Hey Hey
Mar 03, 2007, 11:48 AM
Where are we going?
Should everything be free?
lucid_dream
Mar 03, 2007, 01:03 PM
We are going towards increased Self awareness. Free in what sense?
maximus242
Mar 03, 2007, 02:45 PM
Consciousness Singularity?
Trip like I do
Mar 03, 2007, 05:01 PM
I know where I'm going.
maximus242
Mar 03, 2007, 06:34 PM
Self-actualization?
Trip like I do
Mar 04, 2007, 12:52 PM
....it's beyond that, but stiil apart of it.
Trip like I do
Mar 04, 2007, 12:52 PM
lol.... my avatar has become the great white hollow.
rhymer
Mar 05, 2007, 12:05 PM
Trip,
Your avatar reads "This photo currently unavailable".
Flickr problem?
Hey Hey
Mar 06, 2007, 12:12 PM
QUOTE(rhymer @ Mar 05, 2007, 08:05 PM)

Trip,
Your avatar reads "This photo currently unavailable".
Flickr problem?
Maybe he's going for "god shouldn't have a graven image"!
Hey Hey
Mar 06, 2007, 12:14 PM
By "Should everything be free" I was actually being literal. But I am especially interested in views on knowledge being free for all. Would be nice to have views on this from the world of business.
Rick
Mar 06, 2007, 02:17 PM
Are you referring to intellectual property rights? If so, in current society it depends on if one is a capitalist or a communist. Capitalists like intellectual property rights and communists don't recognize them.
Chip
Mar 06, 2007, 04:01 PM
Ergodicity
Seems we may want to establish a real time repetitive (recursive?) classification system concerning the responsibility of individuals and then whether or not a person is free to have certain information would be dependent on their proven responsibility quotient. The reason why it would have to be done over and over is that people and circumstances change.
As far as communism or capitalism goes, I find those terms to be quite open to interpretation and not in the realm of systems theory, not practical for policy determination. Seems they have both been general facetious facades for elites that seek to cajole the masses into sacrificing themselves and others for their own conceit, much like what has passed for religion.
rhymer
Mar 06, 2007, 04:19 PM
..a bit too mathematical for me, but I have wondered if a classification should exist per person covering rights and responsibilities to self and society.
It would be based on capability and responsibleness already expressed, conformance to agreed principles etc etc. In other words a non-starter!!
If behaviour falls below x, y rights are lost and have to be earned again.
Just try writing the rules!
Just thinking out loud here!!
Hey Hey
Mar 07, 2007, 04:47 AM
Can I step back a little? Will everything be free at some point in the future?
rhymer
Mar 07, 2007, 12:06 PM
If you are using 'free' in the context of its normal day to day use in 2007, YES.
This is simply because the word has been corrupted to mean the 'costs are not shown'!
If you mean free of charge (and assuming that the charge is not hidden elsewhere) then I would guess not because too many people make their incomes from the sales of goods or utilities or services.
maximus242
Mar 07, 2007, 01:49 PM
Lol, I think Hey Hey is talking about the star trek concept of everyone getting equal dispercement. Although I suppose thats simply communism with ethics? I guess for everything to be free, money would have to be eliminated.
Hey Hey
Mar 08, 2007, 05:12 AM
QUOTE(maximus242 @ Mar 07, 2007, 09:49 PM)

Lol, I think Hey Hey is talking about the star trek concept of everyone getting equal dispercement. Although I suppose thats simply communism with ethics? I guess for everything to be free, money would have to be eliminated.
What's so funny about that? Do we have to be financial cannibals for ever? I thought this forum was founded to explore consciousness, especially the expanded type. So in a future of ultimate consciousness we will still have to pay a price (whatever form) for everything/anything? With the social fragmentation that causes?
For years I have been hoping for signs of some social evolution but all I see is retrograde devolution. I reckon that a more basic evolutionary step will be the way that humans change. You know, the sort that influenced the dinosaurs. Communism is a distraction, usually regurgitated when there are no other ideas, or little thought about the serious issue of whether humans will/should always need to be competitive. If only I could see a more humane way for competition. Maybe the best chance is virtual reality. But I think there is a danger that virtual reality will become our only reality. Perhaps expanded consciousness will be a virtual configuration. Off the wall? Well, where are the other signs? Look at the world through history and now. We're pretty fond of conflict, aren't we?
HeyHey
ps Where are we going?
Hey Hey
Mar 08, 2007, 05:26 AM
QUOTE(rhymer @ Mar 07, 2007, 12:19 AM)

