SotS Posted September 28, 2009 Share Posted September 28, 2009 There is an experiment in its infancy that needs scientists of all fields to contribute. Drawn from the works of the late Carl Sagan, the State of the Species Experiment asks the question, “How should society be structured to facilitate the peaceful and rapid advancement of the species?” Check it out at http://www.stateofthespecies.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainPanic Posted September 29, 2009 Share Posted September 29, 2009 (edited) So, first of all, this is our forum, so we'll discuss this project here - not on your website. I'll comment on the parameters of the project: This experiment is set within the following scenario: - At present, the human species is in trouble. - Political infighting and the prevalence of antiquated supernatural beliefs stifle the growth of science and human development to such an extent that the self-destructive nature of humanity threatens to overtake progress. - In this strained state, humanity stands on the brink of self-annihilation. A solution has been proposed to save our fate; one of the world billionaires has agreed to fund the construction of an autonomous city-state whose population will be selected only of those who; - Are committed to rational thought (with the absence supernatural belief) - Agree that the fate of our species will be determined by our rapid advancement in all disciplines of science (to include the humanities) - Are willing to abandon petty political ideologies in favor of a system designed by knowledge and logic - Are prepared to work hard to make this new society succeed The way in which this new city state plans on saving the species is through the free release of knowledge (which will certainly be created in such a scientific community), and by serving as an example to the rest of the world on how successfully such a community can exist. Some comments: 1. So, in short, you want an autonomous city state, which gives a good example to the rest of the world. You will not be autonomous. You will not be independent. You will be just as integrated in this small world as everybody else. Because it's 2009, and we have internet, phones, etc... and if you like to eat some imported foods, have an ipod or affordable computer, you need to enter the world market. 2. You want a system designed by knowledge and logic. That's a "petty political ideology"... just like socialism and capitalism and all the rest are political ideas. Most of them will include knowledge somewhere. It's all equally petty, because people will just bicker over it until they get it the way they want. What you have in mind is system where everybody wants the same. That's called a utopia. People want influence. And you suggested before that you prefer not to have people around who disagree with your ideals. What if they were BORN in your city state? Suppress them? Suddenly that sounds more like the ideas of some other regimes that we think are evil. 3. And it gets worse. You also aim to convert the rest of the world. So, not only do you not tolerate people who think differently in your own society, you also wish to change the rest of the world into your technocratic world. What if people refuse to be converted? I can guarantee you that people won't listen - because they never have. 4. In short, I think you're developing a scary project here. If you like a knowledge based economy, based on science with highly educated people: Go to Scandinavia or any other country in Europe. We're pretty damn close to your ideals, but we prefer to give people the freedom of thought as well. Sorry for being 100% negative about something that was born out of pure goodwill. You mean to do the right thing, but it'll end in tears. Edited September 29, 2009 by CaptainPanic making sure the post says what I want to say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr.syntax Posted September 29, 2009 Share Posted September 29, 2009 I don`t know what to say. I`m a big admirer of Carl Sagan`s but Captain Panic does make a strong case against this attempt. I don`t agree with everything Captain Panic says either. We are at a crisis point as a species. We have been at previous ones. The very extreme and rapid advancement of science and technology seem to be part of the problem and possibly part of the solution if one is to be found and I dearly hope one is, for all of our sakes. I also believe religion is a dangerous force wreaking all sorts of havoc out there even as we speak. In many ways it appears to me that in the last 20 to 30 years we started going backwards so to speak . It seemed to me we were headed in a good direction through the 1960s 1970s and on into the 1980s and that is when our Nation`s thinking started going backwards. Religious types started making more noise and political types started paying homage to them. The names Reagan and Gingrich come to mind with thier family values lines of BS. And the yokels began embracing all the old superstitions once again. It`s the base cause of what is destroying our World and if many among us don`t start standing up against these nuts you can see where they want to lead us. Back to the good old days of constant religious warfare. We have already arrived to a very significant degree. For sure it can get a whole lot worse. That`s all I have to say about all this for now. ...Dr.Syntax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted September 29, 2009 Share Posted September 29, 2009 Everybody thinks their system is "designed by knowledge and logic." Declaring an objectively right solution and then demanding that everyone agree is called totalitarianism. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SotS Posted September 29, 2009 Author Share Posted September 29, 2009 (edited) Captain Panic, I thank you for bring up some really great issues. I would like to address them as best I can. An open dialogue is most certainly what we are looking for, and we will have it anywhere you like, here or on our wiki. I will address your points by number as you have posted. 1.As briefly stated in the “Food Production (Engineering)” and "Economics" subject pages in the Wiki, you are of course correct, we would not autonomous from the world economy, and certainly should not be autonomous when it comes to information exchange, the “autonomous” part refers exclusively to the political aspects of this city-state. I see where that might be confusing, it was not clearly stated in the experiment parameters. That will change. 