East Meets West__Innate Corporatism & Why...?

"Hi Lloyd...how can corporations be the best ordered state?? Corporatism is Globalism...."
"...corporatism is the foundation of fascism, slavery, constant consumerism, the creation of enslavement to debt and non-stop merging and immersion into materialism as the only important thing in life..."

Hi Mikal, Leskey and all, and thanks for stopping by as you are all welcome. And Leskey, I also recognized our similar directions of mind, but being new to the site again, I figured I’d see if your interests be perked enough to join us_Thanks.

Now, to answer Mikal’s query as to my statements about corporations. It’s not that I like this position any better than the majority of people on Earth, it’s just the evolutionary reality handed all us awakening webonites, can not be overcome as fast as many would like. Let me just give a simple example/problem with change-too-fast; most all people either own or rent homes_a necessity_This means all such people are already locked into 30+ year mortgages or lifetime rents_i.e._signed contracts already controlling our future actions_next to unchangeable. Next; most all businesses/corporations/govs. have the similar contractual obligations 30+ yrs. into the future. My point is that about 80-90% of the world is already bought and sold(contract wise) to a future many of us do not want__But this fact_we all must face. So, this is a very limiting factual condition on the type of real changes possible. The future contractual obligations, not only of corporations, but most all people's livelihoods as well, are definitely on the line here, in any serious thoughts of social-eco-eco-politico-changes.

Now, don’t get me wrong__change is possible within certain and specific geometric contexts, enabling real benefit to the greater good of society at large_but we must see these simply explained complex realities, and add them to any ideas we are thinking about of real changes possible__Not to destroy the health and safety of our very beings, as culturally evolved systems. And as Leskey has wisely pointed out, and is also a major vision/view of mine, the inter-disciplinary successes of recent are picking up the unification speed far beyond what most are aware of. I’m truly beginning to see academic unifications in many areas of otherwise disparate fields__and ideas within fields being well understood in many areas_as well as the new_since last Sept. `08 crash__a new desire to learn to unite, as we are all trying to do here at ToeQuest. Though I may sound the trumpet of pessimism at times, I also am becoming very optimistic about what I see happening. I on the one hand see it separating, yet on the other hand see it coming together__Only time will tell.

As far as relating more about your statements above Mikal, and which I expressed to my daughter in that last post, it would be due to the future contractual obligations, already in place, that requires us to transitionally evolve through a new and much better balanced form of corporate capitalism_as bad as globalism and excess consumerism are_than to bring the whole house of cards down around our necks, which may happen anyway, by trying to jump capitalism further and faster than is possible to mechanically/functionally take place__That land of danger of ‘Change Too Fast’ is real__Many nations have tried that in the past, and look what happened. But within, the system is malleable to__by sensible standards__massive middle road changes. One must realize that most all arguments are taking place between two extreme sides of all issues__And no-one’s advocating for the true, and almost invisible, middle position, which is my position. No-one on the international scene, web or anywhere I know of has actually drawn up a detailed middle way ‘capitalist’ path since J.M.Keynes way back in the `20’s and `30’s__Every political party, in every nation, has simply been arguing against the extreme opposites, leaving the argument ‘For’ any middle path_completely in a void__No-Body Home…! That’s the place we all need stand, and fight to design and implement new and feasible middle-way systems.

I will be getting to that middle-way geometric structured system later, but for now lots of the fundamental questions must be talked and answered. SB has posed many over on Labelwench’s thread… Just as a final note on your concerns above__many of your fears can be eliminated if we evolve the true middle-way possibility, to whittle the corporate dragon down to sensibly functioning standards, and more sharing of their resources for individuals and the common good, while taking better care of the Global Commons…

Quote:"I have faith that not all of us are pushed by the adrenaline of fear...some are pushed by good common sense and others have turned fear into courage and strength. I do believe we can persevere through change!"

And I agree with these above statements completely, and not to make this post any longer for now, I end here with a big thanks to all participants…rrr

p.s.
Here's where we are: LINK
Here's where we can go: Link

(Conversation that preceded the above:...)
The only problem is Sb, we've had a world that's already tried that, and we know it doesn't work, nor can it work__in the world as thus far financially evolved. My daughter took a look at all my economic system charts one day, and immediately recognized its expressive values and truths, but upon looking closer she noticed I'd shown the most perfect state possible with corporations still having slightly more rights and money than the people, even in what I'd relayed as the fairest state possible.