It would be based on capability and responsibleness already expressed, conformance to agreed principles etc etc.
Capability differentials = inequalities. Inequalities = conflict. Conflict = history. History =/ evolution. (Sorry can't get the 'does not equal' symbol to remain when I add reply).
I like the idea of responsibility, but its experimentation seem no to be working. Indeed, it seems to have been rejected in most areas of society. Look at crime figures, relationship break-ups, poverty, bankruptcy, obesity, addiction, violence, prejudice, ... the list is too long and will fill up the internet.
Chip
Mar 08, 2007, 06:41 AM
QUOTE
Communism is a distraction, usually regurgitated when there are no other ideas, or little thought about the serious issue of whether humans will/should always need to be competitive. If only I could see a more humane way for competition.
Appears to me we need to find a way to turn competition into a mutually constructive process such as in a friendly game.
maximus242
Mar 08, 2007, 07:51 AM
QUOTE(Hey Hey @ Mar 08, 2007, 06:12 AM)

QUOTE(maximus242 @ Mar 07, 2007, 09:49 PM)

Lol, I think Hey Hey is talking about the star trek concept of everyone getting equal dispercement. Although I suppose thats simply communism with ethics? I guess for everything to be free, money would have to be eliminated.
What's so funny about that? Do we have to be financial cannibals for ever? I thought this forum was founded to explore consciousness, especially the expanded type. So in a future of ultimate consciousness we will still have to pay a price (whatever form) for everything/anything? With the social fragmentation that causes?
For years I have been hoping for signs of some social evolution but all I see is retrograde devolution. I reckon that a more basic evolutionary step will be the way that humans change. You know, the sort that influenced the dinosaurs. Communism is a distraction, usually regurgitated when there are no other ideas, or little thought about the serious issue of whether humans will/should always need to be competitive. If only I could see a more humane way for competition. Maybe the best chance is virtual reality. But I think there is a danger that virtual reality will become our only reality. Perhaps expanded consciousness will be a virtual configuration. Off the wall? Well, where are the other signs? Look at the world through history and now. We're pretty fond of conflict, aren't we?
HeyHey
ps Where are we going?
Hey Hey, I wasnt laughing at you, I was laughing at Rhymers comments on the corruption of the word free and the ruthlessness of todays marketers. I think its a fine idea, I mean there would be no crime, no starvation, no fighting because everyone got the same thing. Overall it seems like it would do society a world of good.
Hey Hey
Mar 08, 2007, 08:57 AM
No problem, maximus242, laughing is good! I thought you might be responding to Rhymer, but your Star Trek comment came after a comma so I wasn't quite sure. Anyway, I always value your comments and it spurred me to expand my thoughts a little. Do you think there are any signs that we are moving away from a cost only mentally, with everything having a price? Notice I didn't say value, as value can still be reconciled with 'free'.
rhymer
Mar 08, 2007, 12:43 PM
There seems to be an undercurrent hint of dissatisfaction with the direction and speed of progress of mankind.
It takes me back to the worl of John Bapty Oates whose works on 'super-consciousness' were aired here a few years ago. He also recognised the apparent weaknesses of current overall behaviour, but also proposed a new concept for development which harnessed supposed (presently unused ) brain capability with a clearer stated responsibility and the achievement of its incorporation into future behaviour. Unfortunately, and probably because it is a new idea and requires change, there was resistance or at least little interest or support.
www.humantruth.org/
maximus242
Mar 08, 2007, 01:09 PM
I suppose cost is associated with value, for everything to be free, we would all have to percieve everything as equal in value. Which seems next to near impossible because we value things we like more than we dont like, we value pleasure over pain.
Im not really sure how one would go about such a change. You would need drastic changes in economics, in fact there would be no economics, then a change in human thought. People would have to have a share amongst everyone mentallity instead of 'its all mine' mentality.
I suppose, at the most basic level, the key to everything being free is the concepts of sharing and equality.
Meklo
Mar 10, 2007, 03:03 AM
QUOTE(maximus242 @ Mar 09, 2007, 05:09 AM)

I suppose cost is associated with value, for everything to be free, we would all have to percieve everything as equal in value. Which seems next to near impossible because we value things we like more than we dont like, we value pleasure over pain.
"People know the cost of everything and the value of nothing."
I'm pretty sure one could convince the masses that a bit of bread was of as valuable as gold if you peddled the idea for long enough.