2.Yes, a system designed by knowledge and logic is still a system and therefore is still petty (if that's what your after). Here is the difference; just as in the university system, (usually) only those whom are experts in a discipline have the influence to decide matters relating to that discipline. We propose that science, not politics dictates, for example, the standards for vehicle emissions, or what is taught in high school biology class (highly simplified examples). Of course there comes a point where certain fields overlap, and organizational mechanisms to deal with these occurrences would need to be created (one of the purposes of this experiment). As far as the everyone thinking alike, this “alike-ness” would only extend so far as necessary to hold together a society committed to the stated goals. This is not a Utopia, that is what is present in every stable nation, otherwise it wouldn't be stable. As far as how alike the founding members should be, and in what ways; this is another topic that needs to be discussed in our Wiki and is part of the experiment! For those born into this society, there will be no oppression of ideas, that goes against the discovery of ideas goal. Sure, children would likely be educated in school, which would teach a curriculum perhaps based on what child development experts and subject matter experts agree is correct, and that would likely have a certain formative effect (as does all education), but again; that is a great topic for the wiki!! 3.Converting the rest of the world; I can see this is a point on which our parameters must truly fail to adequately explain the intent of this experiment. Please let me try and clarify. The type of change we are speaking about here, take place through the free distribution of helpful scientific knowledge, such as advancements in clean energy, food production, etc. We are not talking about robot armies walking down the street, that goes completely against the idea of the thing. This was truly a fantastic example of the dialogue we are trying start on the State of the Species Wiki. Perhaps not always so adversarial, but surly always as honest. Thank you for posting it on our problems page, I can assure you it is exactly what we are looking for and it will not be taken down. I will however move it to its own sub-page which will be linked to the same page in which it was posted (because it is so large). Captain Panic, I would love to try and persuade you more about the merits of this project because I think you would be a great contributor! The reason we picked this forum as venue to debut this project is precisely to get reposes like these (which are extremely valuable because they afford us the opportunity to iron-out inconsistencies and mistakes before we more publicly sought membership). Critical minds are those on which this project will depend, so I urge anyone who has strong opinions about this project to go and post on the wiki! So, first of all, this is our forum, so we'll discuss this project here - not on your website. I'll comment on the parameters of the project: Some comments: 1. So, in short, you want an autonomous city state, which gives a good example to the rest of the world. You will not be autonomous. You will not be independent. You will be just as integrated in this small world as everybody else. Because it's 2009, and we have internet, phones, etc... and if you like to eat some imported foods, have an ipod or affordable computer, you need to enter the world market. 2. You want a system designed by knowledge and logic. That's a "petty political ideology"... just like socialism and capitalism and all the rest are political ideas. Most of them will include knowledge somewhere. It's all equally petty, because people will just bicker over it until they get it the way they want. What you have in mind is system where everybody wants the same. That's called a utopia. People want influence. And you suggested before that you prefer not to have people around who disagree with your ideals. What if they were BORN in your city state? Suppress them? Suddenly that sounds more like the ideas of some other regimes that we think are evil. 3. And it gets worse. You also aim to convert the rest of the world. So, not only do you not tolerate people who think differently in your own society, you also wish to change the rest of the world into your technocratic world. What if people refuse to be converted? I can guarantee you that people won't listen - because they never have. 4. In short, I think you're developing a scary project here. If you like a knowledge based economy, based on science with highly educated people: Go to Scandinavia or any other country in Europe. We're pretty damn close to your ideals, but we prefer to give people the freedom of thought as well. Sorry for being 100% negative about something that was born out of pure goodwill. You mean to do the right thing, but it'll end in tears. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedSisyphus, Please see my response to Captain Panic, this project does not seek to force an objectively "right" solution on the world because this solution can not exist. This is why starting an autonomous city-state is an important component; so those that wish to be involved can. We are not seeking to create a solution which all people must follow, we are simply seeking to create a solution which can work for some people, allowing them offer positive solutions for everyone. Everybody thinks their system is "designed by knowledge and logic." Declaring an objectively right solution and then demanding that everyone agree is called totalitarianism. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedDr. Syntax, It was precisely along the lines of what you describe in your post that this experiment was created. To again borrow Sagan's ideas, as we have advanced technologically, we (as a species) have failed to discard the supernatural beliefs that hamper our wise and judicious use of this technology. Further exacerbating the problem is the fact that these irrational elements have a large and crippling influence on the political decision-making process, as seen by the right-wing war on science. Sure, we admit; our project does seek like-minded individuals in that we seek people who believe in what what are trying to do, but that is necessary to accomplish anything collaboratively. The whole purpose of our experiment is to seek knowledge. Please join us. I don`t know what to say. I`m a big admirer of Carl Sagan`s but Captain Panic does make a strong case against this attempt. I don`t agree with everything Captain Panic says either. We are at a crisis point as a species. We have been at previous ones. The very extreme and rapid advancement of science and technology seem to be part of the problem and possibly part of the