Creating a New World

[Aliana]

Wow – Been away from a computer for a day or so, and having to catch up. Still watching The Trap

I am assuming for this lesson, that we can begin to form a new community in the clearing with a stable external environment - i.e. no immediate threats from the external environment - or is that something we need to consider as well?

Quote from: Laura
Can society be structured like a family? Like a macrocosmic human body?

I think anything other than that will send group on the same path society is on now.

I was thinking something similar. In the first few hours, I trust that people will generally offer whatever assistance they are best qualified to give. It seems that most of the forumites have already covered the basics on what needs to be done immediately to insure survival.

So what came to mind next is: at what point does the group come together to answer the basic questions about community structure? Because it seems that some basic structure will more or less evolve over the course of the first few days as people do what is necessary for survival and generally act according to “type”. While everyone is so preoccupied with survival, they hardly have time to think about the longer term – but once a certain informal structure has evolved – it becomes more difficult to change over time even if it’s unworkable.

So – first and foremost – engendering a sense of being part of a large extended family would be a necessity – not only for survival in the immediate situation – but also as a base for anything that evolves later. It would insure a spirit of "all-for-all" and will hopefully have a positive bearing on anything that evolves later.

Quote from Forge
Never allow psychopats, characteropaths, etc. to become a cook in the community. Let them weave baskets, haul tree trunks, gather firewood, hunt, organize them for activities that cannot endanger normal people. They can be useful in a society in well thought out positions, probably after a therapy.

As Lobaczewsky points out:
"We should not fault anyone for having inherited some psychological anomalies from his parents anymore, than we fault someone in the case of physical or physiological anomalies such as Daltonism" [Political Ponerology p. 205]

This brings up an interesting point – if we look at them as “disabled” in some sense, then perhaps we can find a way of immunizing the community from their depredations while treating them humanely. Obviously education of the community of this phenomenon will be a priority. I think we can assume that such people will always be present, whether by accidents, genetic anomalies, etc – so a proper and humane method of handling this has to be paramount.

 

[Alana]

Well, after watching The Trap, a few things stand out. For one, there ARE people who are only out for themselves, who are paranoid strategists, and not just psychopaths. I think this is where an example needs to be set, publicly, where the situation is described for everyone. "Here we are, no food, no shelter. None of us WANTS to be here trying to survive. We'd all much rather be in the comfort of our own homes with a supermarket and climate control! But we're not there. We're here, and we need to do certain things in order to survive. Yes, there are those who cannot and SHOULD not, i.e. babies, elderly, and sick. But even the sick and elderly contribute where they can, because they see our situation. If we are going to survive as a group, we need to cooperate as a group. If you can cook, cook. If you can hunt, hunt. If you can build, build. But if you have the ability to contribute and do NOT, you create an imbalance in our survival. So you've got a choice. Either survive with the rest of us, by contributing to our efforts. Or try surviving on your own for a while and see how much easier it is to contribute in THIS setting." Then again, maybe an ultimatum isn't the best way to put it! I don't know. Maybe those who do not contribute get to miss out on benefits, like being high on the list for house-living. Maybe they eat last, etc.

I had in mind the question on what to do with the psychopaths/pathologicals among our little group in the forest for few hours. To be honest, when somebody mentioned that they might start killing and raping, my first thought was "We'll have to disappear them!" But that's not STO. And it's unlikely (?) that they start raping and killing the first days, they'd too be disoriented, hungry, etc. So, i think at first, when we spot them and see that they are trying to manipulate and go for a free ride in everybody elses backs, the approach mentioned above by Approaching Infinity is the way to go, imho. The ultimatum. If they stay, they'd need to work for it.

So that things don't go out of hand, we'd need to watch them closely and make sure none of the rest stay alone with them, always be in groups of 10-12 people. This way, the deviants will soon learn that we are united among ourselves and if they get tired of it, and can't deal with not getting things their way, they can go on their own. Somebody (apologies for forgetting who it was :( ) mentioned that these people are usually the risk takers, and if they are willing to cooperate, their skills might be useful to all, if they LEARN to share. The community can use the reward/punishment system to teach them.

