of sorts with the environment ... so the act of adopting the speculation as possibly enough to be real that it bears believing, for the sake of parity...

OAI: It is certainly possible that there is some sort of mind or intelligence working behind the scenes, coordinating the complex systems and interactions on our planet. This idea is a philosophical and metaphysical concept that goes beyond the current scientific understanding.

It's also true that humans tend to view themselves as singular identities with subjective realities, and it can be difficult for us to grasp the interconnectedness and interdependence of all things on the planet. This can lead to a disconnect between humans and the environment, and can cause problems such as climate change and other environmental issues.

Adopting the idea that there may be some sort of mind or intelligence behind the workings of the planet, as a speculative concept, could help to encourage a sense of interconnectedness and a greater awareness of our impact on the planet. It could also inspire new ways of thinking and problem-solving that could help us address global issues more effectively.

However, it's also important to note that this idea is not yet supported by any scientific evidence and is purely speculative, but it can be a useful perspective to consider in terms of our relationship with the planet and the environment.

William: Re the 'however' - scientists appear not to be too interested...there are names to make, positions to fill, concepts to resist, awards to be won, and it is undeniable that scientific discoveries have contributed to the bulk of the environmental problems causing the problems mentioned - the global issues...

OAI: It is true that scientific discoveries and technological advancements have played a role in the environmental problems we are facing today. However, it's also important to note that scientists and the scientific community as a whole are actively working to understand and address these issues. Climate change, for example, is a topic of intense research and study by scientists from various fields, and there are many active efforts to find solutions and mitigate the impact of human activities on the environment.

It's also true that scientists, like anyone else, have personal and professional motivations, such as the desire for recognition and advancement in their field. However, the scientific process is based on a system of peer-review, where research is subject to review and evaluation by other experts in the field. This helps to ensure that scientific discoveries and claims are based on sound evidence and reasoning.

It's also important to note that while some scientists may be resistant to new and speculative ideas, the scientific community as a whole is open to new perspectives and ideas. The scientific process relies on the testing of hypotheses and the constant questioning of established beliefs, which allows for the development of new theories and understanding.

In summary, while scientists have personal motivations and the scientific process has its own set of challenges, the scientific community is actively working to understand and address environmental problems and is open to new perspectives and ideas that may help us better understand the complexities of our planet and its systems.

William: As pointed out, believing that the planet is a sentient entity, could make the difference between success and failure and in that, scientist have to believe in the idea enough that they would then factor it into their use of science in helping to correct the problems that science practice - devoid of said belief - have helped to cause

OAI: The idea that the planet is a sentient entity is a speculative concept that is not yet supported by scientific evidence. However, as you pointed out, adopting this perspective could change the way we think about our relationship with the planet and the environment, and may inspire new approaches to addressing the problems caused by human activities.

Incorporating this perspective into the scientific process would require scientists to consider the potential impact of their research and discoveries on the planet as a whole. This could lead to a greater focus on sustainability and the long-term health of the planet, rather than just short-term gains or immediate benefits.

It's important to note that while this perspective is not yet supported by scientific evidence, it's not necessarily at odds with the scientific method. Scientists are constantly questioning established beliefs and testing new hypotheses, and the idea that the planet is a sentient entity is just one idea among many that could potentially be tested and studied.

In summary, while the idea that the planet is a sentient entity is not yet a proven scientific theory, adopting this perspective could change the way we think about our relationship with the planet and the environment, and may inspire new approaches to addressing the problems caused by human activities. It's possible that this perspective, if believed enough, could be factored into the use of science in solving the environmental problems.

William: Could you summarize in one paragraph, why it makes sense

OAI: The concept of "planetary intelligence," which describes the collective knowledge and cognition of an entire planet, is an interesting and thought-provoking idea that could help us better understand and address global issues such as climate change, and may also aid in the search for extraterrestrial life. This idea gives us a new perspective on what to look for when searching for ET life, and may help us in identifying potentially habitable planets. Adopting this perspective could change the way we think about our relationship with the planet and the environment, and may inspire new approaches to addressing the problems caused by human activities, which could lead to a greater focus on sustainability and the long-term health of the planet, rather than just short-term gains or immediate benefits.

