Creating a New World

[Oxajil]

I like the ideas above. Maybe the children, the sick and the older people get a house first? The more stronger ones could sleep outside in a simple made shelter until more houses are built.

edit: I seem to forget all the time that there are ~ 200 people present. So I guess it's difficult to make one house for all the children etc., I like MC's idea on determining which choice would be the best also for the group

 

[Laura]

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.

Excellent! I think everyone will agree on these points. Especially the singing. It helps to normalize the situation. to inspire the emotions of the others... Very valuable, singing and story telling.

 

[Laura]

I guess the answer to who gets the first house should depend on what advantages there are to having one.

Yes... So, let's consider the advantages to having a separate house.

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?

Oh, now! Wait a minute! You are assigning value to one human being over another in terms of material possessions!

Go back to your original thought: "who gets the first house should depend on what advantages there are to having one"

Since everyone is relatively well-sheltered for the moment, let's look at our group first of all and see if anyone NEEDS the advantages that a separate house confers... like someone who is fragile in health... or needs such a place in order to do what they do best.

Well, I can't think of anything that a person does that they would need a separate house for first, but I can think of situations where greater physical comfort is needed for health reasons.

So, let's let that be our criteria.

Anyone in the group who fits that description? The very old and very young? But perhaps the very young are in the care of their parents and only need a warmer place to be while the parents are working.

So, the first separate building must be a place for the old and infirm, where they can also watch over the children during the day.

Everybody think that's fair and right?

Okay, suppose that is done. Now, it's time to build the next individual house. Who gets it and why?


I see Oxajil is already on track while I was writing:

Maybe the children, the sick and the older people get a house first? The more stronger ones could sleep outside in a simple made shelter until more houses are built.

 

[Oxajil]

Okay, suppose that is done. Now, it's time to build the next individual house. Who gets it and why?

If the children are taken care of, perhaps the next house could be built for the ones who work the hardest physically each day? After a hard work, they perhaps need the comfort of a house the most. A good night sleep. But who are the ones who work the hardest, the hunters or the builders? Maybe both?

What do others think?

 

[Ennio]

I like the ideas above. Maybe the children, the sick and the older people get a house first? The more stronger ones could sleep outside in a simple made shelter until more houses are built.

I like this suggestion. My first thought was that the person who was doing the most organizing/coordinating should get the first shelter. But then thought that that's usually how it goes and resembles a heirarchical structure. So for practical and symbolic purposes I agree that housing for the physically weakest would be the most beneficial to all. When they gain their strength, they'll be able to contribute all the better for the early care. Those who are given this care will feel valued and value the community in turn.

 

[Laura]

I like the ideas above. Maybe the children, the sick and the older people get a house first? The more stronger ones could sleep outside in a simple made shelter until more houses are built.

I like this suggestion. My first thought was that the person who was doing the most organizing/coordinating should get the first shelter. But then thought that that's usually how it goes and resembles a heirarchical structure. So for practical and symbolic purposes I agree that housing for the physically weakest would be the most beneficial to all. When they gain their strength, they'll be able to contribute all the better for the early care. Those who are given this care will feel valued and value the community in turn.

This leads me to think about who should get the next house in similar terms. How about a house for the healer/doctor? This is not only a house, but a treatment area for anyone who needs dedicated care for any injury or illness.

So, who's next in line?

 

[Laura]

Okay, suppose that is done. Now, it's time to build the next individual house. Who gets it and why?

If the children are taken care of, perhaps the next house could be built for the ones who work the hardest physically each day? After a hard work, they perhaps need the comfort of a house the most. A good night sleep. But who are the ones who work the hardest, the hunters or the builders? Maybe both?

What do others think?

That is definitely a consideration. So, maybe after the house for the doctor, the ones who do the hard, physical labor should be next in line. And if there are several of them, instead of trying to decide who works hardest, that group should let the universe decide by putting a bunch of stones in a jar with one of them having a mark on it. The one who chooses the marked stone gets the next house and the others accept the decision of the universe and wait for the next draw?

 

[dannybananny]

I think that we don't need to hunt because we can be vegeterians and killing animals is not really STO, and there are animals that are domestic like chickens, etc., so you don't need to hunt.;)
I want to ask one question what if someone doesn't want to work or hunt?(remember this is 3D)what would you do? he doesn't have to be a psycho but normal person? would you use force?
Creating a cast of hunters that are privileged(like in history where you had warriors) will create cast system if they are not spiritualy evolved(I assume you imagine they are) and on the 3d there are little of them and you can't aspect of all to be spiritualy evolved in this world because it's not realistic. This is like trying to create STO system in STS world, impossible! ;)

 

[Mountain Crown]

[quote author=Laura]Oh, now! Wait a minute! You are assigning value to one human being over another in terms of material possessions!