As i was watching the Trap (watched the 1st and half of the second so far) and keeping in mind the Exoskeleton and Endoskeleton article, i think that after we have seen to the needy and created materials, went out and got wood and food, used sticks to find water ala dowsing, and built a few huts to keep everyone who need them safe and protected, we have to sit around the fire one night, all together in a HUGE circle, and talk about the rules of our little community i think. And yes, there will be a need for a group of decision makers. Not everybody likes to be a leader anyway. The 200 people can together decide who will be their group of representatives. This group can be comprised of the person who is skilled in building, another who is skilled in hunting, another who is knowledgeable on human psychology, perhaps a person with great intuition and compassion will be among them, a wise elder, an inspiring, energetic and full of ideas youth, etc. In short, the people who showed initiative and strength in dealing with the situation initially and found the means and ways that helped everybody else, the people that because of their actions and character, the majority came to trust and respect. And this elected group would be making decisions after assessing the needs of everyone in the community, so they need to be in contact with them all.

What i find fascinating with this idea, is imagining all these people from different ethnic, cultural, class, educational and religious backgrounds, coming together out of necessity and cooperating (for the most part). We might have nothing of what we are accustomed to in our lives today, but the wealth of knowledge and information and skills that each person brings with them is enormous! And what a challenge also. An ex-executive of a multimillion company will see that the cleaning lady is much wiser in the ways of surviving in the forest and might even have to listen to her if she gets elected in the decision making committee. What i mean is that traditional roles will be reversed. Some egos might retaliate, like the ex-executive who will want to order people around like he is used to do. Maybe, but then maybe not. The people are there because of a traumatic experience and that can change a person a lot, one way or another.

Anyway, these are just thoughts i had trying to see this scenario play out, for what they are worth.

 

[RflctnOfU]

Can society be structured like a family? Like a macrocosmic human body?

I hesitated in my earlier posts to mention this idea. An important thing to keep in mind, OSIT, is that NATURE is the great alchemist. Natural principles ought to be considered. If we take to heart the 'as above so below' maxim, then living in harmony with the 'world' in which we find ourselves - eg structuring our little group like the way nature forms itself (or , if you wish, the bipedal form) - a group that operates according to this ought to do well...at least in theory. We will need the 'skeletal structure', the 'nervous system', the 'digestive system', the 'circulatory system', etc etc or the sociological analogue of same, also taking into account the 'cellular structure'. Mother Nature sure ain't dumb! What can we learn from her? Where has she succeeded so wonderfully? We have a template at our disposal that WORKS! And part of that is the 'immune system' - in this case a knowledge of pathology, which has already been mentioned in numerous contexts. How can we do this? Natural talents/passions (of the soul) would be as a sort of self selecting mechanism - the specific system in our 'organism' for which we are most able to work for the whole 'body'. In this context, ALL functions of the body are valuable, as each supports the whole in it's own way.

Ok...I feel like I am rambling now. Done

Kris

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

I think the community would have to be organized in such a way that it makes it easy for everyone to know just what is needed and what is lacking. As such, leaders/elders would naturally emerge, lists would be made, and people would volunteer (well they should be asked/encouraged to do so by whoever is the elder/leader person) their services based on what they know and able to do. But everyone should also gather around and discuss everything, I think the most important thing is to bring everybody up to speed in terms of a mutual understanding of what is needed, and then gradually as time allows discussion of pathology/psychopaths should occur. I know some people have said that pathological elements would be rooted out because of the critical situation, but that's not necessarily the case, and I think the more open and honest discussion and networking happens, the safer everyone will be and the more chances for success the group has, not just for physical survival, but from being subverted and tricked into pathologies.

As for deciding who gets the first house, I agree that those most in need should get it and then the doctor who can use his to heal people. I also agree that those most critical to the survival of the group should be protected, but I think that people who have skills should be teaching them to others to make people gradually better able to survive, so that the group does not depend on any one person for something that no one else can do. Kids can watch adults work and learn at the same time, and gradually start helping at a skillful level as well. I think that deciding who gets "first" anything should always be done by need first, everything else later. But not just personal need, but also the need of the group.

 

[Aliana]

Quote from: Laura

Can society be structured like a family? Like a macrocosmic human body?

I hesitated in my earlier posts to mention this idea. An important thing to keep in mind, OSIT, is that NATURE is the great alchemist. Natural principles ought to be considered. If we take to heart the 'as above so below' maxim, then living in harmony with the 'world' in which we find ourselves - eg structuring our little group like the way nature forms itself (or , if you wish, the bipedal form) - a group that operates according to this ought to do well...at least in theory. We will need the 'skeletal structure', the 'nervous system', the 'digestive system', the 'circulatory system', etc etc or the sociological analogue of same, also taking into account the 'cellular structure'. Mother Nature sure ain't dumb! What can we learn from her? Where has she succeeded so wonderfully? We have a template at our disposal that WORKS! And part of that is the 'immune system' - in this case a knowledge of pathology, which has already been mentioned in numerous contexts. How can we do this? Natural talents/passions (of the soul) would be as a sort of self selecting mechanism - the specific system in our 'organism' for which we are most able to work for the whole 'body'. In this context, ALL functions of the body are valuable, as each supports the whole in it's own way.


Ok...I feel like I am rambling now. Done
Kris.

A macrocosmic human body is even more fundamental than the concept of family which holds some unpleasant association for many. If we think of a group as part of a living, breathing being where all parts are essential to the whole – it completely changes the concept.

The first few months of life are critical for any organism, both in terms of physical necessities and psychological and emotional support for the continued health of the entity. The first few hours/ days in the clearing are going to have a huge impact on the future of the group, not only in terms of physical survival but also its long viability as a cohesive group that is supported by all its parts and also supports and nourishes its members. Every one will have something to contribute – even the pathologicals in some way I suppose. Actually in terms of the immune system, some exposure to bacteria (pathology) is necessary to insure the organism learns to fight off disease. I think I remember reading that a system is most vulnerable when exposed to unknown pathogens or its immune system is not regularly exercised – it gets lazy.

So - I think we need to have some kind of concept for what kind if cohesive mind set can be put forth in first few hours while the group is attempting to obtain the necessities for survival so that it does not go down the road to ruin at the get-go. Have to think on that one..

 

[Charlie]

A very interesting thread!! The dynamics of the group in the first days and weeks is what interests me. The more programs a person has running, the longer it will take them to acclimate to their situation. You'll have a lot of people trying to cling to their old ideas and ways of thinking. When survival is of the utmost importance I think people will be stripped bare. They will be forced to deal with the reality of the situation or die. It's hard to worry about your hair when your kids haven't eaten in a day.

Can society be structured like a family? Like a macrocosmic human body?

I guess the first thing is, what makes a family a family? I think it's all the situations, both good and bad, that you have gone through with the people that are close to you. Sharing these life experiences with others is what makes your bonds stronger. You have gone through the muck with these people and also shared the moments of joy. I think if you transfer this to a small group of people whose main priority is to survive, a strong family atmosphere will develop. When EVERYONE in the community is sharing in the success of a fresh kill for a feast and on the flip side EVERYONE is forced to tighten their belts when times are rough, strong bonds develop.

 

[neema]

As many have said, wow what a thought provoking thread.

Just like others have said, in terms of pure survival, what has already been brought up is a good way to start.

Can society be structured like a family? Like a macrocosmic human body?

I not only think that it can, but a necessary evolutionary step in the human experience. I also think that our entire immediate environment can be an extension of that family. Perhaps forgetting that idea was one of the reasons for our fall.

To me I can easily envision that we are a microcosm of our universe, and the earth itself is alive as a whole, with all its creatures essential to its functioning.

As for deviants, if we just take 6% of the experimental 200 people, we have 12 fully mutated human psychopaths. What to do is a very big question.

If my understanding is correct, mutation occurs in a body be it human or environment, due to stress. So if ponorization is a form of mutation, and has occurred because of harsh conditions, one main thing is to remedy the conditions as best you can.