She then asked why I'd represented the best ordered state as such, and I simply said, even as bad as we may dislike certain actions of the most powerful, they must have more to pay us a middle way fair wage. If not, what would be their incentive to build the businesses that employ most of us. She, recognizing the dynamics said, Ohhhh. All have to be fair and recognize the necessities of all, including the necessities of building much more fair law systems, than we now have. It's a rather serious affair...

I wish it were as easy as one wage, but Mao proved that impossibility long ago. Now, that doesn't mean we can't work to improve systems to the point that one day, we can do away with money systems, but reality requires a transition system of sensible laws to arrive there, without us all killing each other, in the process. So, it's more complex than simplicity, yet no where's near as complex as our academic and financial communities have mistakenly made it.

The problem SB is the adrenalized fear state of all humanity, and it's getting worse, the faster, faster, faster we go...rrr

p.s.
You may have faith in the human condition improving. I have zero faith in the human condition improving. Even the most enlightened Zen Buddhists estimate that only about 1 to 3% of the world has ever been enlightened, at any one time, and none expect the numbers to improve. Adrenalized fear is immune to change without force, and I don't mean violent force, per say, but a large enough group of people demanding the unfair laws be changed, to the fair and much more equitable laws, but that means everyone wanting change must agree on a feasible system of laws first, and that even seems near impossible to even me, but law change only takes a very small % of the society to accomplish just that...
__________________
"To develop the skill of correct thinking is in the first place to learn what you have to disregard. In order to go on, you have to know what to leave out; this is the essence of effective thinking." Kurt Godel
"Time and space are modes in which we think and not conditions in which we live." Albert Einstein
"The uncertainty principle is an absolute, finite, universal constant." L.G.
"The tick-tick-tick of the cesium atom is a sliding-time-scaler constant of all finite universal motion." L.G.

The Inverse Conflexivity of Mind, Common Sense & Lucid Visions of Nature, Humanity & Materialism___Ontology of…

The above title is obviously copied from my last graphic… The ontology of humanism and materialism is a subject argued about since the dawn of organizing, and organized society. Ontology is the "metaphysical science or study of being," as per the online etymology dictionary; http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=ontology&searchmode=none I am here extending it to the total actions of being, to include nature, and being’s materialism, yet it must be discussed metaphysically, until I may be able to later show a scientific method to better explain this subject, which I full well realize is very dear to many hearts. I simply think we can contribute much more to constructive dialogue and pragmatic action, if we can bring the metaphysical understanding more toward the real scientific understanding. This will in no way destroy the metaphysical ground of true heartfelt being, as there are many, many questions science can never answer; but there are also far too many dilemmas of social organizations left floundering in totally un-necessary arguments, by not scientizing that which should be scientized; and what should not be scientized, and can not be scientized, should be left to the metaphysical realm.

How do I know what should be scientized? It’s not a question of me knowing what should and should not be scientized; It’s a simple matter of that which can be scientized, will be scientized, and there’s not a soul on earth who can stop it; or anyone who should stop it.(If these areas turn dangerous, I leave it to the courts and laws to deal with.) As no-one can stop the inevitable, just as no one can stop evolution from being true, or DNA/RNA from being true and beneficial to humanity. The arguments we all witness in the public forums over these issues, and those over humanism and materialism, are completely un-necessary if one simply realizes, each side of these issues is simply ‘reacting’ instead of acting with one’s own common sense and intelligence. To make this simpler to explain, let me use the political spectrum of left and right issues. The humanist left reacts for their own desires, yet in truthfully looking at these actions, is actually reacting against what they perceive as their liberties being reduced, so react they do. The right is just as guilty as the left at ‘reacting’ against the left, in fear of their liberties being reduced, so react they do. Neither side of any of these humanist/materialist or leftist/rightist issues is acting in their own best interest__No-one on either side of any of the contemporary issues offers a truly workable solution to either side’s desires__Not the other’s or their own.

The only solution is to see these differences with a new vision and perception of inverse conflexivity, which requires lucid vision and perception of self-awareness, by being other-aware__Also. The easiest way to accomplish this is to completely invert the picture/image/movie within one’s mind, to thoroughly see it in its opposite light. You’d be surprised what this can accomplish. Let me just give you an example. I once asked at a conference when greed was mentioned; I asked, “What is greed?” Of course most thought it a ridiculous question, but I pressed the issue thus; “Truly and deeply think about this__What is greed? What really causes greed?” Finally, after considerable questions and debate, they started taking me seriously, and began to contemplate it, as they’d taken it for-granted, all their lives. They thought they knew what it meant__but realized they truly did not know what caused greed, thus couldn’t truly know what it was. This came as quite a shock to the entire group, after the conversations finally got moving. So, what is greed, and what does cause greed?