Seriously though, I don't personally imagine that such a future would ever occur. I think people are too stuck in their ways... I agree that there would have to be some un-imaginably drastic changes for it to happen!
maximus242
Mar 10, 2007, 08:51 AM
Mm, not nessecarily. Alexander the Great managed to unite the world for a short time, Hitler managed to cause chaos, Two terrorists caused an entire nation to go to war..
Great change can be caused by only a few people. The Renaissance was a rebirth of thought, theology, philosophy and everything in general. Changes in human thinking have occured, people like Aristotle can be seen as causing changes in the way we think.
The real problem is, that a. So few people have the courage to try and cause change and b. The ones that do - usually go about it the wrong way and have rigid ideals and/or they are more intrested in what they can gain personally than the good of the many.
We have people like Martin Luther King who helped to change the way people think.
There are places in the world where money does not exist, just very few of them.
Rick
Mar 12, 2007, 02:40 PM
QUOTE(Hey Hey @ Mar 08, 2007, 06:12 AM)

... ps Where are we going?
We're going into space! More precisely, we are going to live in
space cities. In just a few tens of millions of years, the earth will be uninhabitable (due to changes in solar output), maybe even sooner.
Living in space cities will require economic changes. Society may strongly resemble some elements of communism, due to the greater emphasis on interdependence that will likely occur when living in that relatively hostile environment. Maybe everything will become free.
Chip
Mar 12, 2007, 04:32 PM
QUOTE(Rick @ Mar 12, 2007, 02:40 PM)

We're going into space! More precisely, we are going to live in
space cities. In just a few tens of millions of years, the earth will be uninhabitable (due to changes in solar output), maybe even sooner.
Yessiree Bob (uh Rick) !
Something that will probably help us get there rather than destroy ourselves is to realize that we are already there. Space colonization needs to start here and now. We need to live on this planet as if we were on a space colony which is the simple truth. Got to "get real" rather than let second-order cybernetic assumptions lead us to die defending fantasies.
Rick
Mar 13, 2007, 07:27 AM
QUOTE(Chip @ Mar 12, 2007, 05:32 PM)

... Got to "get real" rather than let second-order cybernetic assumptions lead us to die defending fantasies.
Indeed. Reality is the best "religion."
Trip like I do
Mar 13, 2007, 07:45 PM
boom.... there it is!
Sorry, please continue!!
Rick
Mar 14, 2007, 02:17 PM
No comment on the space city concept? I thought Trip would like that. Nice explosion, by the way.
TaylorS
Feb 03, 2008, 08:48 PM
We are nearing a technological singularity, beyond which technology will advance so quickly so as to be beyond comprehension, lifting most things that get in the way of the ability to achieve self-actualization.
Rick
Feb 04, 2008, 08:23 AM
QUOTE(TaylorS @ Feb 03, 2008, 08:48 PM)

We are nearing a technological singularity, beyond which technology will advance so quickly so as to be beyond comprehension, lifting most things that get in the way of the ability to achieve self-actualization.
Maybe, but that, too, may be based on wishful thinking. If technoligcal advances can eliminate poverty and bring universal education and prosperity, so that eventually we can move into space and ensure the survival of life, I will be satisfied.
code buttons
Feb 04, 2008, 11:37 AM
The future has two possibilities for us: Galactic colonization or Mass Extinction. The choice is ours:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHbnM_42mQE&feature=related
Rick
Feb 04, 2008, 01:22 PM
QUOTE(code buttons @ Feb 04, 2008, 11:37 AM)

The future has two possibilities for us: Galactic colonization or Mass Extinction.
Exactly right, but the choice is ours only if we can grasp the opportunity while we have it. Vote Democratic in the USA this year. We've had enough of the Repugligans to last a millennium.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.