solution if one is to be found and I dearly hope one is, for all of our sakes. I also believe religion is a dangerous force wreaking all sorts of havoc out there even as we speak. In many ways it appears to me that in the last 20 to 30 years we started going backwards so to speak . It seemed to me we were headed in a good direction through the 1960s 1970s and on into the 1980s and that is when our Nation`s thinking started going backwards. Religious types started making more noise and political types started paying homage to them. The names Reagan and Gingrich come to mind with thier family values lines of BS. And the yokels began embracing all the old superstitions once again. It`s the base cause of what is destroying our World and if many among us don`t start standing up against these nuts you can see where they want to lead us. Back to the good old days of constant religious warfare. We have already arrived to a very significant degree. For sure it can get a whole lot worse. That`s all I have to say about all this for now. ...Dr.Syntax Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedI believe there has been some confusion about the purpose of this experiment. We are not building an evil empire; there is currently no possibility of this hypothetical city-state being built; the State of Species Experiment simply endeavors to create an academic community in which the rational discussion of the stated problem can take place. If you believe in science, and think it would be nice to create a society that reflects this, then the State of the Species experiment simply asks you to share your ideas (positive and/or negative) on how this could be arranged Edited September 29, 2009 by SotS Consecutive posts merged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr.syntax Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 Hello SotS, Thank you for your reply. You may of already covered it but what is it we are supposed to due. Are we to buy up some land and create a commune ? Something like that. You got me thinking about it. I bitch a lot about how the whole World is a bunch of crazy neurotics willing to believe in most anything imaginable. One need only look at the most popular religions and my point is made. Crackpot Clerics seem to lead the current list. My only expertise would be in Primal Therapy. If you wish to check into it go to : hppt://www.primaltherapy.com . A very short but descriptive overview of Primal Therapy is offered there. It may take all one minute to get an overview. Dr. Janov has a short video or you can read as much or as little as you care to. I`ll be getting back to you. Please check that website out. You`ll be in and out in less time than it took to read this response unless you decide to check around in there a bit more. Sincerely, ....Dr.Syntax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 My only expertise would be in Primal Therapy. If you wish to check into it go to : hppt://www.primaltherapy.com . A very short but descriptive overview of Primal Therapy is offered there. Please stop spamming. This relates in no way to the thread topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr.syntax Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 Please stop spamming. This relates in no way to the thread topic. REPLY: Do have some tracking program following me. Anyway, it has everything to do with this thread if you bothered to read it. He is looking for people for some project he is attempting to put together. I was telling him what skills I had that may be desirable. JUST SO YOU KNOW. I will post about primal as much as I care to. Don`t you post about things that concern you. I am not trying to sell aything. I am not a working therapist. I do work with some few for free. I get paid nothing. Primal works. It is the only way there is to cure neurosis. You may wish to look into it yourself. You`ve become obsessed with me in a negative way. I try and avoid you as I know you just want to argue with me and I`M REALLY TIRED OF IT. ...Dr.Syntax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 repeated offtopic spamming will get you banned. so no, you won't post about it as often as you care to. primal therapy has bog all to do with the topic. and also, for someone named 'dr. syntax' you seem to be completely unaware of the concept of a paragraph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr.syntax Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 repeated offtopic spamming will get you banned. so no, you won't post about it as often as you care to. primal therapy has bog all to do with the topic. and also, for someone named 'dr. syntax' you seem to be completely unaware of the concept of a paragraph. REPLY: You are off topic by continuing this pointless argument. ...DS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SotS Posted September 30, 2009 Author Share Posted September 30, 2009 As it may have not been clearly stated by the website and my previous posts, I will explain what the State of the Species Experiment needs from individuals. FIRST: We are not asking for any change in the way you live your life, there are many organizations that already have that one covered, and this would greatly outreach the constraints of this experiment. All we are asking is that individuals educated (formally or informally) in certain relevant subjects contribute their ideas to the State of the Species Wiki. This is an experiment of discovery, attempting to determine what form a society would take if its structure was built collaboratively by experts in their respective fields. No cults, no robot armies; just the sharing and critiquing of ideas! Hello SotS, Thank you for your reply. You may of already covered it but what is it we are supposed to due. Are we to buy up some land and create a commune ? Something like that. You got me thinking about it. I bitch a lot about how the whole World is a bunch of crazy neurotics willing to believe in most anything imaginable. One need only look at the most popular religions and my point is made. Crackpot Clerics seem to lead the current list. My only expertise would be in Primal Therapy. If you wish to check into it go to : hppt://www.primaltherapy.com . A very short but descriptive overview of Primal Therapy is offered there. It may take all one minute to get an overview. Dr. Janov has a short video or you can read as much or as little as you care to. I`ll be getting back to you. Please check that website out. You`ll be in and out in less time than it took to read this response unless you decide to check around in there a bit more. Sincerely, ....Dr.Syntax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts