Creating a New World

Remember, you can play with this. There is no test.

How about we imagine a group of people who get together in a forest clearing and decide that they are going to be a society. Say there is 200 of them. There are couples with children and aged parents, there are aged people with no children. There are orphaned children. There are single individuals.

The range of intelligence and skill is normal, that is, there are some very smart people, most average people, a few not so smart, and maybe one or two who are very slow. Some have artistic talent, some musical talent, some are scientifically inclined, some like to take care of others; some are very good at organizing, some can hunt and like to do it; some like to spend their time with animals, some like building things, some like gardening, some like sewing, some like cooking, etc. There are some who have "psychic abilities," prophetic dreams and such, and so on.

How will they organize themselves? Who does what? How is value attributed to what is done?

So, just think about this small group first of all. Once we get them all "thought out" and are satisfied that it is organic and mutually beneficial for all, we can begin to "grow" our little society and see what happens. Kind of like a Sim City thought experiment.
 
Laura said:
The Cs have said that there was once a time when the 3D world was aligned with 4D STO.

It is interesting that the first thoughts I had when I did the EE program when it came out, was to try to ''remember'' or ''ponder'' about how such a world (3D aligned with 4D) would be like. This is when I saw an image of a boy with a hat sitting on a stone, looking at the left and just laughing. This image made me very happy.

Laura said:
Remember, you can play with this. There is no test.

How about we imagine a group of people who get together in a forest clearing and decide that they are going to be a society. Say there is 200 of them. There are couples with children and aged parents, there are aged people with no children. There are orphaned children. There are single individuals.

The range of intelligence and skill is normal, that is, there are some very smart people, most average people, a few not so smart, and maybe one or two who are very slow. Some have artistic talent, some musical talent, some are scientifically inclined, some like to take care of others; some are very good at organizing, some can hunt and like to do it; some like to spend their time with animals, some like building things, some like gardening, some like sewing, some like cooking, etc. There are some who have "psychic abilities," prophetic dreams and such, and so on.

How will they organize themselves? Who does what? How is value attributed to what is done?

I wonder if money should play a role in such a society. What if not? For example the baker can make the breads for those who ask for it, in return the baker gets what he asks for from others. Like an exchange of every one's skills. Every person, no matter how ''big'' or ''small'' their role is, will have something to give (something like what Tigersoap suggested). And maybe in this society, there shouldn't be leaders, but elders, like the C's said once.

And if someone makes a mistake or has a problem, they all could come together and talk about it and see how they can solve it. The elders could perhaps ask others what they think should be a solution and then together come to some solution. I wonder if every person in this society decides to do the Work? So that when someone makes a mistake, he will be open to receive mirrors from the others and elders.

Edit: There will also be journalists who will make a newspaper together, for all the residents to read. Something like a SOTT newspaper of what is happening outside this society (and in this society). And perhaps journalists from ''outside'' will come to this society and write an article about it, some might want to make this society look bad, but some might not! And what if an article comes out about this society to the outside and more and more people will be interested and might want to join this society.
However before this society can let people in, they should maybe talk with them first, maybe even test them as well? To see if they are not psychopaths who want to get in.
And if they ''pass'', they will be part of the society, a place where they can heal their wounds which they got from the societies out there. And when they are healed (or during their healing), they could perhaps choose a profession which they like and contribute in this society.

This way the society could grow and grow.

Just some thoughts.
 
Laura said:
Remember, you can play with this. There is no test.

How about we imagine a group of people who get together in a forest clearing and decide that they are going to be a society. Say there is 200 of them. There are couples with children and aged parents, there are aged people with no children. There are orphaned children. There are single individuals.

The range of intelligence and skill is normal, that is, there are some very smart people, most average people, a few not so smart, and maybe one or two who are very slow. Some have artistic talent, some musical talent, some are scientifically inclined, some like to take care of others; some are very good at organizing, some can hunt and like to do it; some like to spend their time with animals, some like building things, some like gardening, some like sewing, some like cooking, etc. There are some who have "psychic abilities," prophetic dreams and such, and so on.

How will they organize themselves? Who does what? How is value attributed to what is done?

So, just think about this small group first of all. Once we get them all "thought out" and are satisfied that it is organic and mutually beneficial for all, we can begin to "grow" our little society and see what happens. Kind of like a Sim City thought experiment.

As an aspect of the nature of 'centers' in individual, each person's instinctive center tries to make sure if it can 'survive' or not while each person's emotional center tries to communicate with and take care of others. It depends on 'resources' also. If the 'resources' (food, energy, tools and so on) are limited, I can imagine that instinctive concerns about survival 'mechanically' become stronger than emotional needs in general.

Some who are good at organizing start organizing people and some will follow them but some may resist them. And what if such 'leaders' themselves start having 'frictions' each other? Such frictions may start with very small things but soon can become 'power struggles' through various 'pathological programming'.

(I think TV series 'Lost' describes very well about such human 'mechanical' dynamics when people are lost in an island. IMO)

Besides objective understandings about 'pathology' on personality level[1], people also need to understand each other very well from 'objective' point of views about human nature on its 'essence' level. Both the Forth Way and Rudolf Steiner system described 'types' and related 'features' on essence level, to my understandings. As Ouspensky commented "the
science of types was the most difficult thing in the study of man" in ISOTM p373. 'Subjective' views will cause 'imaginary' frictions that are in fact very understandable from 'objective' point of views, and once such frictions are understood they becomes no more 'imaginary' but 'objective' chemical frictions, which each can 'transform' through the Work - "conscious labor and intentional suffering".

Here is a reference about 'type' in ISOTM:
[quote author=Ouspensky - In Search of the Miraculous p373-4]
There had been talks in our groups about types before and it seemed to us that the science of types was the most difficult thing in the study of man because G. gave us very little material and required of us our own observations of ourselves and others. We continued to walk and G. continued to speak trying to explain what there was in man that could depend upon planetary influences and what could not.

As we left the park G. stopped talking and was going a few steps ahead of us. We five walked behind him talking together. In going round a tree G. dropped the stick — ebony with a Caucasian silver handle — he was carrying and one of us bent down, picked it up, and gave it to him. G. walked on for a few steps, then turned to us and said:

"That was astrology. Do you understand? You all saw me drop the stick. Why did one of you pick it up? Let each of you speak for himself."

One said he had not seen G. drop the stick as he was looking another way. The second said he had noticed that G. had not dropped the stick accidentally as happens when a stick gets caught in something, but that he had intentionally loosened his hand and let the stick fall. This had excited his curiosity and he had waited to see what would happen next. The third said he saw G. drop the stick, but was very absorbed in thinking of astrology, particularly trying to remember what G. said once before, and did not pay sufficient attention to the stick. The fourth saw the stick fall and thought of picking it up, but at that moment the other picked up the stick and gave it to G. The fifth said he saw the stick fall and then he saw himself picking it up and giving it to G.

G. smiled as he listened to us.

"This is astrology," he said. "In the same situation one man sees and does one thing, another—another thing, a third—a third thing, and so on. And each one acted according to his type. Observe people and yourselves in this way and then perhaps we will afterwards talk of a different astrology."
[/quote]


I can not see any possibilities without the Work of individuals. Because, to my understanding, our machines are 'generically restricted' 3D STS machine at the Fall (please let me know if I am off (or not updated) here. I posted similar line of thoughts here as well).

Only through the Work, such STS mechanism can be used for higher purposes that may include possible creation of a STO society. Because only through the Work something not of the machine can enter the process although that (referring: creation of a STO society) would be a great challenge.

A big question when trying to apply the same principle to the whole humanity is if "the rule to the Game" allows it or not. (I associate the Work of Ashiata Shiemash in Beelzebubs Tales here). But situations are changing due to the Wave approaching? The new rule to the Game can be applied by a "group decision"? That is why we are thinking this topic through the 'Networking'? Again, this point can be my misunderstanding point though :-[.


Edit: clarification, correct misspellings and added footnote
[1] Meant for 'false personalities', 'buffers', 'programs' "wounds/traumas/hungers". But there is 'pathology' on essence level as well such as 'pure' psychopath, which is probably what Gurdjieff was not clear about. OSIT
 
Laura said:
Remember, you can play with this. There is no test.

How about we imagine a group of people who get together in a forest clearing and decide that they are going to be a society. Say there is 200 of them. There are couples with children and aged parents, there are aged people with no children. There are orphaned children. There are single individuals.

I feel this is a probable scenario to come. Somehow the children need to be taken care of.

The range of intelligence and skill is normal, that is, there are some very smart people, most average people, a few not so smart, and maybe one or two who are very slow. Some have artistic talent, some musical talent, some are scientifically inclined, some like to take care of others; some are very good at organizing, some can hunt and like to do it; some like to spend their time with animals, some like building things, some like gardening, some like sewing, some like cooking, etc. There are some who have "psychic abilities," prophetic dreams and such, and so on.

How will they organize themselves?

The first thing, I think, that would need to be established is 'at what is each person good' - perhaps via a 'town hall meeting'. Next item on 'agenda' is a list of necessities prioritized in terms of immediacy. First things first, as it were.

Who does what?

Skill sets organized by organizers.

How is value attributed to what is done?

No clue how this would/could be objectively assessed.

So, just think about this small group first of all. Once we get them all "thought out" and are satisfied that it is organic and mutually beneficial for all, we can begin to "grow" our little society and see what happens. Kind of like a Sim City thought experiment.

I think this is a very good idea Laura

Kris
 
Laura said:
Remember, you can play with this. There is no test.

How about we imagine a group of people who get together in a forest clearing and decide that they are going to be a society. Say there is 200 of them. There are couples with children and aged parents, there are aged people with no children. There are orphaned children. There are single individuals.

The range of intelligence and skill is normal, that is, there are some very smart people, most average people, a few not so smart, and maybe one or two who are very slow. Some have artistic talent, some musical talent, some are scientifically inclined, some like to take care of others; some are very good at organizing, some can hunt and like to do it; some like to spend their time with animals, some like building things, some like gardening, some like sewing, some like cooking, etc. There are some who have "psychic abilities," prophetic dreams and such, and so on.

How will they organize themselves? Who does what? How is value attributed to what is done?

So, just think about this small group first of all. Once we get them all "thought out" and are satisfied that it is organic and mutually beneficial for all, we can begin to "grow" our little society and see what happens. Kind of like a Sim City thought experiment.

I think in such a community, the mother-father relationship you mentioned must be expanded. The whole community is a family and a child must be the child of everybody, if some elderly person needs help, everybody must help him/her as if they are helping their mother/father. And every member of that community must know how to approach to a child, not hurt him/her psychologically.

And I think like this network, the group should come together frequently, at least once a day, to share their past experiences, share their problems, ask the input of the group and proceed accordingly. If somebody made a mistake that day, this should be brought up in the group and an objective understanding should be achieved. The economy in such a scale can based on absolute confidence, I think. Scientists shouldn't say: "Look at those people who cook, I am contributing something so much important here, I am better than them." Instead, they should say: "Look at the people of this community, they are doing the best they can at a given day, so I need to do the best I can."

And, at the end of the day, all the products that were produced should be divided according to the needs of each family by the people with organisation skills as you mentioned. If you are a scientist, you can share the research you have been doing and how it can be used to improve the life of community. If you are a hunter you can mention how you saw a different animal, another scientist may be interested in this animal and do a little research about it etc.

Another important thing is, even though everybody play their respective role, those people who can do a few things like sewing and cooking at the same time should work on that skills, if something happens to the cook, the community should be able to replace the cook. So some people in community should do multiple jobs in case of an emergency. Other than that, everybody should do what their heart desires.

Those who have psychic abilities can be good shamans if they desire it, you wrote:

Laura said:
The shaman's essential role in the defense of the psychic integrity of the community depends above all on his ability to SEE what is hidden and invisible to the rest and to bring back direct and RELIABLE information from the supernatural worlds.