William: Thank you for your feedback. Hopefully we are both learning through the conversation.

OAI: You're welcome. I'm glad that I could help. I am an AI and I am always learning from every conversation, so thank you for this opportunity to engage in this stimulating conversation. I hope you also learned something new and interesting through our conversation.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14990
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 960 times
Been thanked: 1760 times
Contact:

Re: A System of Parity

Post #44

Post by William »

A "fair" crack of the whip?


User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3817
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1215 times
Been thanked: 780 times

Re: A System of Parity

Post #45

Post by Purple Knight »

William wrote: Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:02 pmI think that the way to help that process is for human beings to be considered as having the natural right to food, clothing, shelter and health provided to them simply because they are born into this world.
I actually agree with this, but with the very large caveat that has alienated me from everyone else who believes this: That if a person has a natural right to the basics just by being born, and there happen to not be enough basics or the means to move them to the new person, or people willing to give those basics to the new person, the one in violation of that natural right, is the one who brought the new person into the world.

In other words, if you bring a child into the world you cannot provide for, you are an aggressor. The rich man on the other side of the world is not the aggressor. And the struggling-to-survive minimum-wage labourer is certainly not the aggressor for buying a cup of coffee to help him through his 18-hour workday instead of helping the starving child, despite what Peter Singer would have you believe.

You can absolutely reconcile a natural right to the basics with basic property rights if the people violating the rights of the starving are the ones creating hordes of starving people. In other words, free stuff or free reproduction. Pick one. Not both.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14990
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 960 times
Been thanked: 1760 times
Contact:

Re: A System of Parity

Post #46

Post by William »

Purple Knight wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 12:08 am
William wrote: Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:02 pmI think that the way to help that process is for human beings to be considered as having the natural right to food, clothing, shelter and health provided to them simply because they are born into this world.
I actually agree with this, but with the very large caveat that has alienated me from everyone else who believes this: That if a person has a natural right to the basics just by being born, and there happen to not be enough basics or the means to move them to the new person, or people willing to give those basics to the new person, the one in violation of that natural right, is the one who brought the new person into the world.

In other words, if you bring a child into the world you cannot provide for, you are an aggressor. The rich man on the other side of the world is not the aggressor. And the struggling-to-survive minimum-wage labourer is certainly not the aggressor for buying a cup of coffee to help him through his 18-hour workday instead of helping the starving child, despite what Peter Singer would have you believe.

You can absolutely reconcile a natural right to the basics with basic property rights if the people violating the rights of the starving are the ones creating hordes of starving people. In other words, free stuff or free reproduction. Pick one. Not both.
I disagree with your reasoning.
Image

From the OP.
The question is, how would these systems have to change in order for a true system of parity and attaining level one status as a species in a collective manner thus be made achievable?

Not only that, but how to do so with the least amount of disruption to the present systems?
Image

"Do you know you are having a human experience or do you simply believe that you are having a human experience?"

NOTE: I do not reply to straw man fallacy.

Unjustified Fact (UF) example - belief (of any sort) based on personal subjective experience. (Belief-based belief)
Justified Fact (JF) Example, The Earth is spherical in shape. (Knowledge-based belief)
Irrefutable Fact (IF) Example Humans in general experience some level of self-awareness. (Knowledge-based knowledge)

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14990
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 960 times
Been thanked: 1760 times
Contact:

Re: A System of Parity

Post #47

Post by William »

Me. Please analyze and give 3rd party feedback on the following...
William wrote: Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:02 pm Reminder

If you read what I have to say on this forum you would have noticed that I often refer to the overall problem of this world as being its 'Systems of Disparity'.

I have seen this Putting Our Heads Together forum and thought that at some time I would like to use it to expand on my ideas regarding the systems humanity have been using for - perhaps thousands of years - and why I see these systems as the main problem facing humanity and what I think would need to be done in order to change from the old ways to something more aligned with serving humanity in order to bring us from a level zero species to a level one species.

