|
11 Sep 04 - 11:07 PM (#1269701) Subject: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: GUEST,Christina Bridging the gap between science and the humanities is a conceptuality of systems thinking. I say so with respect to a world that can work for everyone, which is synergetic. We have to ask questions referential to a coordinate system and also as we learn better how to generalize concepts. One question that I've discovered relative to conscious participation in our evolution is this: "What is the most consciously comprehensive considerate alternate option?" Once you get to your answer, you may find that you must ask it again. It relates succinctly to equity not the punitive mind sets as well as spaces and spheres in Universe. |
|
11 Sep 04 - 11:16 PM (#1269708) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: CarolC I wish I understood the question. |
|
11 Sep 04 - 11:16 PM (#1269709) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Jerry Rasmussen Generalizing concepts is one of out strengths, here on Mudcat..... Jerry |
|
11 Sep 04 - 11:21 PM (#1269717) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: GUEST In what sense are you using the word 'considerate' 1. Having or marked by regard for the needs or feelings of others. or 2. Characterized by careful thought; deliberate. It would make a difference. Padre |
|
11 Sep 04 - 11:30 PM (#1269725) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: GUEST,Christina Take the question one word at a time. What? What is? What is the? What is the most? What is the most conscious? So far it can't be the least conscious, which might be unconscious or in the subconscious. Next, What is the most consciously comprehensive? Comprehensive means including everything or being the most complete. Then, What is the most consciously comprehensive considerate? This would be as we gather stars, bring to mind, to whom it is I am as a "universe of one, "each in his own separate star." Of course, this is with you also "a universe of one." There are 6.1 human beings on Earth. That is 6.1 individuals. Then, What is the most consciously comprehensive considerate alternate option? In other words, we can always find the most thoughtful solution from our consciousness about our humanity. We need never resort to an admixture of harm. So, we keep asking this question until ideally we leave no one out, make no enemies, and this thinking is systems thinking for the new reality. |
|
11 Sep 04 - 11:38 PM (#1269729) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: mack/misophist Eschew obfuscation. Take Expository English 101. |
|
11 Sep 04 - 11:43 PM (#1269734) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Padre I'd really like to meet the 0.1 human being, if I could see him or her. O well, I'll take it one at a time Padre |
|
11 Sep 04 - 11:50 PM (#1269736) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Bill D "I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what I said is not what I meant." All esoteric conceptualites reflect considerations of consciousness not included in perceptual gradients, so we must eventually reduce the permutation of the variables to their most uniform state, else we narrow unnecessarily the options of the more profligate contributors to the enterprise.....at least, that's how I see it. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 12:17 AM (#1269741) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Jeri I don't know, Bill. It just reminded me I need to buy some of Dr Bronner's pepperment soap. And a world that works for everyone is one that rotates, revolves, and has enough gravity so people don't go flying off all over the place. And probably some oxygen and water, and some dirt and plants and it can't be too hot or too cold. There are probably a few other things too. Anyway, you get all the stuff you need, and then you have to have enough compassion for others that you don't go around strangling people just because they piss you off. It's OK. If humans live long enough, they'll invent the Internet, and you'll be able to do the verbal equivalent of strangling someone, and everybody will think you're normal. Christina, you might want to use small words. Some of us are Americans. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 12:22 AM (#1269742) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Jeri Well, it's not 'verbal' on the internet. We use verbs a lot, but that's not what I meant. Make it the 'on-line equivalent'. Bill, did you just write K.I.S.S. with a whole bunch of etymological effluvia? |
|
12 Sep 04 - 12:32 AM (#1269748) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Bill D *grin*...I just opened my head, and out it flowed! Took about 2 minutes.I don't know where I got the talent...must be God-given... |
|
12 Sep 04 - 12:41 AM (#1269750) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Amos I think it is a lovely question. A |
|
12 Sep 04 - 12:59 AM (#1269763) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Mary in Kentucky LOL. I thought the first post was really Amos! |
|
12 Sep 04 - 01:02 AM (#1269764) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Mary in Kentucky But I knew it wasn't when I realized the word "communication" wasn't there. (It's late here and I'm getting goofy.) |
|