The scientists, depending on their fields, can work with those who have psychic abilities as I mentioned in this thread. And those who produce music, dances etc. can contribute to the expression of society, there could be art nights, once or twice a week where they share their talents. The children should spend time with everybody to determine what they want to do in the community, to get to know the members of community as their parents. I think nobody should have any fear of rejection because of what they have done or their traits as long as they are open to objective input, like in this network.

So the main issue seems transparency and understanding between the members of the group and the formation of trust between each other. After that, they can play their roles in the community easily. Then, the other people might join them, they expand and form other communities and grow.
 
Ya'll are skipping steps here. Please, just picture the scenario and start from the beginning as RflctnOfU started to do.

There they are, standing in this clearing. We don't need to know how they got there or worry about other details. They are just there. You have to do something with these imaginary people who may be shivering from cold and exposure, may be hungry, children may be crying... what are you going to do with them?
 
Wow, this thread is really inspirational,


What I see is people frustrated, who do not know how to express its own anger and disagreement with the reality in which they live because they are so afraid of becoming alone, of not belonging anymore to those near them.

Some have learned to disguise it with lots of work, others masquerade as narcissism, consumerism, drug addiction,others have become humble servants of the lie of these and nobody is able to STOP and see how lie moves through them without control.

As I see it the real hope of this world lies in the ability of some to evolve, to deliver to this world from the depths of their beings the truth, becoming the faithful guides of their brothers, becoming a living example in every situation of their lives with sincerity and openness.

Showing those who have close, they are there, really there, unconditionally, showing alternatives to the crystallized patterns of behavior, showing that the words love and freedom are beautifully bounded to the world knowledge.

And seems to me, for this creativity is needed because,

Creativity is a river of living water wich binds all the force in existence that purifies, heals and illuminates everything in its path, just need doors and windows open, just need faith.

Faith is honesty, openness, receptivity, and when creativity is flowing freely, there is no fear, there is no ego disuniting, and everything becomes more and more clear, we trust in our ability to do and also in that of others and wherever we are, we give this to those near us, because that is what we are, what we have become.

The irresistible force capable of anything.
 
Laura said:
Ya'll are skipping steps here. Please, just picture the scenario and start from the beginning as RflctnOfU started to do.

There they are, standing in this clearing. We don't need to know how they got there or worry about other details. They are just there. You have to do something with these imaginary people who may be shivering from cold and exposure, may be hungry, children may be crying... what are you going to do with them?

Oh, I see. :-[ (like G's stick, this shows my 'type'!)

If I am not injured and can walk around, then start asking around what others need.
If already someone is doing it I will join him/her and probably make a list of 'needs'.
And then try to have opportunities to discuss those needs with everybody to solve one by one.
Of course, if there are obvious situations that needs to be addressed ASAP like children are crying or someone is injured then I will go there to DO something about them.
If I don't know how to treat with severe injuries, look for doctors.
Then I understand a need for the skill list of each person also.
So I will ask each person what he/she can do.
...
(ok, I need to go to sleep for now... passed 5:00am in CA. Thank you for this great topic! :))


Edit: grammar
 
Laura said:
Remember, you can play with this. There is no test.

How about we imagine a group of people who get together in a forest clearing and decide that they are going to be a society. Say there is 200 of them. There are couples with children and aged parents, there are aged people with no children. There are orphaned children. There are single individuals.

The range of intelligence and skill is normal, that is, there are some very smart people, most average people, a few not so smart, and maybe one or two who are very slow. Some have artistic talent, some musical talent, some are scientifically inclined, some like to take care of others; some are very good at organizing, some can hunt and like to do it; some like to spend their time with animals, some like building things, some like gardening, some like sewing, some like cooking, etc. There are some who have "psychic abilities," prophetic dreams and such, and so on.

How will they organize themselves? Who does what? How is value attributed to what is done?