This is where the inversity of conflexivity comes in. By turning mental images/mentalities up-side-down, and looking at them anew, one is able to see an entirely new thought process within their own imaging/thinking processes. Just try this; take the issue you think and care the most about, and reverse your views completely about the same issue. It’s actually the same as taking the other person’s view, you hold opposite views of, and making them your own. When one does this, it allows one to climb directly into another’s mind, without even having them present; then you can actually see what’s missing of their thought system, as reflected in your thought system, by direct and total comparison. And if one is honest enough to realize the missing pieces in another’s thinking, through this thought inversion, then one must realize the same may be missing in their own thinking, as deep conflexive inversions are usually symmetrical, even of opposing views, images, concepts and perceptions. If you don’t think so__Just try it__and be honest about it…

Not to leave you in the dark about what causes greed, and what it truly is; here’s my experience of it, as I was once a businessman, who’s very being was being taken over by greed; until it repulsed me enough to close my business, and return to a normal job, working for the man. Greed is induced by several combinations of factors; the major being childhood pride and vanity induced by self, parents and friends, but when one has more money and opportunities than others, and showing off comes natural, the main culprit is adrenaline feeding these weak childhood passions, into habits of worse habits feeding on each other. Once pride and vanity begin swelling, fed by adrenaline, the greed junkie is born, never to stop__unless repulsed as I early was(businessman at 21 yrs. of age), yet I still suffer the disease of showing off, as I am still an adrenaline junkie with a damaged ego__Once a junkie, always a junkie. Mine is no longer greed, it’s just being a show-off junkie, but I was once a severely damaged greed, vanity, show-off and pride junkie of pure adrenaline and out-of-control ego…

False & True Philosophical Utopias…

(Anyone wishing to follow these debates as they take place: Click Here)(click image for larger view)

“Two things here are all-important to assure oneself of and to remember. The first is that a person is not absolutely an individual. His thoughts are what he is "saying to himself," that is, is saying to that other self that is just coming into life in the flow of time. When one reasons, it is that critical self that one is trying to persuade; and all thought whatsoever is a sign, and is mostly of the nature of language. The second thing to remember is that the man's circle of society (however widely or narrowly this phrase may be understood), is a sort of loosely compacted person, in some respects of higher rank than the person of an individual organism." C.S. Peirce

The above quote is the central premises of explanation of my graphic, in my first post this month. If one studies the depth of Peirce’s statements related to my graphic, the truths are represented by the three center circles, which can actually be the three conceptual/perceptual and non-perceptual selves, as one fades, one is present ‘I’/being, and the third is the self “coming into life in the flow of time”. The reason I’ve chosen conflexivity is I didn’t feel the present terms actually covered all the actions taking place in our mental processes. Others have chosen the words, ‘Abduction’, ‘Reflexivity’ and ‘Reflexive Control’, but it’s more than a mere reflexive system__The deepest mind states are a truly conflexive process. By conflexivity, I mean, as an analogy, say an epiphany, which is a split second lucid vision into the super-consciousness of one’s own mind, or as some would believe, into the super-consciousness of all minds or even a universal mind. The reason I choose ‘con-’ is it has the meaning, when added to ‘flexivity’, of being two or many processes in one, especially as relates to a small split second’s epiphany, having the massive power of vision to reveal such a large amount of information, it’s often over-whelming to retrieve at that moment. It may take years or even decades to understand the entire meaning of such epiphanies, as I’m sure many of you have experienced, and for this reason and the explanation’s complexity, I’ve chosen the word conflexivity. If one looks up ‘con’ in the online etymology dictionary at; http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=con&searchmode=none one will quickly see the utility of the many meanings, which suits my purpose well, as I intend, over the next 6 months, to relay an entire system of philosophy, by a method I’ll later explain. For now, it’ll be from a universal standpoint of eclectic genericity. By using a general method, it allows me to take in all the breadth of universal facts and beliefs, and at the same time allows a perspective of the depths of particular facts and individual beliefs, desires, habits and ambitions…

So as not to become bogged down in constant extreme debates between others varied views and ideas, and my own, I’ll be responding with general impersonal expositions of my ideas, as loosely relates to others’ ideas. My methods have their main foundations in the early Jains, Nyaya, Heraclitus, Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, Euclid, Eudoxus, Nicomachus, Archimedes, Apollonius, A.Biruni, Avicenna/Ibn Sina, A.Magnus, F.Bacon, Boole, De Morgan, W.Clifford, A.Schopenhauer, C.S.Peirce, T.Veblen, W.Durant and L.Kolakowski. The three I’m most impressed with are Ibn Sina, C.S.Peirce and L.Kolakowski, as all three offer eclectic universal genericity perspectives. Both Ibn Sina and C.S.Peirce offered complete philosophical systems, including all views of human thought, i.e., Logic, Physics, Metaphysics, Spiritism and complete category systems to boot. These two are the only ones who offered all of human thought in one person, and respected all aspects of these diverse mentalities of history, therefore I have a great deal of respect for them, especially as offering a great helping hand to unite the many dis-united schools of thought, mentalities and ideas of our present ‘crazy’ world.