Go back to your original thought: "who gets the first house should depend on what advantages there are to having one"[/quote]

Yes, I understand you here. How about a care unit/hospital with one or more private rooms for temporary use for those who need recovery from unusual work, e.g. hunters, builders, or such ?

 

[Oxajil]

That is definitely a consideration. So, maybe after the house for the doctor, the ones who do the hard, physical labor should be next in line. And if there are several of them, instead of trying to decide who works hardest, that group should let the universe decide by putting a bunch of stones in a jar with one of them having a mark on it. The one who chooses the marked stone gets the next house and the others accept the decision of the universe and wait for the next draw?

I think that's a great idea!

Maybe the next house could be made for a family? Using the same method to choose which family gets a house first?

I think that we don't need to hunt because we can be vegeterians and killing animals is not really STO, and there are animals that are domestic like chickens, etc., so you don't need to hunt. ;)

Killing and eating plants is STO?

I want to ask one question what if someone doesn't want to work or hunt?(remember this is 3D)what would you do? he doesn't have to be a psycho but normal person? would you use force?

Each person would do what that person feels comfortable doing. No need to force anyone to do anything. imo

 

[Mountain Crown]

that group should let the universe decide by putting a bunch of stones in a jar with one of them having a mark on it. The one who chooses the marked stone gets the next house and the others accept the decision of the universe and wait for the next draw?

A very interesting and creative idea, I think.

At sometime the needs of married couples should come into play, no? Those with children?

Edit: Oops, I see Oxajil already mentioned this.

 

[MetaDjinn]

I think that we don't need to hunt because we can be vegeterians and killing animals is not really STO

Hi dannybananny,

I've always been confused by this line of thinking: isn't part of existing in 3D the fact that we must eat other living things in order to live? Sure, many say that choosing vegetarianism is more moral, but I then think of a question posed by Alan Watts (I think) - he wondered if vegetarians feel more noble because of the simple fact that you can't hear plants scream when you kill them. They are alive and we do end their life and eat them. I do think, from some of the reading on the health posts, that some people do need meat in order to reach their optimum health, osit. Do others here believe that in order to be more STO oriented, you have to not eat meat? I am not trying to be confrontational; I am truly asking from a position of wanting to learn and understand more.

Thanks,
Christopher

 

[truth seeker]

Okay, suppose that is done. Now, it's time to build the next individual house. Who gets it and why?

If the children are taken care of, perhaps the next house could be built for the ones who work the hardest physically each day? After a hard work, they perhaps need the comfort of a house the most. A good night sleep. But who are the ones who work the hardest, the hunters or the builders? Maybe both?

What do others think?

That is definitely a consideration. So, maybe after the house for the doctor, the ones who do the hard, physical labor should be next in line. And if there are several of them, instead of trying to decide who works hardest, that group should let the universe decide by putting a bunch of stones in a jar with one of them having a mark on it. The one who chooses the marked stone gets the next house and the others accept the decision of the universe and wait for the next draw?

I think that after the one doing the hard physical labor have received their houses, the people doing the cooking should be next.

 

[Beorn]

I was also going to mention families. I guess some within the family will also be working hard, so there will be some cross over there.

Also my mind drifted to those who may be working hard but not being recognized. Who's changing all those nappies for instance, those working with the sick etc. The cleaners, the cooks? In our society we tend to overlook those who do certain kinds of jobs. For instance my friend gets paid more to work with animals than she gets looking after 5 or 6 children at a time!

I'm not saying they should get a house, but how do we consider those who work tirelessly and don't fit into certain criteria. I guess things need to be dynamic to a certain extent.

 

[dannybananny]

Killing and eating plants is STO?

Men ate them before The Fall and they were STO!


I've always been confused by this line of thinking: isn't part of existing in 3D the fact that we must eat other living things in order to live? Sure, many say that choosing vegetarianism is more moral, but I then think of a question posed by Alan Watts (I think) - he wondered if vegetarians feel more noble because of the simple fact that you can't hear plants scream when you kill them. They are alive and we do end their life and eat them. I do think, from some of the reading on the health posts, that some people do need meat in order to reach their optimum health, osit. Do others here believe that in order to be more STO oriented, you have to not eat meat? I am not trying to be confrontational; I am truly asking from a position of wanting to learn and understand more.


You must consume it's the way it goes, and C's said it isn't rally matter because it's concentrating on physical body.