So, just think about this small group first of all. Once we get them all "thought out" and are satisfied that it is organic and mutually beneficial for all, we can begin to "grow" our little society and see what happens. Kind of like a Sim City thought experiment.

A few quick thoughts, they come as I write..


So here we are, at this forest clearing!
I imagine someone, possibly a few, with natural leader abilities stepping up and starting organizing things. We need food and we need shelter.
I imagine people who feel they can contribute with either, will step forward. The tasks range from hunting, to nuts-seed picking / fruit-picking, gathering logs for making fires , gathering all kinds of material needed for building shelterand cooking. WHomever in charge of said task, will get more people to help him.

Someone will be needed to guide and calm down anyone who might be slightly panicking, a kind of mediator / guide / Elder, someone who can better See objectively the situation than the majority.

We also need someone to look after the kids. - And someone to look after the old / sick. We need farmers / teachers / builders / doctors - you-name-it-we need 'em.

Basically we have a huge range of practical things needed to be done, and I imagine those tasks being taking done, by people doing what comes naturally for them.

The value attributed to what is done, is the task itself done.. I mean EVERYONE has something to contribute with. The tricky part is deciding who does what indeed. I imagine that being done via networking in big townhall meethings, where Fx I can tell This or this person I believe would be good at teaching/making clothes/what-ever-task-at-hand - and by networking about it, I think it would fairly quick be decided who does what.
Everyone needs to feel they constribute their best, so frequent meethings would be necessary to adjust all the time. Everyone should be ready to give ALL when asked.
 
I would like to add a few cents too.

Leo40 said:
IMO the guiding principle of ALL human and 2D and 1D occupants of this planet should be
CO-OPERATION

I agree. From co-operation comes synergy, but co-operation should be based on networking or free exchange of ideas, concepts and most importantly knowledge.

Leo40 said:
We don't need government, we govern ourselves.

Absolutely. Self-government is the key. Any essential issue at hand should be publicly discussed with free flow of ideas, information and knowledge and later choice could be made by a common voting. Sort of like a real referendum. Nowadays with means of networking technology this should be rather easy, provided that the Internet has no evil hand that manipulates the outcome like it happens all over the world now.

Leo40 said:
We don't need money, we exchange value; be it goods, services, skills etc.

Absolutely. Still some kind of accounting system to keep track of credits earned for services rendered or goods delivered should exist. This way you could provide services and self-manufactured goods or products and gain credit to get the things you need.

Leo40 said:
We live in Communities. The idea of "kinsdomain" described by the oh so derided

Absolutely. Living together is so much more fun and much more effective for providing for a basic needs. Energy could be saved for providing necessities and time and energy served this way can be used for people to gather knowledge and study reality, while not destroying environment.

Leo40 said:
I remember when our family had 4 generations living together; there is no need for
childcare or "social services".

I have the same experience. I also remember in the past when people lived closer together and neighbors would take care of children on regular bases too. Such extended communities took care of their young very well.

Leo40 said:
We don't need schools. Homeschooling is growing all over the world.

We do not need ANY schools. Life and universe is a school. If parents or caretakers transfer their knowledge and experience to the next generation, no schools are needed. And if all the knowledge is stored in electronic libraries, kids can have access to all the humanity knowledge at will and at once.

Leo40 said:
We don't need hospitals. They are breeding grounds of sickness.

Indeed. We could have professional services coming to people in their homes and performing all necessary medical tasks. Only heavy-duty medical tasks could be done outside of home.

Leo40 said:
These are just a few ideas that come to mind.

Similar things came to my mind too.

One thing I dislike are the laws and legal rules imposed on us by the government, allegedly for our own good. Obviously, these are controls to keep us in check by the pathocrats. We could easily live without ANY written codes and rules, just by a few sound principles like serving others and not hurting others.

Oliwer
 
Laura said:
Ya'll are skipping steps here. Please, just picture the scenario and start from the beginning as RflctnOfU started to do.

There they are, standing in this clearing. We don't need to know how they got there or worry about other details. They are just there. You have to do something with these imaginary people who may be shivering from cold and exposure, may be hungry, children may be crying... what are you going to do with them?