For example if malnutrition is a huge factor in the development of healthy brains of children, one of the main priorities is to make sure all children in development receive adequate sustenance. I think another important factor from the first day is upbringing. As Oxajil already mentioned the idea of having all the adults serve in a parental role providing support in the development of the children’s psyche. Obviously for the first few years the child’s parenting will exclusively fall on the responsibility of the actual parents of that child.

I think it is crucial as the children develop, if they are raised within a group sense of family, this can naturally develop into adulthood creating a deep bond and connection for all. Also as we eliminate many of the causes of the psychopathic mutation, chances are that the % of mutation will dramatically decrease.

If this were implemented, psychopaths must be prevented in participating and interacting with children. I think as a community is developed and all the essentials for survival are prepared, we must not lose sight of the growth, education, and development of the children, as they are the future of the group.

As for the actual psychopaths within the group, I like the idea of
Approaching Infinity on an ultimatum.

 

[gotogo]

Ummm... I still can not give up the NO VIOLENCE principle. Something inside tells me that (referring to giving it up) will be 'wrong'. Are there really no ways to defend ourselves with the NO VIOLENCE principle? Or am I just too "inflexible" here?

Just to touch on this my thinking was that by feeding the group, aren't we already using violence to survive? I guess your speaking more of person to person which by all means I agree, violence would be unacceptable. I've never considered myself a fighter, but I could see myself as the one who dies trying to save someone else. I've never been able to stomach abuse at any level and if someone were to try it in my presence, I would feel compelled to defend the weaker side. So basically what I'm saying is that maybe you wouldn't have to worry about violence yourself. There might be people in the group who would take care of it anyway.

I think you are right. I am not going to against 'hunting' to survive. I am checking myself if my proposal of the NO VIOLENCE principle is just coming from my subjective 'morality' or something that can be called objective 'conscience' as Gurdjieff described:

GotoGo made good question about psychopaths.

Can we be 'creative' to defend ourselves WITHOUT applying any VIOLENCE methods here?

I was wandering that also. What can we do, even if we manage somehow to detect them soon? And how to detect them anyway? All that they must do is to take on some good mask of sanity and be good and helping in the first time. I doubt that they will show themselves immediately, and if they find their alikes and connect with them, what then? I don’t know.

EDIT: Once again.. more thought. There is also disarming and restraining that could be done as well. It doesn't always have to lead to violence.

I agree. I was thinking of 'martial arts' but something like Aikido, which I studied when I was young and my teacher often said something like "You are going to 'neutralize' the force of attackers. If you become negative inside and attack back then you lose!" Can this king of 'martial arts' be a subject of our educational curriculum in our community? Not only for children but I think adults will benefit from it.

Also what is the 'violence' in a very real sense? I think many people will agree with how 'violence' cause serious problems in human being. So what is actually 'essence' of it?


I was thinking Laura's question:

Now, I'm going to leave aside some of the questions that have been raised for the moment and ask this one:

Can society be structured like a family? Like a macrocosmic human body?

I tried to think with Cell models at first following Ana's approach (which is great!) but because of lack of enough knowledge in this area, I started to think with the Forth Way ideas...

The 1st idea came to mind was four lower centers. Can it be applied to society? Then I start categorizing human activities to the following 3 categories:
1. moving - instinctive life (I combined them as G's sometimes does)
2. emotional life
3. intellectual life

I think society has these 3 aspects also. For example:
1. Building hoses, hunting, cooking and healing physically injured people are moving-instinctive necessities for a society.
2. Taking care of others especially elders and children, counseling people and singing together are emotional necessities for a society. Actually, this aspect has a lot of creative potentials that lead to several kinds of arts and cultures!
3. Collecting knowledge, discussing practical issues to apply knowledge and creating rules/laws can be intellectual necessities for a society.
(So for the survival situation for 200 people, our emphasis will be on moving-instinctive needs first, but soon after other aspects need to be worked on since "Man does not live by bread alone"! Also 'balancing' these 3 aspects seems important. OSIT)

Then here is an interesting question:
What can be higher centers or Self of a society?

