Michael,

"(M0) Morality purposes the endless continuity of rational being"

Rationality is a process, of decision making, not a stable destination. Proposing it as the highest good also assumes good as a form of unambiguous ideal. While our religious and cultural models treat good and bad as some form of cosmic dual between the forces of righteousness and evil, they are actually the biological binary code of attraction to the beneficial and repulsion of the detrimental. What's good for the fox, is bad for the chicken and there is no clear line where the chicken ends and the fox begins. Then, like computer programing, lots of these binary choices add up to the larger reality. Not only are there many shades of grey, but all the colors of the spectrum exist between black and white.

So then when we get into a rational process of decision making, what might be a good at one level, even lots of goods added together, can equal a bad on another level. Such as when we have an economy based on growth in a finite ecosystem, the result is a bit like those bacteria racing across the petri dish. If you were to really pick apart the decision processes people make, they chose that which is beneficial to themselves, because if they didn't, someone else would take advantage of the opportunity.

As you recognize, top down proscriptions and prescriptions don't work, but simply inspire people to want to keep climbing to the top to be in the position make such judgements, so it does have to be some form of bottom up decision making process. I just think that; One) we need to recognize there will always be winners and losers and if there was a sense that losing a conflict wasn't terminal, nor winning one absolute, then it would be a more organic process, in which the layers of options and results tend to settle to their levels, rather than a mechanistic result, where a one, or a few winners dictate to the rest.

Also; that the only real end result that matters is maintaining a habitable planet. I think the entries advocating for extra-terrestrial solutions really don't have a firm grasp on the realities of the size and inhospitality of relatively empty space. We haven't been back to the moon in half a century and are mostly cluttering up low earth orbit with a lot of junk.

Regards,

John

PS, Here is an interesting essay, comparing eastern and western logic.

Dear Mike

I am very pleased with your suggestion and would be very grateful if you give me another translation to recognize the shortcomings that I have made.

I did see copies of your text - I would love to look forward to establish a regulation for your future and especially: "Maximizing PERSONAL FREEDOM: Necessary Inventions" - you'll find it at "The Optional" in my essay.Attachment #1: 1_NHIM_V_BT_BUC_V_GII_PHP_TNG_TH_CHO_TNG_LAI.pdf

    If you don't mind John, I added you to my review list. I'll read your essay shortly.

    You say my "endless continuity of rational being" is a process and therefore not a stable destination. But the qualifier "endless" makes it stable in theory. Are you claiming that an endless continuum cannot be realized as a practical matter? Please explain. - Mike

    Thanks Ajay for the thoughtful review. Here I explain the feasibility of consensus.^* The kind of consensus we're after is defined by the validity criterion (D, p. 3) as a text (myth, law or plan) to which all affected persons can in reason agree. Put like that, you'll see it's easy to obtain a starter consensus. The example I give for a mythic text is (p. 8), "We want to create a better future for ourselves and our children."

    Nobody could reasonably disagree with that; or, if they do, we just erase the part they disagree with. The only problem now is to take that trivial starter consensus and evolve it into something less trivial and more actionable while still holding onto the consensus. My essay describes some of this from the vantage of the individual guide (G, p. 8), but here I offer a more general and graphic description. Picture that starter text ("better future") sitting on the forest floor as the root draft. Above it picture a horizontal series of more substansive drafts ("better future by flying into space", "better future by letting folks play with science", etc) as the lower branches of the tree. Above each branch, picture sub-branches of yet more substansive drafts. And so on, out to the leaves. The tree now encodes a complex set of alternative paths along which the trivial consensus of the root might evolve toward a more substansive text.^** Guiding its actual evolution is the public sphere above the leaves (figures F6, F9) whose rational discourses constantly mull the overriding question, "By what path could the text evolve without ever losing consensus?"

    It then evolves by path selection, step by step, till there emerges in the lower branches the fruit of the process, which is either a) the sought for substansive consensus, or b) a clear dissensus together with a mutual understanding of why consensus has failed. There's also the possibility c) of a given forest dying. The mythic forest would always be the last to go, it alone having the potential for immortality; and the essay ties its fate to that of all rational being in the cosmos.

    Mike

    * I take the feasibility of consensus as your "implementation" question. Please correct me if you meant something else.

    ** Here I simplify the tree's internal structure and gloss over the mechanics of its evolutionary stepping. For more information, see: 1) figure PS; 2) my April 27 post to Doug's essay; and 3) Doug's April 30 post to my essay, and my reply there.

    Mike,

    I've now read your essay a 3rd time and must admit I still struggle to genuinely understand your thoughts (the 1st was speed reading so doesn't count as yours is as immune to skimming as mine).

    I somehow miss the jump from the limitations of c to populating the stars (all of which I agree with) and also reliance on myth. As an astronomer I'm very happy with concepts of distance and light speed limitations but I use the word myth quite often to describe current paradigms of astronomy and physics which we require to shed, so I myself suffer subconsciously from omnipresent preconceptions.