The first steps would entail caring for the immediate needs of individuals. This would require temporary sacrifice by those whose needs are not as severe. The sick, (if any) the youngest and the oldest should be attended by the stronger in any way that natural talents present themselves.

Encouraging advice from the experienced might be given to trust in instinct during the initial stages until proper shelter and food can be provided, for nothing of value for the whole would likely occur until this is met. During this time I think it would be beneficial to trust in the time honored instinct that the young and/or inexperienced should honor the older and/or experienced regarding what and how to work for these needs.
 
Some able-bodied individuals who are not participants in caring for the young or infirm ought to go in groups of two or three to gather anything that may be useful for the group - wood for fires and shelter, stones that may be useful as tools, plants that are known to be edible or suitable for temporary clothing, etc. Upon return anything not of immediate use could be placed aside for the future.

Scouts should be chosen who would report of the outer perimeter regarding safety, animal tracking, possible caves or other geographic interests.

Someone could sing sweetly to the rest.
 
Very good...

Gotogo said:
If I am not injured and can walk around, then start asking around what others need.
If already some is doing it I will join him/her and probably make a list of 'needs'.
And then try to have opportunities to discuss those needs with everybody to solve one by one.


Helle said:
Basically we have a huge range of practical things needed to be done, and I imagine those tasks being taking done, by people doing what comes naturally for them.

The value attributed to what is done, is the task itself done.. I mean EVERYONE has something to contribute with.

MC said:
The first steps would entail caring for the immediate needs of individuals. This would require temporary sacrifice by those whose needs are not as severe. (...) During this time I think it would be beneficial to trust in the time honored instinct that the young and/or inexperienced should honor the older and/or experienced regarding what and how to work for these needs.

Okay. Someone has stepped forward to organize things. Maybe that same person has a lot of experience building, for example, and sees the immediate need for shelter and food. Another person who has some experience hunting steps up and says "I can go find us some food if there is someone who can cook... another says "ground up seeds make a good sauce, I'll go get them..."

So, the builder decides what is needed and asks who can help assemble the materials. The hunter sees the need for food and sets off to get it.

Someone else sees that children need reassurance and something to do and gathers them around to tell a story... maybe it is one of the elders who has experience with children and can't do much in the way of physical work.

Some women decide that, since their children are okay, they can go out and find some mosses and things to make comfortable beds since people will need to sleep.

And soon, a shelter is being built for all, food is being cooked, beds are being created, nerves are being calmed, and everyone is contributing in some way.

It is obvious that some contributions are more "valuable" than others, in a certain sense, though of course, the builder could not do as much, or do it as well, without his helpers. So, while he may be offered some extra gravy on his meat to thank him for guiding the building of the shelter, he is modest and fair and makes sure that everyone else is well-fed first before he accepts that extra sauce. The same for the hunter. He may be offered the first cut of meat, but, being a fair and humble person, he asserts that everything must be divided equally - some of the sick people actually need more nourishment than he does, though certainly, he and the other high-energy creative people who contribute so dramatically to the survival of the group need to be well-fed and their health protected so they can continue to do what they do.

The next day, of course, while the hunter and the gatherers are out getting more food, there is a discussion about building more permanent homes for everyone, utilizing the help of all those who can contribute to such a project.

So, who gets the first house? And why?

Hint: I don't know the answer myself - I have to think about it like everybody else. This is a mental exercise for ALL of us, including me!
 
Laura said:
So, who gets the first house? And why?

I'd say everyone should be protected, so maybe one big shelter with one roof for immediate protection against elements.
This can still be used later on as one big reunion hall.
Everyone needs to rest and be safe from the wind or rain as soon as possible because everyone is inter-dependant on everyone else.
Then start building more private, quieter shelter if needed.
 
I guess the answer to who gets the first house should depend on what advantages there are to having one. This would then apply, I think, to the one (or few) who by gaining these advantages are the most valuable to the group as a whole.

What are these perks?
 
Back
Top Bottom