¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 TO FABIO AND OTHERS READING THIS POST.
 I learn as I compose these posts and I expect they may be useful, in some way, to a few. I realize I write to myself and the future. However, as I comment on frequently, this medium is not really suitable for deep diving in these issues and by my continuing to devote my time posting here I don’t devote time trying to design the platform/medium I need.  So I must reduce my comments on views of the future – in this medium.  I may post on design issues for new media, at least to invite other to participate.  THANKS FOR ATTENDING,  Larry/nuet
Fabio – Thank you so much for responding and sharing your insights.

LILIES ARE CHANGING SOULS. 
Wonderful metaphor. Are variations on this metaphor useful?

• ¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0
• Are “souls” multi-dimensional and do they change in stages and interacting with other souls changing. Or is the change a single, one paradigm “awakening” after which follows a world of bliss. My exemplar of the latter is Barbara Marx Hubbard and her decades long movement for Conscious Evolution.  There are many variations of Personal Change First beliefs.  I started to use “strategies” or “scenarios” instead of “beliefs” in the prior sentence – but realized that these AWAKENING anticipations give little thought to what comes after.  Will awakening include competencies for collective action among diverse souls, or will we lose our diversity?
  • ¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0
  • I am a strong supporter of “Adult Stage Development”, currently highlighted by the Objectifying Models of Robert Kegan and the competing views of Spiral Dynamics by Beck and Cowan. These can be viewed as sequential awakenings.  Their research shows that most of humankind are locked into lower levels of awakening and that moving up the awakening ladder is difficult to facilitate (with current methods).
  • There is ample evidence of significant and powerful awakenings in many persons.  Some seem to be deeply inner driven and possibly with metaphysical associations.  This includes conversions from so-called NDEs. Not all awakenings result in a person better suited as a member of a mature humanity, as evidenced by many religious born-agains.
  • I have studied “psychic phenomena” since Jr.Hi. and am convinced there are “domains of reality” beyond our conventional. I wish I had time to explore the collective message in crop circles. You mentioned favoring a “telepathic” connection.  We already may have it, as possibly evidenced in deep coincidences between identical twins – a type of entanglement beyond Quantum Physics. However, managing telepathy may prove far more difficult than managing overt communication – which may be why it is a suppressed competency. I believe that psychic competencies and other connections with metaphysical domains requires that humankind put its present level of being in better order. I don’t expect these hidden talents to pull us out of our Crisis-of-Crises.
  • My core strategy for humankind-to-Humanity is UPLIFT – a generative model strategy/scenario draft for “Changing Souls”.  It is crudely represented in a concrete set of document should any others be willing to work on it with me – BUT, that will require an advanced medium for “collaborative synthesis”.
  • Although souls are changing, we only have limited knowledge of all that is happening. My limited assessment informs me that the changing is inadequate to our need, but there is much more we can do.

A NEW WORLDVIEW NEEDS TO BE BORN.  OK.  HOW?

• ¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0
•         Itemizing all the problems with contemporary worldviews (plural important) is a necessary first step.  However, a dangerous step because once deeply engrossed in such study makes on heavily biased towards fixit or transformational strategies insead of create anew and replace strategies. Also, many features of old worldviews are deemed essential to incorporate in any new worldview without examination of consequences.
•         What is the relationship between worldview and world? Here I have novel insights that call for critique and contribution. Can we “make it”?  We are not prepared to accurately anwer this question as we haven’t even begun to consider alternatives. Assigning probability estimates to futures forecasts is a very dangerous enterprise.
•         The hidden factor here is AGENCY.  Do worldview/worlds evolve in a “natural deterministic/scientific” process or can human creativity and agency make significant differences?  Here the new emergents are confused. They demand agency in their domians of work but appear to deny it as a collective force re humankind’s future.  Contemporary science doesn’t inform us on this issue!

GAIA WILL SURVIVE.   Is survival the primary concern?

• ¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0
•         Does Gaia (and Cosmos) have agency?  Is creativity inherent in reality or a late-comer with humans? Today, evidence can be amassed for both positions. Has Gaia a “purpose” in emerging humankind with its potential of opening a totally new dimension to reality beyond the causal flow of physics-biology?  To what extent might our Crisis-of-Crises be a riskful experiment by Cosmos/Gaia for THEIR next stage of emergence?  In spite of the current flurry of new planets for life, their are also reasons why Earth may be among the first to host a Gaia attempting what we are now in the midst of.  I AM ENERGIZED BY THIS PRIVILEGED.
  • ¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0
  •         A worse case scenario may drive Earth to Venus like climate. Gaia advanced after prior mass extinctions. Humankind collapse or extinction, in most scenarios, will leave Gaia scared – but she will recover. What was attempted in mamamls/primates/humankind may be tried again in other species.  One can argue that the extinction cliff we have pushed ourselves was necessary for us to gain the needed technologies to survive more massive cataclysmic events in the future that would threaten the advances of humanity (super volcanoes, asteroid collisions, etc.). All wild speculation.
  •         Which is worse?  The death of all humans or that there never will be another human (and what we might have become)?
  •         I can die with the cosmic humor that humankind didn’t cut the mustard, and that somewhere else the extension of reality will occur – maybe assisted through Sheldrake’s Causative Formation modification of the morphogenetic fields. But human, Her&Now, I will continue to push that our agency will succeed.

“I am after a setup where knowledge can freely flow across these man-made nerves of the planet to serve local people to strengthen those local strong bonds to sustain their lives and seed the seeds for a thriving eco-society.”

• ¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0
•         Every positive scenario will involve “strong local bonds and lthriving eco-societies”. However, the nature of local systems will need to change also during the emergence of a sustainable Humanity/Gaia from Person to Planetary. Some local “communities” can be transformed. Others will need to be dispersed and relocated for many reasons. Most local to regional organizations today are artifical and imposed. Refuge populations and individuals will be part of the mix.
•         Appropriate technologies are blossoming and we have just begun to see what can soon be available – but the advancement and distribution of these will need technologies beyond the local. Even today, the spread of re-localization is hampered by their provincial attitudes and narrow focuses.
•         Humankind evolved propensities for tribal living, with a great variety of cultures – not all ideal, but that propensity for healthy and viable tribal life has been proven. What is not in our DNA is propensities for many tribes of diverse cultures to organize in stable societies. Civilization, with it class structure and suppression of learning, has been the default mode until we learned how to do better – which is now in our collective intelligence. Tribal survival/thrival has features that can work against higer order societal organization.  Thus, we cannot expect a humanity as holarchically viable from Planetary to Personal to emerge for local alone.  Higher order organization must be based on sysnets of small team/group – but the balance must be by design with a dynamics of topdown & bottomup.  How this will manifest in the next few decades is our challenge.
•         The “spirit of the indegenous” is more related to the special nature of close knit “communities of practice”, which can be new movements brought together by our intelligent technologies as well as populations with extended heritage back to tribal times.  These indigenous peoples have retained a more intemate relationship with Gaia, and a knowledge base to be used. But, not all indigenous peoples can be part of a new Humanity, without change: for example, those which exploit women and children or have unsound ecological practices (for our current age).
•         Any movement to create a nu Humanity must attend to the basic needs of all participants. But, it cannot assume that meeting basic needs will be sufficient to motivate participation in the larger planetary challenges or to acknowledge that attending to planetary issues is critical (in the long run) to sustainablity of provision of basics at the local level.

 “How do we want to try to survive? I am not sure I have an answer,
and I oscillate between despair and optimism.”

• ¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0
•         Although it may sound like I have the answer, I don’t.  I query about what the answers might look like and whether we would recognize them when they come. Nuet is a world, based in my Here&Now with a great many potential future scenarios with generative potentials. It gives me no pleasure to play with details of future scenarios I dislikie – but I can play some collapse scenarios out for learning.  Most of the optimistic visions I read about are not scenarios – the vast middle is absent.  After an initial process the human story enters the Great Fog, with an even more nubulous human system emerging down the pike..
•         I no longer think in terms of pessimism or optimism, although I frequently experience excitement or disappointment. I imagine the personal scenario I would like to live and how I would like to see things happen on Earth in the future.  I work towards this, not very effectively.