Sunday, January 27, 2013

Seedy side

Apparently two of the biggest foolish ideas are Christianity and Democracy. Why? Because the notions of Christianity to believe the best is possible in man has led to a society which embraces evil and repudiates good. The ideas that a person should forgive his enemy and sacrifice well being for heavenly rewards hasn't turned out too well for countless individual and this nation.

The notion that government by democracy some how is an enabling ideal and that the poor and wicked won't capitalize on the opportunity to enrich themselves by voting it so, is either foolishness or a lie.

The judeo-christian ethic and value system has empowered man from its inception. The ideas that honesty and integrity are critical to the success of society and that laws are essential to the well being of man and beast has served this world well for many thousands of years.  However it seems to have come to an end when individual integrity is deemed worthless or negotiable.

All other systems of government have proven themselves to be destructive of the individual as well as society far in advance of democracy's failure which leaves us little or nothing to look forward too.  Christianity offers nothing more than a benign dictatorship based on the notion that love for one another and consecration of all things is the best answer. Christianity acknowledges evil but offers no solution to it or for it other than to love you enemy.

All of the "-cies" and "-isims" including survival of the fittest has been tried and failed.  What next?  In my opinion if the second coming of Jesus Christ is not at hand then it must be the "-ologies" that are on the horizon.  The future of technology seems practically limitless.  New discoveries and countless inventions and developments point to a different and perhaps brighter future.

One of those scenarios is the replacement of labor by robots so that instead of a man's worth being dependent upon his muscles or intelect his worth is measured in service.  The supplanting of integrity and ethics by a sentient and empathetic droid is really unnecessary, impractical, and unlikely. However, there is still the issue of good and evil which can only, currently,  be dealt with ethically, morally, and by legislated law enforcement.

A second future is the reliance on technology and the enabling of the individual man or woman to deal with good and evil through information and computer aided knowledge and assessment. As technology becomes microscopic and can be integrated into our physical being we will find ourselves being made smarter, stronger, and potentially wiser.  As technology becomes ubiquitous and amorphous we will able to perceive the intent of and know the history of any acquaintance.

The notion of transparency will be augmented by the ability to perceive value or threat instantaneously. Instead of reliance upon a government to legislate laws or an enforcement agency relegated to the role of investigating the crime after the laws have been broken we as individuals will be able to find and associate with like minded individuals.  Instead of becoming victims of unscrupulous hooligans we will be able to reside in a place and time that is appropriate and adequate for our well being and prosperity.

It is conceivable that laws will be unnecessary because social and economic dealings will be done with the full knowledge of the individual, the infinite memory of the cloud, and the computational power of the computer.

It is conceivable that ethics, morals and rights will no longer need to be articulated or argued about but lived by the people in our association.  It will be possible and probable that families, neighborhoods, communities, cities, counties, states and possibly nations will be coincidentally inhabited by like minded people who are willing to allow others to exist peacefully.

Obviously the danger of any homogeneous gathering or ideal is the likelihood that 'group think' will take over because invariably there will be one dominate idea or personality that is charismatic and influential. Throughout history that has been the beginning of injustice, intolerance, and prejudice.  The interesting thing about the technological future is that the intent of one individual and willingness of others will be easily discernible. Because of our enhanced analysis and empowered decision making processes the depth and breadth of any aberrant idea or concept will be necessarily limited because more people will be revolted by it than attracted to it.

Not that bad ideas and intent can't exist because they can but that the support they receive will be proportional to those people who really want to do bad things and have bad things happen to them and not simply a bunch of dupes misled and misinformed. As a consequence I don't think the bad ideas or destructive intent will find many followers because it will be possible for the potential dupes to consider the negative consequences. Those repelled by it can quickly and easily distance themselves from it and seek better associations.

This will all be possible through applications by countless programers posting their utilities which will inform us of the various state of affairs we find ourselves in and where those people, places, things, and actions are the we are attracted to.  Our own personal profiles will determine the value of each person or instance independent of big sis. because all information can be accessed and analyzed according to our preferences.  It is relative only to us and affects only us and an our personal behavior.  Our every actions is recorded and reported as a means of informing everyone else.

The power brokers will obviously try to maintain power but because the internet is divested and the information communal there is no simple way for them to aggregate power and influence.  Because the applications are situation specific there is no easy way to integrate their collective influence.  The only danger is when information is kept secret.  Even that can be over come because the lack of access will trigger alarms and discount the value the people, places, or activities associated with the secrecy.  In a sense a self-policing and first order transparent environment relative to personal profiles and values established not by any agency but by the algorithms each person employs to evaluate the circumstances for themselves.

The most interesting thing is that morals are individual based not institution based.  Your value to me is not what someone else says it is based on their standards but how you measure up to my standards. My standards can be low but after a while I get tired of being taken and swindled and my standards naturally rise and my feed back loop becomes much more discriminatory.  I all have the incentive to live up to my standards because that will be the deciding factor on how a value is reported.  We instinctively want good things to happen even though we are attracted to the seedy side of things.

No comments:

Post a Comment