Thursday, December 30, 2010

Is Organization Always Needed?

The extra overhead of putting together an organization to forward a particular purpose and achieve a goal is not always justified for a short-range goal. Try to keep the resources spent on organization as a small percent of the overall resources spent to achieve a particular goal. Short-range goals = less organization.
Small activities may be “do-it-yourselfers”. In a task involving more than one person all that may be needed is to set up and possibly “smooth out” some flow lines for sub-products and products. This can even be done “on-the-fly”.
Keep your organization lean, but with enough structure and “muscle” to retain its integrity and make progress despite any obstacles the environment has to offer.

Work as A Therapeutic Activity

First, make the assumption that the goal of your therapy is to recover more “you” in the form of more competent self-determination. First realize that the physical universe we live in and react with is built and arranged on the basis of aligned data. The alignment is not only of data of equal value, but also in terms of hierarchies of data from the most basic to the most specific. Now get the idea that once upon a time, and it probably was very long ago, you had a very good understanding of the fundamental data and hierarchies of data that applied to whatever you were working with or communicating with.
So what happened? Well, you most likely did have a lot of good experience in working and getting things done, and what defined it as good was its alignment with fundamental data of the area in which you were working or communicating. However, along the way a lot of mistakes, goofs, unethical activities, even crimes resulted in accumulated aberration that cut across your ability to face up to areas of life and work with them. So there are pools of good experience buried down there under the aberration. You want to tap into these pools. How to do it?
First, make an effort to educate yourself in the fundamental data of the area in which you will be working. It is probably true, especially in the beginning, that what you are thinking of as fundamental may still be quite shallow (or particular) in relation to the “deeper” more fundamental data you would have known before. But all that is OK. Think of it as an archaeological dig. You may be getting good results by regaining contact with a certain level of knowledge and understanding, while still deeper levels lie as yet untouched.
As you are working try to remind yourself of the basic fundamental data that underlies the top layer data of your work. If you have a good work purpose, and you are making progress on it, you can build up a communication with and awareness of the underlying basics if you keep them in mind to some degree. It is not necessary to keep them all in mind, or even any in mind at any given moment. Most people have trouble keeping more than a couple of things in mind at one time. Just pick one of your fundamentals up and hit on it every once in awhile in the course of your work. If enough progress is being made and enough of this “hitting” is being done along the lines of fundamental data known in the present that match or come close to matching fundamentals known and used before, then you will at some point tap into a reservoir of your own good experience. Your reservoir may allow you insights into other aligned data that you had not been aware of as well as greater confidence and certainty on the data you were working with.
A good example of the application of this theory is the previous article in this blog on Tai Chi exercises using the Tai Chi fundamental principles.

Saturday, December 18, 2010

How to Evaluate the Optimum Solution for a Particular Existing Group Scene

First, define what the limits of your existing scene are. It is best to focus on what you can influence or change directly or with the least amount of indirection. Include in this scene a “third dimension” of data ranking or data hierarchy, where more basic or general data underlie less general, more specific data. Think of the data items as pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. So, there are functions, activities, production, knowledge, purposes, competency, hats, hat wearers, policy, technology, training, equipment, etc. All of these are pieces of the puzzle. They are aligned in a particular configuration in the existing scene. You just want to look and see what you have, not what you wish to have or think you have, but what you actually DO have in the existing scene.
Next work out what the ideal of this scene would be. Bring to bear any relevant practical philosophical knowledge that you have. You should want to include safety, production, viable exchange of products, freedom for the scene participants to apply self-determined competency, ability to self-correct, and ability to support or back-up higher level s of production through judicious application of resources that increase the degree of organization of the scene.
Now go back to the existing scene and “look” in the direction you would have to go in order to progress towards the ideal scene. If you rearrange the puzzle pieces of the existing into different configurations, which configuration will give you the maximum progress towards the ideal scene? That is your answer. In working this out you may want to use lists or diagrams or representative manipulatable items that can be moved around to represent different possible configurations of resources.
Don’t worry if you don’t get it done perfectly. Close will do, and you have your whole life to practice getting better with it.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Contra-Life Acts or Sins, Cleanliness and the Ideal Scene