    From seemingly (to me) more pragmatic and empirical foundations I've produced a conventional paper on a cyclic galaxy sequence and cosmology the evidence of which, if studied carefully, implies a very long term (infinite in fact) cyclic process of re-ionization and renewal where we have and will constantly be turned over and mixed with fresh material as garden soil and plants. I'd like to feel morality in one iteration influences the form and intelligence of the next sentient being any one of our brain cells may next become part of (after part of countless billions of suns and rocks between).

    But only myth supports such a hypothesis. I wonder if some complex proton oscillation patterns may hold information of previous cycles? - It's really only a better evidenced 'multiverse' theory, but those who hold more mundane myths may well sent the men in white coats to drag away those with different myths! I wonder which sounds more credible to you?

    Best wishes

    Peter

      Mike,

      I've now read your essay a 3rd time and must admit I still struggle to genuinely understand your thoughts (the 1st was speed reading so doesn't count as yours is as immune to skimming as mine).

      I somehow miss the jump from the limitations of c to populating the stars (all of which I agree with) and also reliance on myth. As an astronomer I'm very happy with concepts of distance and light speed limitations but I use the word myth quite often to describe current paradigms of astronomy and physics which we require to shed, so I myself suffer subconsciously from omnipresent preconceptions.

      From seemingly (to me) more pragmatic and empirical foundations I've produced a conventional paper on a cyclic galaxy sequence and cosmology the evidence of which, if studied carefully, implies a very long term (infinite in fact) cyclic process of re-ionization and renewal where we have and will constantly be turned over and mixed with fresh material as garden soil and plants. I'd like to feel morality in one iteration influences the form and intelligence of the next sentient being any one of our brain cells may next become part of (after part of countless billions of suns and rocks between).

      But only myth supports such a hypothesis. I wonder if some complex proton oscillation patterns may hold information of previous cycles? - It's really only a better evidenced 'multiverse' theory, but those who hold more mundane myths may well sent the men in white coats to drag away those with different myths! I wonder which sounds more credible to you?

      Best wishes

      Peter

        Mike,

        An endless continuum is either the absolute, as in a flat line, or infinite, where all the positive and negative curvatures, waves, forces, actions, etc. eventually cancel out to that flat line.

        Rational behavior is expressed as a force. For the individual organism, or what functions as an individual, like an ant or bee colony, rational behavior is to last as long as possible and propagate as widely as possible. Normally this action is balanced by conflicting activities in the environment, so the various such wave actions do not overwhelm the context with any one action. The situation now is that one species, us, has managed to reach the point where the wave action of our collective rational behavior threatens to splash much of the useful water out of the tub, leaving significantly less resources for our descendants to play with, which is not conducive to the endless continuum of our existence. So the question now is how to move to the next level. After thousands of years of 'going forth and multiplying, do we develop that sense of internal balance and express our forward momentum in ways which are not overly destructive of our environment.

        In the context of your thesis, what are the ideas we start debating and collectively deciding. I try to focus on one particular aspect of our collective function in my entry.

        Regards,

        John

        Dear Michael

        I thoroughly enjoyed your essay which was so well constructed and written that I do not have any real criticism.

        In the introduction to my essay A Space Age on Earth , I, too, mention the function of myth making and the decision making process as it relates to the perception of humanity's place and purpose in the universe. "As knowledge increased though a process of making finer and finer discriminations about the nature of reality, the prevailing models of understanding were consequently modified or replaced by newer ones in order to have a more precise and believable explanation of where we came from, who we are and what is our ultimate purpose." AND "When Earth was perceived of as the entire universe it gave rise to myths and religions that continue to permeate and influence society into the present time."

        I found that your essay eloquently describes this "age old" process and I especially liked your concluding section: "Forever retelling the myth: the material practice of rational being" where you write:

        "The future of humanity is necessarily of mythic construction, our ultimate existence hinging on our ability to invent and evolve a story so convincing it becomes immortal." Bravo!

        Interestingly, your diagram on page 7 (Figure 8 ) reminded me of another "knowledge/myth" conceptual diagram from a previous epoch that is embedded into the American Indian medicine wheel symbol - a circle divided into quadrants by a central cross which also happens to be the Greek astronomical symbol of the planet Earth - the globe with equator and a meridian.

        The image can be seen here. A symbol I also incorporate into The Space Option logo.

        As shown, the four equidistant points representing (N/S/E/W) as well as (Mind/Physical/Emotion/Spirit) are located on the circular diagram representing a conceptual decision making process that proposes to bring harmony and balance into the processes of life:

        1. DECISIONS lead to...

        2. ACTIONS which influence our...

        3. EMOTIONS which then influence our ...

        4. VALUES which in turn influence our...

        1. DECISIONS and so on.....in perpetuity

        I intuitively felt this graphic depiction of ancient knowledge and the associated processes relates well with your more contemporary construct as both relate to "steering the future of humanity".