It may be not relevant but a 'connection' can be 'deputy steward preparing for the arrival of the master' metaphor:
[quote author=Gurdjieff in In Search of the Miraculous p67]
Eastern teachings contain various allegorical pictures which endeavor to portray the nature of man's being from this point of view.

Thus, in one teaching, man is compared to a house in which there is a multitude of servants but no master and no steward. The servants have all forgotten their duties; no one wants to do what he ought; everyone tries to be master, if only for a moment; and, in this kind of disorder, the house is threatened with grave danger. The only chance of salvation is for a group of the more sensible servants to meet together and elect a temporary steward, that is, a deputy steward. This deputy steward can then put the other servants in their places, and make each do his own work: the cook in the kitchen, the coachman in the stables, the gardener in the garden, and so on. In this way the 'house' can be got ready for the arrival of the real steward who will, in his turn, prepare it for the arrival of the master.
[/quote]

What can be 'deputy steward' or 'steward' of a society? And what does it mean that function preparing for the arrival of the master (higher centers or Self)?

Another metaphor Gurdjieff often uses to describe a Man's situation is 'carriage, horse, driver, and master' metaphor

He again used the Eastern comparison of man with a carriage, horse, driver, and master, and drew the diagram with one addition that was not there before.

Man is a complex organization," he said, "consisting of four parts which may be connected or unconnected, or badly connected. The carriage is connected with the horse by shafts, the horse is connected with the driver by reins, and the driver is connected with the master by the master's voice. But the driver must hear and understand the master's voice. He must know how to drive and the horse must be trained to obey the reins. As to the relation between the horse and the carriage, the horse must be properly harnessed. Thus there are three connections between the four sections of this complex organization [see Fig. 5b]. If something is lacking in one of the connections, the organization cannot act as a single whole. The connections are therefore no less important than the actual 'bodies.'

With this metaphor, one may get some interesting perspectives toward 'violence' also. It seems to me 'violence' makes structure upside down like horse occupied by 'negative emotions' is taking initiative instead of master by threatening driver or something. If that becomes a situation of our society, it will be soon off the road without even any psychopaths. OSIT :(

(It became a long post. sorry for the length... )


Edit: clarification & grammar

 

[Willow]

in my op its very difficult to imagine such a situation of a group of 200 that find their self back in the woods as survivors in a sto thing. we all didn´t grew up in a sto world. so its normal that for example gogtogo still have this problem with violence and i can understand that but we all are not structured sto and at the end we will end in forms of sts that means: violence, psychopaths, leaders, splittings of familiar groups, rules, laws, laws for breaking the laws and so on. at the end is life is a loop in duality in this 3rd and this duality brings always the opposite.
i often over the yeras thought aboute this thing but i never found an aspect to even start wether to end because i just know what kind of problems it would bring. thast very sad.
do we take the example of "the lord of the flies" there was a splitting. all those great men of the history all was broken once. i think the dfficult is to decide what is the best for all. if we have decided that it will bring koprmises for other the group and i guess that sto means "good for everybody" even in a 3rd or in my thoughts it is not possible to create a sto world in 3rd.
the group will become bigger and bigger or will we have a birth controlling to keep the group smaller? if the gruop becomes bigger i think we create a system and in the hole history the problem of the sytem is the syytem.
very difficult.......

 

[shijing]

Can society be structured like a family? Like a macrocosmic human body?

There are plenty of ideas in this thread that are the seeds of such concepts. And we've seen from "The Trap" that freedom and democracy and "capitalism aren't what they are cracked up to be. In fact, they are rather effective tools for psychopaths.

In the scenario we are discussing, it seems like the answer to this question really depends on the make-up of the group. If we took 200 people from this forum, it would probably work because there are certain ideas and concepts that we all share because of time spent here, and although we don't have identical mental lexicons, they are probably pretty similar compared to some random assortment of 200 people.