As to the ‘False & True Philosophical Utopias’, this will be an ongoing discussion about “The Mentalities of Histories” as Kolakowski has named them. This ‘mentalities’ has far greater conceptual representational power than say, ‘The History of Ideas’, ‘The Intellectual History of Eras’ or ‘The History of Concepts’, as ‘The History of Mentalities’ can represent anything from the smallest personal individual in depth idea, to the largest universal open conceptual ideas of the planet’s evolutional mental state, as expressed by people such as P.T de Chardin, E.Schrodinger, D.Bohm and even J.Lovelock. I intend to discuss most all the false utopias of leftists and rightists, i.e., Marxism, socialism, communism, the Heinz 57 totalitarianisms, the Heinz 57 capitalisms and anything else that comes up as relates to social philosophy, social justice and a possible evolution to a true state of pure liberty, based on the complete ‘Inversity’ of present state law system understandings, through full explanations of what ‘Inverse Greed’ truly consists of. This may sound like a tall order, but I assure you I have simplified the process greatly over the last two years, by graphing, tabling and charting these processes and methods with an analogical/visual representation that’ll become obvious as we progress. I’ve named my entire philosophical system ‘Aneology’, which means ‘One Visual Logic…’

Not to make this post any longer, I’ll end here for now…

P.S.
The Q, C, and X, as represented above stand for Q = quantum states(though all 3 are quantum change states), C = biological cells, and X = foreign exchange markets, as so emplaced. These letters can be replaced to represent all central actions of brain/mind states, or other states of complexity of the nations' systems and world systems, where complexities yet unsolved exist. In other words I could have the letters, M = minds, P = photons, and C = concepts, etc., etc. Just as in all algebras, the letters are interchangable as per the topics of discussions proceed. As per the drawing's box informations, they are all chiralling cycloid motions of photons, as photons are the family of bosons, which allow super-positioning/cloning, etc., as per Einstein, which allows concepts to merge from lesser states to greater vision states, then fade to emplaced memory states. Future diagrams and explanations of the mechanics will form the entire picture of a working brain/mind model and possible and necessary probable world mechanics of...

The reason foreign exchange is included is it represents one of the largest areas of incomplete complexity(and many others will be shown in future posts), similar or symmetrical, information wise, as that of deep brain/mind mechanics of hypotheses formations, and possibly a clearer method of future explanations, since any internal mind states, not completely understood, can more easily be represented by symmetrical relationships of external real world states(I'm drawing the symmetries of actions from E.Noether and her statements of physical states in relation to the symmetries of the laws of physics and nature, and the required conditions of her theorems_She's one of our most important global resources of unifying thought). Just as morality can not be agreed to internally(the epistemic dilemma of 'free will and responsibility'), other than our individual prejudices learned by age 18, as per Nietzsche, this same internal moral state can be understood through its symmetrical external relationship of the desires, ambitions and habits of entire communities' esthetic liberty actions, as represented by the real world accomplishments we see around us, which actually exists by the original moral desires and ambitions of individual choices, and this way morality is actually externally/objectively, scientifically measurable_over time. As an example, we all enjoy living in comfortable houses, as per living in cold, damp caves_that's a moral/happiness personal choice we all make. Though some may not see it as a moral choice, one only has to think about the more compassionate condition of wife and children's comfort of house compared to cave, then one sees the moral/happiness implications. This will also be given through future graphs, tables and graphics, with their related explanations, and showing how to measure not only morality, but a closing of many of philosophy's epistemic and ontological gaps...

Hope that helps...

And as per logic of, logic simply tells us the true and false condition states of our reasoning, and no more, i.e., reason asks/contemplates the questions/doubts, and logic answers the condition states of... Of course, many conflate logic states with Aristotle's syllogistic 3 laws of logic__I use Ibn Sina's, Boole's, Lobachevsky's, Grassmann's, De Morgan's, Clifford's, Peirce's and Vasiliev's much extended logics, over Aristotle's less extensive reasonings...