Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0
On the morning of 02/12/18, on trips out with Eloise, I had a cascade of insights – hints of which I wrote with pen-on-pad. I transcribe them below, with comments or links to posted comments.
competency sets for UPLIFT ** personal uplift competencies
This was an extended insight related to the real potential of the emergent UPLIFT TEAM. It included the realization that Stan Pokras, through his desire to learn more about UPLIFT, has “essentially joined” “our” emergent team.
I had many detailed thoughts about the practical, Down2Earth aspects or our specific doings, this year. We must begin exploring this query, elsewhere.
One thread was about inventorying our competencies (skills and handicaps). What necessary competencies need by the team may not be strong in any of us (five initial members). I remembered my many prior thoughts about developing a Skills Assessment Process and a Skills Database (from my 1976 Mission_2000 manuscript, and many subsequent times).
This is a theme we should attend to, as it is an early, essential component of the UPLIFT Process. I recommend we each begin drafting a short bio of ourselves relevant to UPLIFT. Should include personal quirks and life-story-sketches, as well as special knowledge and competencies.
nuet’s ASSETS MSC weak: specifics/acculturation
The insights and ideas, currently hosted in nuet, may well be of great significance to the survival/thrival of Humankind on Gaia. The future of Larry (Laurence Joseph Victor) is not relevant, other than – initially – to seaf nuet with the UPLIFT Team. This assessment of nuet’s value is, obviously relative to Larry/nuet. My challenge is to motivate others to devote time & energy to learning about uplift, BEFORE they adequately comprehend its importance. Thus, the need to present other values/ reasons for exploring nuet and UPLIFT.
One “argument”, too long and involved for this post, attempts to establish the savant nature of Larry; justifying why he may be so uniquely-unique as to give credence to his synergy-of-insights. How do epistemic and paradigmatic shifts occur? This is far from claiming the significance of Larry, other than he hosts nuet.
What are the meta-characteristics of Larry/nuet that “mark” him as a potentially useful savant? In compensation for Larry’s sever disabilities (lack of mental imagery and autistic traits) he has developed special assets (rare in humankind and useful at this time). He has discussed these assets elsewhere.
My primary asset is automatically activating deep, alternative contexts to most figures of attention within his experiences. Larry/nuet is a super divergent thinker, but with the ability to focus deep in convergence, when necessary. His gift is actually being able to process at all holon levels. Most others are unable to notice his talents in both the highly abstract and the highly concrete. Larry/nuet strengths lie in his ability to navigate all holon levels. Had he the time, he would be an inventor of useful tools. Larry/nuet has recently coined the acronym, MCS (Magnitude/Scope/Complexity), to characterize the architecture of his wrld, called nuet.
Larry/nuet’s handicaps cluster around his difficulty in sharing.
(1) Although he can privately focus/attend to tiny details related to his own work, he has great difficulty giving extended intention to fine details presented by others. He has literally, no sensory remembrances and lacks visual imagination. His inner, unconscious models can be highly “spatial”; however, this is never experienced “concretely”. He has difficulty sharing because he lacks a “visual screen” on which to “project” remembrances and created images. Without auditory mental imagery, Larry has no ability to replay a sound, so his speech recognition can be quite poor.
(2) Larry’s “autism” blocked his psychologically becoming a member in conventional categories: son, brother, father, husband, friend, student, teacher, physicist, American, etc. His mind resists acculturation. Teamwork will be difficult.
These two handicaps limit what Larry can do to seaf our UPLIFT Team.
Additionally, Larry’s body is in decline, although his internal organs and physiological systems appear strong. Over decade ago an MRI revealed a highly damaged cervical spine, but without symptoms, until recently.
On 10/01/2017, while driving our KIA, stationary, in line waiting for a left turn, I was rear ended. At the time I experienced no body injuries, not even a jarring. Three weeks later I began to have very strange feelings and limited functioning of both hands. This got progressively worse. I can’t pick up small objects, button shirts, remove and replace credit cards to my wallet, etc. Three weeks ago this “sensation” moved up both my arms. Yesterday (o2/13/18), during incensed difficulty with mobility, identified the cause as the feelings in my hands and arms now in my legs. I expect this is due to my cervical spine. Thursday (o2/15/18) I will have minor carpal tunnel surgery on both arms – to rule this out before they “attack my cervical spine.
I have no trouble keyboarding, except for many typos. Yet, at any day I may not be able to be online. This leads me to be concerned whether nuet and nurt’s writings will be accessible with Larry severely handicapped.
Organizing around Learning , not Economics
UPLIFT has many faces/perspectives like the Elephant and the Wise Men. When attending to one face, it is easy to ignore the other faces. This is the mis-match between the “band-width” of human realtime cognition and the Magnitude/Scope/Complexity of conceptual schemes to be explored.