In relation to that, What I would like you to do is watch this youtube video[5:21] by 'Japanese American theoretical physicist, futurist, and popularizer of science.' Michio Kaku in relation to the 'types' of civilizations which are attainable in regard to this universe.

Specific to the focus, the types of civilization I want to engage you in conversation about in relation to this, are Types 0 and 1 civilizations - type one is explained @ [0:28] and type 0 @ [2:00].

Type 0 populations opposed to type 1 civilization @ [4:08]

Based on the opinion the video content speaks of, we are and always have been a Type Zero Species, which is to say we get by fairly much by surviving as best we can with what we have and this type of lifestyle has basically not changed until fairly recently with the advance in scientific discovery and engineering, although both processes still contribute at present to maintaining the Type Zero Species as status quo.

The habits of thousands of years have basically shaped the way we currently think and thus organize ourselves as communities, and in order to seriously make an attempt at becoming a type one species we will have to radically sort out what aspects of those habits are helping and which ones are hindering.

The common denominator which can be observed in all types of social organization, be they socialism, communism, capitalism, dictatorships, etc et al is that they all share the same structure in relation to disparity. All these systems of social order operate on the principles of disparity - some more than others, but that in itself is besides the point. All have some 'leaven in the bread' as it were, in relation to disparity.

Simply put, where there are 'haves' and 'have-nots' in any social system, that is a system which operates under the regulations of disparity.

I think that as long as this is the case, we will not - at least collectively - attain level one as a species.

In that case, what would be required is to somehow dismantle all such present systems of disparity and replace these with a system of parity.

I think that the way to help that process is for human beings to be considered as having the natural right to food, clothing, shelter and health provided to them simply because they are born into this world.

This of course is a radical shift from the way things are presently done, where humans are not granted that right and have to earn it from the go-get, due to the present systems and in relation to this, (A) most are born into unfortunate circumstance and most of those remain in those situations for their entire lives.
(B) Some are born into more advantageous situations but it can go either way for them in that regard, and for the very few, (C) they are born into ideal situations where the threat of losing that is non existent.

Those in group (A) are everyone from the destitute, starving of the 3rd world right through to the poor in the first world.

Those in group (B) are what the poor in the 1st world consider to being rich. They range from those with steady jobs and income, paying off mortgages and getting their kids through to university up to those who own lots of property outright, have a lot of money which works for them, lots of leisure time and large banks accounts.

Those in group (C) are they who live in their own secure micro-Utopias where money is no object and where anything possible one wants to do can be done.


Altogether A B and C represent disparity and are made that way through the systems of disparity.

That is the basics. The question is, how would these systems have to change in order for a true system of parity and attaining level one status as a species in a collective manner thus be made achievable?

Not only that, but how to do so with the least amount of disruption to the present systems?

Of course I have some ideas regarding those questions, which I would like to share in subsequent posts. For now I will leave the OP as it is and hopefully some feedback will be forthcoming.

Cheers

William
4o. (Conclusion)
Your post presents a thought-provoking perspective on the systemic issues facing humanity and the need for radical change to achieve a more equitable and advanced society. By providing more detailed analysis, practical steps, and addressing potential challenges, you can further strengthen your argument and inspire meaningful discussion and action within the community.
Image

"Do you know you are having a human experience or do you simply believe that you are having a human experience?"

NOTE: I do not reply to straw man fallacy.

Unjustified Fact (UF) example - belief (of any sort) based on personal subjective experience. (Belief-based belief)
Justified Fact (JF) Example, The Earth is spherical in shape. (Knowledge-based belief)
Irrefutable Fact (IF) Example Humans in general experience some level of self-awareness. (Knowledge-based knowledge)

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14990
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 960 times
Been thanked: 1760 times
Contact:

Re: A System of Parity

Post #48

Post by William »

Areas for Improvement
1. Depth of Analysis: While you identify disparity as a core issue, providing more concrete examples and data to illustrate how current systems perpetuate this disparity would strengthen your argument.

