MyBlogsFoundations

My Blogs related to our society may start as a provocative caricatured problem analysis with nevertheless the hope to collect feedback so that I can progressively enrich the analysis with your input. They will then get a new version increment.

After a problem analysis, a complementary blog with proposals will follow, according to the same procedure.

I expect contradictory viewpoints but for them being considered in my consolidation effort they should be more than an emotional rejection or acceptation.

The underlying philosophy I follow is a scientific one (not easy in social/political/economical matters; social experiments are indeed reserved to churches and to secret agency) where theories are falsifiable (which can be verified as erroneous through a wide agreement on experiments contradicting forecasts from the theory) (K. Popper). Science is indeed the single philosophy which evolves by challenging its current belief.

Religions are its contrary and the most conservative ones are the monotheist ones versus the polytheist ones that have less to loose when one of their gods gets neglected. Human being have been obliged to invent gods to keep themselves more quiet, having to face a frightening unexplainable nature. Religion and Churches emerged as an alternative power to brute force when the needs for this one started to decline. And monotheism facilitates taking over and mainly keeping the power (otherwise, somebody else may come with a new more attractive god much more easily).

Mysticism is the glueware between honest scientists and believers. If you are surprised by this statement, you are probably the victim of the tedious cold way with which science and mathematics are taught, forgetting that science grows with the discoveries made by people with a (quasi mystic) vision, seeing beauty in the patterns they discover and willing to share that with the world. The discovery process experienced by real scientists and artists is also made of suffering for some instants of ecstasy (as real religious or social leaders or great warriors).

To understand the society, you should know and understand Machiavelli who claimed "the power corrupts, the absolute power absolutely corrupts". Searching to whom the crime profits or adopting as principle: "privatisation of the profits, collectivisation of the lost" will help you too.
Th one who profit are somewhere in the 5% BI, paid by the 83% GS that have to remain very quiet:(regularly remember them to abandon their pride to authorities, educate them to be quickly fitting a job with a salary to keep their nose just above water while avoiding to awake any form of mind to criticise what they observe, promote a star system to let them dream, send them to war if you can, let them becoming addict to anything (legal or not), make them afraid for their health, give them sex or reality shows for free,...)

It is also an evolutionary one (S. Kauffman and I. Prigogine are here my mentors) where competition and co-operation are balanced. It is also an agnostic one.

Respecting life, thus diversity, is probably my single holy belief (where I'm somewhat mystical) but within a global context. (I come back at the end on this)

Now, unfortunately, I estimate that 2% of the worldwide population is made of people understanding this vision with the necessary ethic to fairly use their capabilities while respecting it (the GI quadrant); the BI quadrant is 5% and leads the world for their own power; the GS quadrant is 83% and abandons their autonomy to the BI quadrant; the remaining 10% (the BS) allows the BI to keep the GS busy for their safety.

Common sense is also a blessing but also a vanishing capability in the mankind. If common sense is defined by "what nobody knows, everybody knows" which is a statistical result called the law of the big numbers. It is declining because the average citizen (the 83% GS) is now brainwashed by the deadly triad: Finance - Media/advertising -Government/education and so common sense is progressively replaced by flattening the behaviors and minds with consumption as palliative.

Partisan of the theory of evolution believe that nature is auto-regulated (but not necessarily progressing, only adapting. So, if the mankind is natural, why taking care? Is the mankind forming a natural specie, stabilizing itself at the edge of chaos with other species? We are obviously the dominant mammal specie (all others are vanishing at a rate of 20 by century in progress) and we are the unique specie breaking down the dogma of biology leading to the so-called egocentric genome due to our capability to teach our children with our accumulated know-how so that their brain can control their genome.

We have thus the responsibility to preserve our capacity of adaptation and to keep this possible unique thing we are in the universe. We need to put back our long-term survival in the heart of our concerns and therefore to propose mankind-wide projects to see again something else than $ in the eyes of our children, to comeback to the time of the dreams.

Is this not an utopia? yes, it is! But is there a more attractive road to the future? No. IS it feasible? let's try we will see! Going dead is indeed more easily reachable. What is the most easy? to become stronger than your neighbors and defeat them or to be stronger today than you were yesterday? If you go to the budo to learn how to beat the others on street, a good teacher will disgust you because its exercises am to make you better than before and to respect the others. Were are the greatest rewards? the one you get when you reach the top of a mountain when you believed it was at the limits of your capabilities. And how easy it is to share that feeling with others having made the same experience and to feel again that feeling invading you.

But wait a minute! You are not going to let me believe that an ultimate truth is thinkable in human matter? No, indeed; this is impossible to obtain it, only to come day by day closer to it, and you will not see the time passing.

OK guy, but think deeper! You want we spend time to reach a better solution on a problem like voluntary abortion or euthanasia? But is it not a paradox to have a general law to regulate something which is best avoided? Yes, it is. But having though on such problems and formulating what you have learned to teach it to other will put you in a better situation to evaluate any particular case with is always different than another and help the people deciding /propose the least worst solution for all parties involved.

That's why we have a brain? To learn and understand a theory and be prepared to find a solution in a practical situation. Buy learning to apply recipes, you miss the point. For understanding, you must try hard and suffer until you get this aha! effect and then you will even become an expert, possibly proposing new breakthrough and experiencing by yourself the passion of discovering. We are in a (lack of ) culture where not understanding results from bad explanation. It is the biggest fallacy of our educational systems. Understanding is yours and it is your responsibility to find appropriate assistance for progressing. Even better, if you just understand that, the remaining is just a question of your motivation; and the best way to get a motivation is not to have your ass in the butter for the remaining of your life. I conclude with R.Feymann, Nobel prize of physics, reputed as the best teacher of quantum mechanic, who after 3 years teaching wrote " the students understanding quantum mechanics don't really need me but the ones needing me have never understood quantum mechanics".

That's folks! It's time to awake. (Dune, F. Herbert)