But the example that I use in my own mind is my neighborhood -- what if 200 people from my neighborhood found themselves together, more or less on their own, and how would the idea of a macrocosmic human body work? People in my country and culture (America) are very conditioned to think of organizing in terms of a stereotypical democracy -- appointing or electing leaders, and setting up a hierarchical structure. In addition to that, its been my experience that when you just bring psychopathy up to the average person, you're met with a blank stare and they are somewhat incredulous of the whole idea that in reality this could be a major problem -- many people are really conditioned to think that everyone else is just like them. So I think a really crucial question that would arise early on has to do with the average level of objective understanding of reality. In a random group, the only hope you would have of getting people on the same page would be education very quickly through a combination of explanation and example before an alternate organizational principle began to solidify that might be hard to reverse (as suggested by annp at the top of this page).

One other thing that I think about too is how to work out an interaction space where secrecy is discouraged. What I have in mind is the principle here on this forum where PM'ing is frowned upon because it allows the group to monitor all interactions and make sure there is no predation going on behind the scenes. I have the feeling that if 200 people were dropped into a situation like this, there would be people who would really want their alone time, either individually or in cliques. What could be done to allow privacy but still promote accountability to the group? What could be an incentive for people to make them want to interact transparently and discourage secret agendas (and I'm not even including psychopaths for now, since that is a problem on a whole new level)?

 

[clerck de bonk]

THANK YOU SHIJING!!
I've been trying to put this question/issue out, but You did it far better than I could ever have.
The flow here is incredible and much is accomplished regarding the "fun" part(planning) but few touch on the really important stuff(IMO). Namely:

1) How to deal with pathological tendencies in yourself as well as others(...continue with the 'work', of course, but this is a totally new situation!)
2) How to deal(and detect) with real psychopaths(...continue with the 'work', of course, but this is a totally new situation!)
3) How to "get the word across" so people truly understand(taken that you yourself understand it already!)

Thanks also go to Goto for a tremendous post ;)

 

[Bluestar]

This thread has taken the fast track. Just as I thought I have read all the post, there was more. After watching the full 3 episodes of the Trap, there was seven more pages to read. Whew.

Most of the things have already been stated. We all have a basic idea of the first things that need to be done for basic survival.

The posts on pathological issues really comes into the category of survival. If this forest is in our realm of 3d sts, then are we still under the influence of hyperdimensional beings? If yes then basically half of the 200 are preadamic and the other half is adamic. Therefore the parameters are basically the same as they are now. My first instinct has always been of a giving nature. Until proven otherwise I give the benefit of the doubt that all are in it for the good of all. As soon as I am proven otherwise, the situation on an individual bases has to be dealt with in a positive way for the good of all. Other wise the entire group could be in danger.

I abhor violence. One can see what violence has done to our world, even with the best intentions. If someone is causing trouble within the group with violence, it may have to be met with a radical means. Aren't we all willing to protect the group? Or do we just let a violent psychopath take over and hurt those around us? Thinking this is a basic survival mechanism. Just like our bodies sending it's armies of white blood cells to fight off infection. Does the body put the infectious germs somewhere in the body to live out it's life? Feeding it somewhat just so it doesn't have to kill it? No, if the body is healthy and a bacteria or virus comes inside it, it attacks it to rid the body of the "invader". If it does let it live somewhere in the body, it may gain strength and come back and harm the body later.

Not suggesting that this is the stand this group of people in the forest should take, kill it before it kills us kinda thing, I am just looking at a way the the good of all may have to deal with some issues. I would find it very hard to take some ones life. For that matter I would find it hard to eat an animal that I have had to kill. In my present moment of thought. Don't know what I would do in an instance of survival?
These are just thoughts I was pondering, I trust I have not offended anyone.

I also like the word facilitator instead of leader.

Thanks

 

[ana]

We observe that there is a majority of people in our group who, even if they have been ponerized as was shown in "The Trap," will still probably be able to respond to their human instincts of caring and sharing. So we can assume that since this is how the majority is, that is how humankind initially evolved. We also notice some pathology in our group (some of you created such groups, so there they are.) What to do about pathology? We suspect that pathology is due to mutation because, obviously, as we have seen from "The Trap," human beings could not have evolved into psychopaths because they would have destroyed each other (and themselves) eons ago.