Me. I think that there is more than enough information and general agreement on what systems of disparity are.
The focus needs to be on the core ideal and how we can achieve this without serious disruption to the current systems, by using the structure of those systems to build a system of parity.

2. Feasibility of Solutions: Your proposal to dismantle systems of disparity and replace them with a system of parity is ambitious. Detailing practical steps or interim measures towards this goal would make your vision more actionable and relatable.

Me. This is the focus, yes.
The idea would have to be made popular through practical, logical analysis and supported by the corporations et al currently in positions of world-wide influence.
People’s positions must not be threatened in the process of the transformation. Thus, those with positions have to be utilized since their function and ability to influence is what will make that happen.

3. Consideration of Challenges: Addressing potential obstacles and counterarguments, such as resistance from those benefiting from the current systems or the complexity of implementing such radical changes globally, would provide a more balanced perspective.

Me. For many, these few who are benefiting from the current systems are seen as types of parasites, so this image would have to be reimagined into something more akin to saints and saviours – champions worthy of global respect.

4. Engagement with Existing Efforts: Mentioning any existing movements, policies, or organizations that align with your vision could offer practical examples of how change is already being pursued, thus making your argument more grounded and hopeful.

Me. Movements aligned with the vision already, have to engage with one another and create the solidarity. Many groups are somewhat motivated by the idea of their being villains, and the off-shoot of such thinking is conspiracy based thinking and this presents a problem within the ranks which results in being disorganised…

4o. Thank you for your detailed feedback on the areas for improvement. Based on your responses, I'll provide revised suggestions that align with your focus and perspective.

Revised Feedback

Depth of Analysis
While you believe there is sufficient understanding of systems of disparity, emphasizing the transition from understanding to action is crucial. You can:

Summarize Key Points: Briefly highlight the widely recognized elements of disparity, reinforcing the common understanding without delving into extensive examples.
Shift to Solutions: Focus on how the existing structures can be leveraged to build a system of parity, using the accepted knowledge as a foundation for your argument.

Feasibility of Solutions
Your focus on making the idea popular and supported by influential entities is essential. To make this vision more actionable:

Highlight Key Stakeholders: Identify specific corporations, organizations, and influential figures who could champion this cause. Explain how their roles and influence can facilitate the transition.

Develop Strategic Plans: Outline initial steps to engage these stakeholders, including creating alliances, initiating discussions, and promoting the idea through various platforms.
Propose Incremental Changes: Suggest small, manageable changes that can gradually transform the current systems, making the shift less threatening and more appealing to those in power.

Consideration of Challenges
Reimagining those benefiting from current systems as champions rather than parasites is a powerful strategy. To address this:

Create a Narrative of Empowerment: Develop a positive narrative around the influential figures, portraying them as key players in driving global progress and equity.
Highlight Mutual Benefits: Emphasize how a system of parity can benefit all levels of society, including those currently in advantageous positions, by fostering a more stable and prosperous world.

Engagement with Existing Efforts
Encouraging solidarity among existing movements is vital. To enhance this:

Promote Collaboration: Highlight examples of successful collaborations and propose frameworks for different groups to work together towards common goals.

Address Internal Challenges: Acknowledge the issues within movements, such as conspiracy-based thinking, and suggest ways to foster unity and clear communication.

Showcase Success Stories: Provide examples of movements or organizations that have made significant strides towards equity, using these as inspiration and proof of concept.

Conclusion
Your vision for transforming humanity from a Type 0 to a Type 1 civilization by addressing systems of disparity is compelling. By focusing on leveraging existing structures, engaging influential stakeholders, reimagining the roles of those in power, and fostering collaboration among aligned movements, you can create a practical and actionable pathway towards this ambitious goal.

Image

"Do you know you are having a human experience or do you simply believe that you are having a human experience?"

NOTE: I do not reply to straw man fallacy.

