• ¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0
• Just viewed the Moyers/Suzuki dialog , part 1, on Climate Change. Part 2. Frustrating! If only I could motivate them to attend to UPLIFT. There IS a concrete, viable way out; one doesn’t need to depend on vague hope. Yes, humankind has the potential – but there is no viable organized activity to actualize that potential. Because, in their envisioned endgame our sick societal system will somehow be magically transformed into a healthy societal system. However, most attention is captured by how to avoid (or adapt to) Climate Change – using a modified version of contemporary humankind. Even if the shifts are really major (stop banks creating money, regulate corporations and banks, outlaw war, full transparency, etc. ) the scenario would be step-by-step modification – to slowly transform societal systems so they can attend to slowing Climate Change and adapting to Climate Change Consequences.
• I propose that attempted simulations of any transformation scenario would demonstrate a very, very low probability of success. There are systems where specified transformations are impossible. This is probably the case for transforming large, complex and highly interdependent, dysfunctional societal systems. Reform of any parts would so destabilize the whole so as to create a backlash that blocks the reform. Concurrent coordinated reforms would require cooperation and collaboration that doesn’t exist. Significant societal transformation is impossible. We must seek alternatives.
• While we continue to survive living within our changing societal systems – as we don’t have a new system here-right-now to depend on – we could begin to learn/organize the emergence of the new Humanity we need. Our UPLIFT movement is not dependent on established systems (other than to temporarily support our persons), nor does UPLIFT attempt to change them. As persons we remain temporarily dependent on established systems; but this dependence decreases rapidly as our UPLIFT movement  begins  to accelerate its growth exponentially. Our nu order, our new Humanity, as peacefully as possible, replaces the established systems.
• Our movement is called UPLIFT because its goal is to rapidly uplift the distribution of cognitive/emotional/performance competencies in the whole human planetary population. Imagine the cornucopia of human resources becoming available to attend to all our many crises – as a whole and not as separate, independent, problems. Furthermore, moderating Climate Change (and the many other harms humankind has done to the biosphere) will require everyone to radically change their lifestyles – and for this we need a wise, intelligent, informed, competent, emotionally balanced, global population.
• That the UPLIFT process is not only possible, but the most viable option available, appears not to be even in the imagination of everyone concerned. Given time I can make a good scientific case for its viability. Much depends on giving some direction to the vast human potential today, emerging-in-turmoil facing a “no way out” situation – imagined, but felt real. David Suzuki, in the Moyers interview, made reference to the moon program of the 1960s – where we set out to accomplish a major mission – not being sure we could do it – it depended on our learning-to-organize and our organizing-to-learn. We did it! We can do it again. It is an enterprise commensurate with our emerging potential.
• How might I get the attention of Bill and David in a setting where I might present the UPLIFT option? Sending them a letter or email won’t do it. Even if someone arranged for me to have a brief audience with them won’t do it. Well organized personalized  campaigns are needed if people with influence are to be reached. But, I have no proven presentation to give them. I have yet to create a presentation to motivate others to learn more.
• Why has it been so difficult?” has been my primary challenge for a long time. I don’t devote more time developing the UPLIFT program because that work requires teams and I can’t organize teams.  My recent analysis is that a major educational system is needed for others to learn to comprehend UPLIFT, and that only I – alone – can create a pilot version (to prepare my initial team). This will involve me getting back to work on the UPLIFT process – but this time applied to myself and my initial team. There still remains how I will get anyone to chose to assertively learn more about UPLIFT when the educational program is ready.
• In analogy, UPLIFT might be viewed as a university degree major, a new academic discipline. I assertively learned physics and math at RPI, Chicago and Yale because I wanted to know about science – and physics looked like the foundation. Yet, my understanding of just what “physics” was emerged slowly over all those years – and I am still learning.  I learned physics topics and practices semester by semester, but my comprehension of “physics” emerged slowly. I actually came to comprehend physics after learning its contexts in the history and philosophy of science. But, that latter learning was greatly enhanced by my formal education in physics and math. Higher education was fortunately affordable in my years, and it was the “proper” activity for a young man to engage.
• I fear I would scare people off, and cause them to look at me as arrogant, to claim that UPLIFT is a new conceptual scheme as complex as physics. Even a brief introduction would be equivalent to a challenging graduate course. It would be even more difficult because UPLIFT concepts must compete with “established” concepts – which must be unlearned. None of this is new – BUS was designed with these challenges in mind.  I designed BUS to handle these challenges, but didn’t expect that I would attract no one to explore BUS with me. A BUS is needed to create a BUS, I have discovered.
• Could Larry/nuet really be that unique – a true alien among humans? Has his special savant nature really given him special competencies no one else has? My reading of Social, Denial, and other books challenging our accepted views of “human nature” suggests a speculative hypothesis. But, that is not the only difficulty. Larry lacks many requisite competencies to accomplish many of his projects. His many decades work have been poor in efficiency – he cannot really build on his own writings because they are not adequately organized – nor can they be usefully organized. Larry needs discipline. He understands his needs, and why, also from his readings about “human nature”. To apply slow, conceptual knowledge is very difficult when resisted by fast, intuitive, mammalian knowledge.

¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 5/15/2014 12:22 AM
5/16/2014 12:20 AM   Almost 24 hours exactly since I stopped composing. Meaning?

¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 Today has been a total waste. My actions will be washed out with interference of the actions of the swarm. Can the actions of individual persons impose direction to the swarm?

¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 It doesn’t matter what I write, there will be no effect in the future. Probably! There is a possible future where my writings will be later viewed as seminal. Yet, Larry makes no meaningful actions to reesee seaf galdee nuet and UPLIFT. He jabbers with his fingers on the keyboard like everyone else. My take on Jabber in 2009:

¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 Will all the Jabber-Jabber-Jabber in social media result in anything significant?  The paradox that faced Tolstoy. Do some individuals make a difference or is it all washed out by the swarming masses? Like everyone else my fast, intuitive mind is paralyzed into a habit-knot, while my slow, rational mind dithers within its constraints. Nuet continues to creatively emerge, but has no agency. Individual persons cannot significantly change by self agency, even when conceptually desired. Persons bootstrapping seafing each other can significantly change. UPLIFT remains a viable option.