One face of UPLIFT that seems difficult to accept: In the human systems processes within UPLIFT, “education” (via OLLO) replaces “economics” as a “driving force”. Analogy: structural integrity is essential for any building construction, but it is never the driving force of architectural design. In UPLIFT, “economics” retreats into an (essential) background, whereas Organizing-around-Learning become foreground. In designing UPLIFT to optimize “the uplifting of humankind”, various models of “economics” would be applied. We remove all ideology from economics, and view it as a technological discipline, not a scientific discipline. Another analogy: nutrition is a essential aspect of food, but it need not “drive” our eating styles. Fads in eating styles, based on incomplete knowledge of nutrition, are analogous to different economic styles.
No matter how progressive or radical proposals appear for a better future, MOST start with tinkering with economic systems. The exceptions are those proposals based on religious conversion. Almost everyone imagines a good, future education as being like our contemporary best. What if our contemporary best is grossly inadequate? (from email to Stan 2/13/18)
(Governance Subsystems vs Governmental Components)
This theme is very well attended to today, with many labels and in many guises. Michel Bauwen’s Peer2Peer and Commons is explicit in both rationales and means to “decentralize”, and more. Tom Greco researches variations of “local currency” systems. I could search and list thousands of orgs calling for and/or creating human systems without “leaders with power”.
Here, I propose we explore the decision-making of our emergent UPLIFT Team, including our decisions from here on out.
My prior thinking on this theme distinguished between Decision-Making COMPONENTS or SUBSYSTEMS of a system/org/group/population. My exemplar is to contrast GOVERNMENTS (components) with GOVERNANCE Subsystems. Governance being a process without explicit leadership bosses. Although there have been governance subsystems for all of human history, governments have dominated (for many reasons, some genetic propensities which require “handling”). Our Sci/Tech of governance remains embryonic/primitive, especially in the face of advanced technology (which enhances the “power” of both Governmental Orgs and Governance Subsystems).
Governance and Government are but two modes of organized decision-making. There will be many times when the Government Model is more appropriate. I climbed high mountains only behind a competent leader (government). Wintering over in the Antarctic, 1960-61, we 19 men chose to follow orders from our young, inexperienced MD, lieutenant – only when appropriate. Doc Walker was so informed. There was never a need to challenge his decisions; but he often consulted with us as would not be done in the military. We were 10 seabees and 10 civilian scientists.
Sandwiching my stint in the Antarctic, I lived in an urban commune at Yale in New Haven, where ALL decisions had to be unanimous. At the time, serving as “president” (with one hour labor credit per week and having the responsibility of busywork representing Rochdale to Yale), I moderated a meeting where one objection, to a proposal, turned around all others, when their “case was made”. The four “elected offices”, at The Rochdale Cooperative wielded no “power”.
On the other hand, decision-making should be limited to those who both comprehend the choices (to an adequate level) and are “free”/competent to choose. Most humans today don’t meet minimum requirements to choose between many options; which is one rationally for UPLIFT.
Designing/Establishing/Maintaining a Just/Viable/Competent social/societal Decision-Making systems is daunting. I forego further explication, here.
However, the Decision-Making Process needs to be established (yet experimental) BEFORE there is a major increase in membership.
Potential & Emergence
Although the close relationship between potential nd emergence should be obvious, that direct linkage just became explicit.
As I type this, the need to add “ignorance” to this, popped-to-mind. “IGNORANCE” = Positive knowledge OF what you don’t YET know or comprehend; or can’t YET do or appreciate.
In a “sense”, what “is-to-come”, already “exists” – as potential and ignorance. Potential <=> nu .
History of Sci/Tech – many shifts/disruptions
This is continuing theme, the implications of the content in the History and Philosophy of Science on our personal/social/societal futures.
Scientific establishments (as human orgs with human members) rewrite they own historical myths to propagandize students into their “discipline”. Although scientists may speak about Scientific Revolutions and Paradigm Shifts, ESTABLISHED SCIENCE in any era, believes/performs as-if they are “near the truth”; having only to work out some fine details.
As difficult it is to imagine, given the wonders of contemporary Sci/Tech, that we are about to undergo Revolutions and Shifts what will dwarf what hav gone before. this will primarily be in the human sciences, but will spill over to the material sciences. The naive and false belief in the “nature” of Sci/Tech by both the “elites” and the “masses” blocks their ability to prepare for then. They can’t stop or control them. Indeed the “elites/masses” comprehension of Sci/Tech lags far, far behind what is already accepted by the Sci/Tech communities.
Note: New Sci/Tech findings in most disciplines are not known by sci/techs in other Sci/Tech disciplines. Most sci/techs are highly specialized and don’t transfer their Sci/Tech knowledge outside their narrow discipline.