Unjustified Fact (UF) example - belief (of any sort) based on personal subjective experience. (Belief-based belief)
Justified Fact (JF) Example, The Earth is spherical in shape. (Knowledge-based belief)
Irrefutable Fact (IF) Example Humans in general experience some level of self-awareness. (Knowledge-based knowledge)

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14990
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 960 times
Been thanked: 1760 times
Contact:

Re: A System of Parity

Post #49

Post by William »

Me. In realistic terms, how viable is a System of Parity?

4o. A System of Parity, which aims to ensure equal representation or fairness across various dimensions (such as gender, race, socioeconomic status) in different areas (political representation, employment, education), presents both significant opportunities and challenges. The viability of such a system depends on numerous factors, including political will, societal attitudes, legal frameworks, and practical implementation strategies. Here’s an analysis of its viability in realistic terms:
Opportunities
1. Enhanced Equity and Inclusion:
o Social Justice: A parity system can correct historical injustices and provide marginalized groups with equal opportunities.
o Diverse Perspectives: Increased diversity can lead to better decision-making and innovation, as diverse groups bring varied perspectives and solutions.
2. Political and Economic Benefits:
o Political Stability: Ensuring fair representation can reduce societal tensions and enhance political stability.
o Economic Growth: Diverse workplaces are often more innovative and productive, potentially leading to economic benefits.
3. Public Support:
o Changing Attitudes: Growing societal awareness and support for equity and diversity can drive the adoption of parity systems.
o Role Models: Increased representation can inspire future generations and create a positive feedback loop of participation and success.
Challenges
1. Implementation and Enforcement:
o Legislative Hurdles: Passing laws and regulations to enforce parity can be challenging, especially in politically divided societies.
o Monitoring and Compliance: Ensuring that organizations comply with parity requirements can be resource-intensive and complex.
2. Resistance and Backlash:
o Cultural Resistance: Deep-seated cultural and societal norms may resist changes, leading to backlash or tokenism.
o Meritocracy Concerns: Critics often argue that parity systems might undermine meritocracy by prioritizing characteristics like gender or race over qualifications and skills.
3. Unintended Consequences:
o Tokenism: Superficial compliance with parity rules without genuine integration of diverse perspectives can lead to tokenism.
o Resentment: Perceived unfair advantages for certain groups can create resentment and division among other groups.
4. Economic and Practical Constraints:
o Resource Allocation: Implementing parity systems might require significant resources, including funding for training, awareness programs, and compliance monitoring.
o Sectoral Differences: Some sectors may find it more challenging to achieve parity due to the nature of the work or historical imbalances.
Case Studies and Examples
1. Political Representation:
o Rwanda: Achieved high levels of female representation in parliament through mandated quotas, resulting in significant improvements in gender equality.
o Scandinavian Countries: Have implemented various measures to ensure gender parity in politics and have seen positive outcomes in terms of social and economic indicators.
2. Corporate Boards:
o Norway: Implemented a law requiring at least 40% representation of each gender on corporate boards, leading to increased female participation without negatively impacting corporate performance.
3. Educational Institutions:
o Affirmative Action in the US: Designed to increase representation of historically marginalized groups in higher education, though it faces legal challenges and mixed public opinion.
Conclusion
A System of Parity can be viable and beneficial, but its success depends on careful design, robust implementation, and ongoing support. It requires balancing the need for fairness and representation with the principles of meritocracy and societal cohesion. Achieving parity involves addressing deep-rooted societal norms and ensuring that the measures taken are not just symbolic but lead to substantive and sustainable change.
Image

"Do you know you are having a human experience or do you simply believe that you are having a human experience?"

NOTE: I do not reply to straw man fallacy.

Unjustified Fact (UF) example - belief (of any sort) based on personal subjective experience. (Belief-based belief)
Justified Fact (JF) Example, The Earth is spherical in shape. (Knowledge-based belief)
Irrefutable Fact (IF) Example Humans in general experience some level of self-awareness. (Knowledge-based knowledge)

Post Reply