12 Sep 04 - 02:15 AM (#1269781) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Teresa Guest Christina ... not only did you not take the billions and billions into consideration in one instance ... but you did it in two! Now do tell me ... which 6.1 people were you using as an example? It's a lovely question ... and the answer is 42. No, was that the right question? Anyone ever heard of nexialism? I think it's a lovely idea, speaking of "synergetic". ... :) But mostly I just try to get along with folk, and do what i can, and that's what I expect other folk do, too. :) ;) T |
|
12 Sep 04 - 06:10 AM (#1269838) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: GUEST, John O'Lennaine This is the third time I've visited this thread and I've only just realized that this is not a place to find a word that works for everyone. That's right, I only just noticed the "l". I am however, still wondering what that word might have been. It'll drive me nuts until I find it. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 06:18 AM (#1269844) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Bert To what? |
|
12 Sep 04 - 08:49 AM (#1269887) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Amos Actually, I still think the question in the original post is lovely but by far the most important contribution in this thrread is the phrase, "a world that works for everyone". A |
|
12 Sep 04 - 09:06 AM (#1269898) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: JennyO Íàâîäèòü çàçîð ìåæäó íàóêîé è ãóìàíèòàðíûà íàóêè áóäåò conceptuality ñèñòåì äóìàÿ. ß ãîâîðþ òàê ïî îòíîøåíèþ ê ìèðó ìîæåò ðàáîòàòü äëÿ êàæäîãî, êîòîðîå ñèíåðãåòè÷åñêî. Ìû äîëæíû ñïðîñèòü âîïðîñû referential ê ñèñòåìå êîîðäèíàò è òàêæå ïî ìåðå òîãî êàê ìû ó÷èì áîëåå ëó÷øå êàê îáîáùèòü ïðèíöèïèàëüíûå ñõåìû. Îäèí âîïðîñ I've îòêðûëî ïî îòíîøåíèþ ê ñîçíàòåëüíîìó ó÷àñòèþ â íàøåì ðàçâèòèè ýòî: "What áóäåò ñàìî ñîçíàòåëüíî âñåñòîðîííåå áëàãîðàññóäèòåëüíîå äðóãîå option?" Êàê òîëüêî âû ïîëó÷àåòå ê âàøåìó îòâåòó, âû ìîæåòå íàéòè ÷òî âû äîëæíû ñïðàøèâàòü èõ ñíîâà. Îí îòíîñèò succinctly ê ñïðàâåäëèâîñòè íå êàðàòåëüíûå êîìïëåêòû ðàçóìà òàê æå, êàê êîñìîñû è ñôåðû â âñåëåííîì. I thought that maybe if I translated Christina's post into Russian, I might understand it better, but it didn't help. And now my letters seem to be growing some kind of fungus on top of them. Oh well, I guess I'll never know the answer..... |
|
12 Sep 04 - 10:11 AM (#1269943) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: *daylia* gads, Christina - must be too early in the morning. Maybe I'll make a bucket of coffee and try again! But as I watched the sunrise this morning, golden/apricot/rose clouds shimmering and glowing on the horizon, I knew that this World does indeed "work" for everyone ... even when it's not so apparent, and even for those of us who think otherwise. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 11:26 AM (#1270000) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Amos What's the matter with you people? Christina is speaking perfectly clear Californian English?? A |
|
12 Sep 04 - 12:53 PM (#1270067) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Teresa LOL, Amos! oddly enough, as soon as I moved away from Berkeley, I suddenly, magically lost my Californian (ish?) language abilities. funny how that happens. ... Of course now in Nevada, there are other dangers, but I'm not going into those ... ;););):d T |
|
12 Sep 04 - 01:07 PM (#1270086) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: CarolC Maybe this thread is a birthday present for Amos. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 02:50 PM (#1270170) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Little Hawk Heh! Heh! Christina should be encouraged to go on at more length...say another 10,000 words. Then she could get published. I'm sure someone would read it. It might become a bestseller. "A World That Works for Everyone", though, is a terrific phrase around which to build a useful dialogue. I wish I had more time today, I would expand on the idea some. Our politicians would be well advised to ponder such a concept sooner, not later. As would we all. When I drive in traffic, I usually try to work toward precisely that World...which is to say...I let other people in. If everyone did this it would all move very nicely, and with a minimum of stress. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 02:55 PM (#1270175) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: GUEST,dianavan Christina - "What is the most consciously comprehensive considerate alternate option?" If you engage in this exercise, there are no options but to do what is right. Why is it that so many people do not know the difference between right and wrong? With no religious upbringing at all, logic and reason are not so obscure. You can only decide what is right according to your own reflection on the matter. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 03:36 PM (#1270207) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Gam We're on our way! |
|
12 Sep 04 - 03:41 PM (#1270214) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Gam I'm confused about the double negative with no and are not. With no religion can we better think an independent thought? |
|