        Looking forward to hearing more from you in the future and with best regards,

        Arthur

          Dear Michael!

          I found your essay title interesting conveying something similar message to be considered as I'd tried to point out to that in my essay.

          I've not yet been able to read it over with perusal and taking a deserving comment.

          However at the first glance, I welcome the 'morality principle', but I can a bit disagree with the further 'myth-making' and looking into the 'stars'. At least the phrases need to be reconstructed.

          As far as, I also skim read your 'Votorola' about page (much in your essay an abbreviation from that - I find it very interesting and I will look at the software too, as an IT women also :) I feel, I'm able to understand your thoughts and concepts, however all is quite complex for first sight and even for non technical average understanding. (As I read above in some comment).

          I'm also not sure the voting system can work well as negotiated someone's else sent me and written on your wiki page.

          I'm ready to discuss with you further, but I find non-relevant doing that longer here. You can reach me the given e-mail in my essay.

          I can further offer you an annotation tool(it works stable for me tested on Win8 ff28)

          Kind regards,

          Valeria

            In the context of my own thesis (to answer your question), the overguiding idea is the mythic one of where we come from and where we're going. I agree the environment matters here. Please see my answer (E) to Mark's May 3 post. I think it applies both to the living and non-living environment (not always clearly distinct).

            If you watch "Temples of Time" (which I recommend), note the overall mythic structure which is also a natural structure; the whole film comes and goes like a wave, or like a breath. - Mike

            I see your mistake, Peter (though I don't share your sense of humour). You're looking for a complicated answer, but really it's quite simple. Please imagine (p. 1) ...

            A child is looking at the night sky. His mother points, "Do you see that star?" she asks, "That's where we come from. We also have people there, and there," she says, pointing to other specks of light, one by one. Then she gestures across the whole of the starry sky, "This is where we live," she says, "We will always live here."

            She just told a myth. A myth is a story of 'ultimate origin and destination' (see abstr). Far from being false, this particular myth will always be true. Therefore the promise it contains will be kept. She knows this. She knows this precisely because the limit of light speed (C) serves as an interstellar 'barrier to extinction events' (abstr). You see, it isn't complicated.

            And please don't make light of it. The moral view is important. Humanity matters. Thinking only of physics can lead to bad consequences. We might instead tell the story of the child at Hiroshima crying for her mother, with her skin half burnt off. If we steer humanity into the shithole of extinction, then we let that child die for nothing. Either way, you see, these mythic stories tell us exactly who we are.

            Mike

            Mike,

            Sorry to not watch Temples of Time. I don't have the correct download and with this satellite connection, downloads are more trouble than they are worth. Problems of living in the country.

            I agree the guide of civilization is the myth, the narrative, the history. One of my favorite sources of understanding the foundations of western civilization is Gilbert Murray's Five Stages of Greek Religion

            It lays out the various stages of belief systems and how they evolve out of and develop from prior stages. One of the main reasons the story of Jesus proved to be so powerful in this tradition was that it reflected the ancient tradition of the year king. This was to make an individual male a symbolic king for the year, then in the spring bacchanalia, the women would tear him to shreds and bury the pieces in the fields as a fertility rite. So the story of a man declared as king being executed during the spring festivals of the Jews had a strong resonance. Now there are significant differences. While the Greek tradition was primordially organic and female and fertility oriented, the Story of Jesus was much more of a civil conflict between an older and corrupt order and the birth of a new God and order. In a sense then, this was a step over that bridge between being one with nature and its endless cycles of birth and death, to one of civil order and its linear progression upward, to uncorrupted stability. The myth evolves according to function.

            As a side note, consider this article. It lays out the fundamental civil split between Samaritans and Judeans. While this article doesn't consider that aspect of it, it should be considered that Jesus and his disciples came from north of Jerusalem and this had to have still been a major issue in his day. Consider also that for all his pacifist teachings, Jesus' main transgression was to physically attack the "moneychangers in the temple."

            Could it have been that the historical story of Jesus was much more of a percolating civil conflict and not so much a religious rebirth?

            For one thing, it would have been swept under the rug by both the Jews, who were doing that anyway and the Christians, under much external influence, had little mythological need for an internal Jewish issue, but one between the healthy new order and the decrepit old one

            Now this might be something you don't agree with, but I think it offers an interesting possibility and an example of how the myth is molded from the clay of convenience, to become the necessary vessel of social narrative.

            The question than becomes; Where are we going and how will the myth evolve?

            Will we continue on this path of exponential growth and continue directly for the stars, since that is the only space large enough to contain this multiplying process? Or is there a reset in the future and nature does rise back up(think sea levels) and consumes this male denominated and dominated culture, to possibly use whatever mutated dna survive, possibly as central nervous system to a global organism, aka, Gaia?

            Many aspects to consider in this subject.

            Regards,

            John