Civilization Next? Gleaning the Complexity of Human Action?

[MetroPunk]

CORWIN: I cannot express how appalled and distraught I am with the condition of humanity and the relationship we have with our environment. I need to figure out what variables are most central to this blind, wreckless relationship and what of those I can most feasibly manipulate.

how do we evolve past then?

CORWIN: I don't know. I think our evolution has to occur mostly on the individual level. When we try to redesign our social, political and economic systems, we are basically trying to minimize the extent to which the flaws of the individual manifest in the larger system. This is not stable or adaptive, it is a temporary solution to the symptoms of a disease that runs very deep.

i follow your analysis, and do not totally disagree,
in fact we might agree strongly on many of the symptoms,
and what they suggest...

but it is my opinion that humans have been ‘designing’
(thus far within the dominant civilizations)
our social, political and economic systems
in ways that most often reflect the interests of POWER,
guided by Elites and their subcultures,
sometimes influenced by interest groups (in a broad sense)
and perhaps, only recently, as citizens…

civilization operates in ways that are influenced,
informed and dominated by a variety of
ideologies, practices, procedures, discourses, traditions
- based in the historical and material development of
pre-modern, modern and post-modern life-ways & emergence…

however, it is my proscription (prescription maybe?)
is that we instead try to design our ‘systems’, practices, institutions, etc...
in ways that MAXIMIZE the potential of humans, ecologies, social systems
AND thus begin appropriately linking these potentialities
into a pragmatic matrix of resiliencies and adaptation,
- but in way that also allows for chaotic occurrences,
and supports creativity…

in a very simplified nutshell:
we should act and know is ways that
more effectively align ourselves with the TAO…

where you might see the managed minimization of “flaws”
i see opportunities for exploration and more sophisticated adaptation…

why does evolution have to take place ONLY at the individual level?
are we isolated automatons,
completely distinct from the contexts from which we come?

CORWIN: The systems do need continual reassesment in order for our species to survive until this radical individual transformation occurs on a large enough scale, but our focus should be on the individual.

i think its too narrow to just focus on the individual…
people exist within systems (contexts),
and these systems co-generate individuals…
(tetra-evolve in AQAL terms)

i think “radical” and positive change must evolve/involve
the ‘dance’ of collectives and individuals,
and between systems and within environments…
the dynamics are complex - and transformation can occur
on multiple levels…

MORE TO COME....

[Andy]

The second way that nature has taken to form complex societies is to develop a species with enough intelligence to pass on their knowledge to subsequent generations, with a capacity to abstract from any new projects or ideas of something that functions is still only in his head. Thus arises a species, Homo sapiens evolved that not only genetically but also culturally. This cultural evolution is much faster and also produces its own breaks social complexity. Gradually the man will go to hide in caves to build first towns, cities and then eventually orbital stations. The association of human tribal groups and clans are born of the union of these kingdoms, empires and nations. Human societies have always been highly specialized. And in the past centuries such specialization has been further accentuated.

Burgundy Wine