What is a sin? A sin is whatever a Christian authority says it is. That is not a very useful datum for providing guidance to live ethically. It also leaves organized Christianity open to subornation and perversion.
A better guide is "pro-life". This should be inclusive of any legitimate religion, and it puts the responsibility on the individual to apply his self-determination in comparing and aligning data with the pro-life direction. In this way not just the few, but the many exercise their analyzers and take some measure of responsibility for seeing that the overall scene does
not head in the wrong direction.
Whether an action or activity is pro-life is determined with reference to the pro-life direction, which is the direction of movement towards the ideal scene. It is the direction of winning the game of life; winning in the game of "chutes and ladders". The goal is recovery of self, allowing opportunity for generating and building on good life experience and getting back to the better states of life that we as spiritual beings have been in at some time in the past.
The ideal scene I am referring to here really enters in above the level of the personal life. The ideal scene should be capable of including at least all honest people, while the personal life is centered around the individual. The ideal scene is a practical philosophical tool that refers to the here and now. It is not meant as a metaphysical or religious or spiritual intangible. It is meant to be a workable, achievable template that individuals and groups can use to reconcile their
activities beyond their private life against.
How is the ideal scene determined? The ideal scene could be stated in general terms as steady progress and movement in the direction of improved conditions. One way to get more specific is just to list out all the desired components, then see how or if they can be optimally arranged to allow the most components to be included and to allow the most opportunity for success in
achieving or improving each component for the most individuals. The desired components should appeal to all unabberated individuals, not just a select group or strata.


This list is just intended as a starting point. It can be added to and modified with the idea of moving closer to the optimum. It might help to list the points down on separate pieces of paper and lay them on a table top so that they can be moved around in an effort to align with each other. The idea is to end up with a coherent set of items that can be used as a guide in
determining the pro-life direction.

In working, communicating, staying out of traps, correcting self and others, aligning and evaluating data. A commitment to Continuous Improvement of Competency.

As advances are made in the pro-life direction it should become easier to get along with others. But this should not preclude:

Freedom to Dislike or Hate Others
A person's individuality is expressed not only through their likes, but also through their dislikes or even hatred. A common turn-off to the idea of increased harmony is the intimation that an individual would be required to like everyone else. Like, dislike and hatred are components of the personal life, but since they are subjective, should remain subordinate to objective realities and considerations and so should never trump the

Right to Work and Participate in Groups
For all honest individuals.

Increased Productivity

Decreased Crime

Decreased War

Increased Personal Health

Increased Sanity

Increased Education and Literacy

Increased Intelligence
A basic activity in moving in the pro-life direction is analagous to playing horseshoe pitching. The individual faces up to all factors in his environment and tries to choose the optimal activity and use of resources that allows the most progress from his current position or situation in the pro-life direction. Just like in horseshoes, he doesn't have to be perfect. In the general direction is good, close is better, ringers can be gotten over time, and so will increased intelligence (from all that analytical exercise of aligning data to give a better result).

Increased Understandings and Ability to Communicate

It should be driven by the individual-- from the "ground up", so that its continued success is not dependent on any particular leader or group of leaders. This makes it more robust and much more difficult to pervert. To this end the activities should be:

Simple and Doable
There should be no great costs involved. The main costs would be analytical "elbow grease". Much of this would be applied during the hours already being spent in work and chores. Some time would also be spent on study, which requires:

A Technology of How to Successfully Study for the Ability to Apply,
which is a very different thing from studying to pass a test or get a grade, and which can be applied by the individual, if he desires, beyond the halls of formal education.

It should be capable of being forwarded from the starting point of any existing culture wherein the individual has at least basic human rights. Revolutions should not be needed, but the individual will become stronger, more capable, and less easily led. Some may object to that.