12 Sep 04 - 03:43 PM (#1270220) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Gam Like many other idealistic insightful linguists, and novitiate comprehensive generalists, I long for a world that works for everyone. To realize such possibilities, new perspectives are essential and writing is integral to the process. So, I couldn't agree with you more. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 03:46 PM (#1270222) Subject: Broken Days From: wysiwyg What the hell. Maybe THIS is what it's about-- tho YMMV-- The Chinese I Ching system includes a cycle of days that repeats over and over and over. Each day in the cycle has a particular characteristic that is said to be present. Each day of the cycle is considered auspicious for certain things and inauspicious for certain other things. My memory of the whole thing is pretty fuzzy, except for the day I most relate to in that cycle-- the Broken Day. A Broken Day is said to be suitable only for housewrecking. Not a day to start anything, and not a day to expect that important things will go well. From relationships to mechanics, what is fooled around with will fall apart.... the best one can do on a Broken Day is stay low and try not to disturb anything that is already at rest or in motion! :~) I think it's a 7-day cycle, so..... count ahead and downscale your plans for that day?! :~) Seriously-- I have had many days where, sometime in the afternoon, I realize that although I started the day in really good humor and form, the day has contained several crises too many-- no matter how well I have dealt with them, and usually in good humor too. But at a certain point in the day I will find myself thinking, "You know-- hmmm! I think actually that despite STILL being in a good mood, and despite handling all this really quite well, I am actually Having a Bad Day and I should pack it in till tomorrow. It's not going to get any better, this day!" (Yielding cheerfully because the objective, really, is not worth the stress needed to to achieve failure!) Sometimes the genius lies in knowing when to quit for the day and go on breaktime till another day. Even on a workday. I call it taking not a sick day, but a Mental Health Day. I educate bosses that these are essential and soon they agree! Unfortunately, there are too often the days where I don't recognize that until I have done a fair share of "homewrecking". One trick to recognizing Broken Days soon enough to bail productively is to really enjoy detaching yourself from the need to care about what is happening, and to enjoy NOT being actually responsible for outcomes. I don't mean that it's good to seek being irresponsible-- just to practice letting go of being SO responsible (or capable, or whatever the "hook" is that gets you so wrapped up in trying to do whatever it is yo are trying hardest to do). Once you let go of that, it is actually quite entertaining at that moment when you spot the truth that you are riding a landslide down a slippery slope. Not falling down it, but sliding (gracefully or not) on the top of a mess of crap sliding down all by itself. Once you see that-- it's obvious that you can't stop the landslide and that it's best to have a good ride down! And the next day, you can pick through the debris and sort it out... or create something new out of it. I think this approach combines a realistic view of the operation of both entropy and creativity-- yin and yang-- and reflects balance. But.... it's only like that on a good day. :~) I suppose someone following the I Ching cycle closely and with discipline knows when the next day will be a Broken Day and then what-- just set the clock to sleep in? :~) ~Susan |
|
12 Sep 04 - 03:50 PM (#1270228) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Gam My conceptual faculty and emotions reacting to "Eschew obfuscation": Long words can be confusing to some folks. Long sentences are often disturbing, especially when we pride ourselves on not tuning in beyond any curriculum, to Universe, for example. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 03:53 PM (#1270233) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Gam Generalize the concept to means taking it to the conceptuality of unification field and yes the Ying-Yang is also a sphere. Mostly, I try to figure out R. B. Fuller's Synergetics: "Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking. See bfi.org |
|
12 Sep 04 - 03:54 PM (#1270234) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Don Firth Great idea, Teresa. "Nexialism." Actually, I first ran across the concept in the Van Vogt book cited in the link you posted, which I read wa-a-a-a-ay back. I've always wondered why the concept never seemed to catch on, except with a few people such as Buckminster Fuller, and I never heard the word "nexialism" outside of the SF novel. Don Firth |
|
12 Sep 04 - 03:56 PM (#1270236) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Gam Am I allowed to post my URL here without breaking the rules? |
|
12 Sep 04 - 03:56 PM (#1270237) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: wysiwyg (Gam, Mudcat threads are linear, not particulate. If you are replying to an individual's post, it's helpful to address the post to that person if you want them to know you are addressing their post. And you need not post an individual reply to each post-- you can reply to several posts in one reply post, addressing each part of your post to the individuals to whom you are replying.) ~Susan |
|
12 Sep 04 - 03:57 PM (#1270241) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Gam Thank you! |
|
12 Sep 04 - 04:02 PM (#1270247) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: mg I think it would have sustainable agriculture at its heart rather than manufacturing. we are probably going to head back in that direction as people lead simpler lives, which I think they are and will, and manufacturing jobs become taken over by robots. People will have to work somewhere; there will be machines to do some of the worst heaviest farm work, and people will understand they have to pay more for healthier, more local food. People in America have never really lost their love of the land. We'll have more integrated facilities..like cows grazing on Microsoft headquarters say...goats all over. Animal husbandry has to return; the way we raise animals is horrible in many situations, and yet many of us need to eat meat unless they grow it safely in labs somewhere. We need to quit enabling teen pregnancy. If you don't want teens to get pregnant, they have to be chaparoned, at least to a certain age. Poor people need help, obviously. Medical care, housing, etc. They need to exchange some labor for some help, which at least in the fairly recent past the very suggestion of which, that they be asked to shovel snow or paint libraries etc. has been sneared at. As I have often said, there needs to be a contractual understanding between the haves and have nots: haves will provide the necessities of life; have nots will provide dignified, supervised, non-exploited labor if they are able, and not do anything to damage public facilites, such as housing projects. They will not engage in anti-social behavior, such as gangs, meth use etc. They will not, nor would anybody if I was queen, have children out of wedlock. At least deliberately. And no, I would not be punitive toward them but neither would I enable this to keep happening as it is. It is probably the key factor in getting people out of poverty period. Address this and all sorts of other things just fall into place. Well, I have to go back to work now. mg |
|
12 Sep 04 - 04:06 PM (#1270250) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: wysiwyg Gam, are you asking if can you post a URL to your own website? Yes, you can. The only URLs we usually avoid posting are for porn and racist stuff, and sites that install bad stuff on others' computers. The rest of the guidelines for Mudcat, and helpful stuff, is in the FAQ/Newcomers Guide, here: CLICK ~Susan |
|
12 Sep 04 - 04:07 PM (#1270252) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Gam Maybe equity is missing and that we have no conceptuality of it. Perhaps the PRSE system, Politics, Religion, Society, Education are at the heart of the problem. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 04:10 PM (#1270257) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Teresa Don, thanks for the response. I think nexialism never caught on because no one has ever really simplified (without oversimplifying) the definition, which can be a bit elusive for non-philosophers like me. It's just on the edge of my understanding, but I know I like the inclusive nature of it, and the concept of being "interdisciplinary" very much appeals to me. Ah, I didn't know about Bucky Fuller's ties either. Another one of my heroes, right up there with feynman. T |
|
12 Sep 04 - 04:13 PM (#1270262) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Gam My website is relatively new. I started posting excerpts of my prespective, roughly, in early August. I work at it almost everyday. http://www.grandmaherlove.com I hope this explains my enthusiasm for finding and conversing with some very bright people. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 04:14 PM (#1270265) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: beardedbruce mary, I am not argueing against your posting, but think you might consider the following: Freedom means the chance to make less than optimal choices. Where are all those machines that do the work made? How are they powered? Who maintains them? The "best" possible form of government is a benevolent dictatorship- the problem is keeping the dictator benevolent. Who defines anti-social behaviour? you mean things like dancing, and drinking on sundays, and having all-night sings? Whose standards do we use, and how does that make the rest of us happy? How would you enforce the rules in your society? Ever read a short story called " A Boy and His Dog" ? |
|
12 Sep 04 - 04:17 PM (#1270272) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Gam bearded bruce, Were you ever that boy and his dog? |
|
12 Sep 04 - 04:19 PM (#1270278) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: Gam It's 1:18 P.M. PST. I've gotta go. |
|
12 Sep 04 - 04:23 PM (#1270281) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: beardedbruce Not likely... |
|
12 Sep 04 - 08:12 PM (#1270533) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: mg John Deere. mg |
|
13 Sep 04 - 01:26 AM (#1270761) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: katlaughing Gam=Christina or someone who is quoting from Gam's website. |
|
13 Sep 04 - 03:40 AM (#1270824) Subject: RE: BS: A World That Works For Everyone From: GUEST,SueB I think the world works hard enough already! |