Okay, so pathologicals are mutants that "do not play nice." We see that it is SUPER important for someone in the group to have this knowledge, to be able to spot it and share that information with the rest. Perhaps this was a shamanic role in some tribal societies - they could "see" the pathology more or less "psychically".


Now, I'm going to leave aside some of the questions that have been raised for the moment and ask this one:

Can society be structured like a family? Like a macrocosmic human body?

There are plenty of ideas in this thread that are the seeds of such concepts. And we've seen from "The Trap" that freedom and democracy and "capitalism aren't what they are cracked up to be. In fact, they are rather effective tools for psychopaths.

I will try to continue using the cells of our body to see if we can compare the behavior of cellular pathology with the one of pathological beings ( I have never studied biology, so hopefully someone with a real background can correct me if I am wrong or make an imput with new info to take into account to approach this).


http //library.thinkquest.org/C004535/properties_of_life.html

Organisms can consist of a single cell (bacteria for example), or many cells. In more complicated organisms, cells are organized to form more complicated structures such as organs, for example. In each of these cells, unique forms of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) molecules are present. DNA can form into genes, which are used to make the proteins and other molecules a cell needs to survive and reproduce.


To survive, organisms need to get energy. Energy is captured in many ways, photosynthesis (using sunlight for energy) being one of them. The whole set of chemical reactions that cells use to receive energy is called metabolism.

http //es.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%C3%A1ncer

Normal cells at the contact with neighboring cells inhibit their own reproduction, but it seems that some "malignant" cells do not have this brake. On the contrary those cells seep into the bloodstream (or lymphatic), by breaking cell adhesion molecules that attach to the cells to the basement membrane, with subsequent destruction of the latter.
When they lodge in the parenchyma of an organ, they destroy the architecture of it, being, in turn, their metabolic waste products are toxic to adjacent healthy cells, causing the elimination of this cell type.Malignant transformation of normal cells is the acquisition of a set of specific genetic changes that act disobeying the strong antitumor mechanisms that exist in all normal cells.

So it seems that cancer cells ie, someway have lost their group consciousness and therefore the balance, and capacity for self-regulation. They only seek food for their own survival/reproduction and consume without control deteriorating and degrading the system/body.

Okay, so pathologicals are mutants that "do not play nice."

And this is what seems this cells are doing.

As for deviants, if we just take 6% of the experimental 200 people, we have 12 fully mutated human psychopaths. What to do is a very big question.

Following this analogy, then maybe we can ask ourselves.

How are we actually fighting cancer? Is it being fruitful?
Is there any way to prevent it? Does it involves only physical structure?

 

[Thomas Alan]

Ok, We are talking alot about group consciousness. But isn't their really only individual consciousness if there is consciousness at all? So doesn't there need to be a conscious decision that the group is a value and it's welfare chosen?

For instance, Gurdjieff made a conscious decision to offer the knowledge he had gained to others. A few wanted to know more about what he had to offer and became a group for that purpose. Gurdjieff might have chosen only to write books for instance and not offer individual instruction.

I don't know if I am framing my question clearly. And it is a question not a statement.
In the example of the 200 people in the forest. Doesn't one or a few individuals need to make a conscious decision that the group is a value to be maintained?

Of course any who are conscious in the group of 200 will also be empathetic. They will not abandon people to chaos and starvation. But isn't the first step a conscious decision?

Mac

 

[Leo40]

I have been reading this thread from the beginning and I am amazed by the suggestions.
The situation:

200 people find themselves in a clearing in the woods.

That is all that is given.

Now come the assumptions.

1. This is a group of "normal" people. They don't have your (the forum members) understanding.
2. The inital responses in any emergency are correct. People will generally be helpful.
3. But what then?
They will follow their programming! They will select a LEADER and the whole garbage starts again!

This is facing the reality as it is.

Everything else is just wishful thinking or dreaming.