There should be no central authority. Central organization should be kept to a minimum. This would decreases or eliminates the opportunity for infiltration and perversion. There can, however, be:

Consultants should be expected to encourage the individual to think for themselves, rather than supply answers. Possibly the teaching model of Socrates could be used in which he (Socrates) only asked questions of his students, rather than lecturing them.

Correcters or Checkers
Who the individual can reference to. A Corrector or Checker should always appeal to the self-determined understanding of the individual.

Libraries and Depositories of write-ups of successful actions and hats, policy system templates, etc. The Internet is ideal for this.

Opportunity for the individual to acquire enough resources to allow him to work, maintain his health, provide for his family, and communicate as required to engage in the pro-life evolution.

Opportunity for the individual to rise above the level of hand-to-mouth existence and the struggle to fill immediate need so that he can devote at least a minimum amount of time to education and practical philosophy and self-determined application of what he has learned to his accumulated life experience. Part of this would be increased health leading to increased longevity which then allows greater amounts of life experience and time to reflect on it.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Group Dynamics Chart

A chart depicting the progression from the personal life into the impersonal (professional) life and beyond. It shows what I call the "Who Band" vs. the "What Band".

Click on the image for a better view.

Sunday, March 14, 2010

The Road to Freedom

The Road to Freedom must be traveled on a self-determined basis. It is not an easy Road, but it is wholesome and practical. Following another or others cannot be substituted for self-determined understanding and action. The Road leads up out of the Who band of the personal life into the What band of group activity. The What band includes what goal, what purpose, what policy, what technology, what awareness, what product, what sub-products, what exchange of products, what exchange of sub-products, what condition of communication with the environment, or exchange with the environment of the group, what flow, what line or route, what statistic, what function, what position, what "hat", what sequence of actions, etc.
The road out of the Who band is a road that leads toward higher levels of data coherency, with fewer and fewer arbitrary data, actions or activities. Part of this coherency is alignment with existing bodies of empirically successful coherent data (object oriented programming, design of life forms, etc.).

Each man travels the road when he determines his own goals, finds a path or purpose line to arrive there, then creates a system of policies, or finds an existing group that follows this purpose line. He then applies himself within the framework of policy of the group with the knowledge and awareness that a well-organized group is the most optimum use of resources to make progress along his chosen purpose line. Applying the mind towards optimization of resources is a good exercise to strengthen analytical abilities.

Social groups are aggregations of personalities. They are not causative enough to achieve any but short-range goals and purposes. They lie within the Who band.
Any fixation on Who-ness or establishment of Who arbitrariness is a tie that prevents continued progress away from the Dark Ages of feudalism. A "civilization" with too many ties back to the Dark Ages in the form of Who fixations puts itself in jeopardy of being pulled back and permanently subordinated to Who arbitraries.

For a civilization to remain healthy it must make constant progress away from the edge of the steep slope which falls away into the eternal Dark Ages. The more progress made away from this edge, the more secure is the Road to Freedom now and in the future for those who would recover their competency in improving conditions and increase their self-respect and value to others. Any system that upholds Who-ness as senior to self-determined thought and action in the What band of group activity is a tie back to the Dark Ages which must be broken for civilization to progress towards greater stability and security.

Anyone who has agreed to being subordinated to a Who or system of Who-ness is on the Road to Slavery or is already a slave. For a person to stay free he must "earn" good experience through progress towards self-determined goals. The better the goal, and the more progress made, the higher the "pay" or return in terms of good experience. In today's world mainstream media is constantly pushing the "Who" of politics, Hollywood, music and sport. Personal and social networking is all who-based. It is up to the individual to keep a focus on the what-ness of his self-determined goals and purposes as senior to all this who-ness mess.

Good experience stabilizes the individual. He develops a better ability to face up to that area of life, and has more confidence and certainty based in demonstrated competence. Part of the "pay" also is greater ease in meshing with others to operate as a team rather than an aggregation of personalities.

Please progress along the road to higher competency and help distance yourself and others from the rim of the canyon of eternal Dark Ages.