 |
The Sandorian Grove: Call for Papers: (Online) Conference On Systemic Flaws and Solutions 2009 |
Category: Articles 26 comments 13 Oct 2008 @ 18:05 by Merlin Silk @76.168.217.251 : volunteeringYup - I volunteer for setting up the wiki - do we have a domain for that project yet? how about SystemicFlawsAndSolutions.com... As an alternative to using a wiki (Meidawiki would be the choice here) we also could use a system like Joomla which would allow more control on what gets added to the book. Wiki is more like an anarchy (which I usually tend to) while an article submitted by an author in Joomla will go through an editing and publishing cycle. 13 Oct 2008 @ 18:42 by ashanti : Wisdom of the crowds I like the new collaborative model of content creation. Sounds good. I would add that those in public office should not earn more than just above their needs (removes the greed factor). 13 Oct 2008 @ 19:41 by mx @189.68.220.56 : SystemicFlawsAndSolutions.com sounds good, and Joomla sounds good, too, as for a subject so charged, it would be good to have the possibility to filter it. 13 Oct 2008 @ 21:53 by Ed Dawson @76.168.215.49 : ??????? No individual ownership of land? So no one can own a house or farm? So tell me what the incentive would be to develop land by draining, enriching with compost, plowing, planting, etc? Gee let's see if it takes X number of years for orange trees, olive trees, etc. to grow to maturity and begin to provide a harvest, why bother if you do not own the land in which they grow? And if you are 80 and dying, can your children inherit your trees? Much of the above chapters sound good, but the items on inheritance and land seem to require "clarification". ;-P Grew up on a small farm, Ed 13 Oct 2008 @ 22:21 by mx @189.68.220.56 : draft character the above is still a draft... the list of possible topics (I changed the formulations just now) were originally a 10-point 'plan to save the world', hmmm, I will still write this up completely as a 'paper'. For the conference itself, there should be much more freedom of choice in the topics themselves. land: 'stewardship' with the right to use it for 99 years seems better to me. OR, limit the amount of land that can be 'owned'. This is to avoid speculations and amassing property of land in the hands of a few. Same on limitations on inheritances. Things to discuss... 14 Oct 2008 @ 00:15 by Ed Dawson @76.168.215.49 : Use limits are too inflexible So basically you are calling for the land I own to be lost to my boys "after 99 years" of it being in my family? As for limits, how do you limit a cattle ranch? Agriculture is obviously something you have never done, Max. I say this because from a farmer's POV, your proposal is nuts. Efficient farming often requires a large scale. Also: improvement of a piece of land increases its value. Why increase the value of a piece of land only to lose it eventually? What would be the farmer's motivation to bother to improve land? Yeah, I was FFA (Future farmers of America) as a kid. I suggest you rethink your land proposals. I totally agree with taking corporations off the land and making farming a family affair again. But a farmer has to be able to own his land. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION. I don't do the enforced ogunda thang very often but this time I will. Talk to a few farmers who farm their land and ask them if they would be interested in anything more than raping the soil if they were not permitted to own the land... Edward 14 Oct 2008 @ 05:39 by Merlin Silk @76.168.217.251 : communism All these points are good chapters, right? We don't have to decide here in these comments what is wrong and what is right. The only thing at this point of the discussion is a warning not to try to do again what Marx did and also not to do what Washington did - both failed because they both promoted systems with systematic faults. And one of the faults common to both was that some smart man wanted to make rules for others - darn, I am really becoming an anarchist. 14 Oct 2008 @ 13:11 by ming : Systemic Flaws Very cool, I'll be happy to participate. As to land ownership, the spirit of the inquiry here would be to go deeper, to look at what systemically happens if one accepts the idea of ownership versus if one doesn't. It is in part about bringing the hidden assumptions to the surface. Like, there's the idea there that one can only really be motivated if one can keep everybody else away from one's property. Which is sort of an odd backwards idea, in my view, but it is quite fundamental to our capitalistic society. It isn't that I can feel I own something, it is that I can stop everybody else from feeling they own it. I can put up "Stay out!" signs and shoot at people who trespass on my property. While happily ignorning that I bought it from somebody who bought it from somebody else who stole it from the public domain, who quite possibly killed whoever was living there, and then lied about it. Part of the systemic tendency is to make more and more stuff monetized. Most of the fundamental goods of existence have already become owned by somebody that one must pay for getting it. Land, food, water, work, health. Despite that those people didn't really create it. There isn't much left to add to the pool. To follow the trend, next could be air, sleep, free speech, and I don't know what else somebody might come up with. Anyway, I'm looking forward to addressing some of this stuff in my paper. 14 Oct 2008 @ 13:11 by mx @189.68.214.148 : opening the eyes to systemic flaws Merlin's perspective presents my own: the proposal is to opening the eyes to systemic flaws and not to dream up some new laws yet. We should focus on the systemic flaws and avoid (endless) discussions about details (cartesian thinking) which has its place when it has been made sure that the structures themselves are not deficient. I mixed my own solutions in there as statements which wasn't good and I changed the wording (see above) to questions instead of lawlike postulates. I am thinking about withdrawing the list of discussion points and leave it more open that way. This is not the CALL yet, I will change this too!! 15 Oct 2008 @ 01:23 by Merlin Silk @76.168.217.251 : Now MX has to write a compelling into... ... so that we possibly get many contributors to the virtual conference. The goal is to be invited to TED in a year or two and tell about this virtual conference. So, where can you write your intro? Here: http://www.SystemicFlawsAndSolutions.com 15 Oct 2008 @ 02:45 by Everlight @98.221.193.254 : Ownership vs Collective The Native Americans and other indigenous groups around the planet generally looked at personal ownership of some items of daily living and horses, etc. but not the land which belonged to them all as a tribe or Nations of Native Americans. They considered themselves the caretakers of "Mother Earth". True, there were many wars fought among some Native American Nations over territory under their control. To handle this waring among some of the Nations, the Iroquois Confederacy was created by 5 powerful neighboring Nations and later a 6th Nation joined them. There were no longer wars among these Nations and a collective type social structure was formed. The typical hunter/gatherers had their specific roles. At harvest time ALL helped. Everything from the land was shared and stored with common ownership. There has been much written on the success of this form a society. Many indigenous groups around the planet have been waiting for the predicted collapse of the world governments and are already prepared to start all over again living the "old ways". MX and Merlin... I am with you. Everlight 15 Oct 2008 @ 13:25 by mx @189.68.218.39 : Wiki Merlin: great for the superfast and efficient setup of Wiki and URL! Extremely cool! The first page will become the start page and the official introduction sort of a preface. I'll take care of that. I logged in and left a footprint there. For tThe editors of the wiki (meaning who can log in) should be possible to exclude 'bozos' if they should appear, that means blacklisting certain users or install an authorization/approval process for the log-in. Hope this is possible without much trouble. 15 Oct 2008 @ 13:30 by mx @189.68.218.39 : indigenous solutions Everlight, glad to see you here! What's missing on the topic of 'indigenous solutions' are detailed descriptions going beyond anecdotal reports. Sadly, there is a lack of it. It may be a great idea to include such descriptions, from the view of systemic thinking, in that conference. Before the presentation of the conference is stable, I don't want yet invite the leaders in the field there. 15 Oct 2008 @ 13:36 by vaxen : Nice... Merlin. Very nice beginning. anarchy 1539, from M.L. anarchia, from Gk. anarkhia "lack of a leader," noun of state from anarkhos "rulerless," from an- "without" + arkhos "leader" (see archon). Anarchist (1678) got a boost into modernity from the French Revolution. Anarcho-syndicalism is first recorded 1913. Archon (Gr. ἄρχων, pl. ἄρχοντες) is a Greek word that means "ruler", frequently used as the title of a specific public office. It is the masculine present participle of the verb stem ἀρχ-, meaning "to rule", derived from the same root as monarch and hierarchy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon Of course you are all familiar with Jung's (Attributed to him but can be found in El Arabi's writings and those of other Sofayeen Mystics as well as Judaic Kabbalists) theory of the Arche-types In the early literary period of ancient Greece the chief magistrates of various Greek city states were called Archon.[citation needed] The term was also used throughout Greek history in a more general sense, ranging from "club leader" to "master of the tables" at syssitia to "Roman governor".[citation needed] In Roman terms, archontes ruled by imperium, whereas Basileis ("Kings") had auctoritas. Link ibid. above Archon Eponymos? Yes systemic flaws. Older than Bab Alon. Asymmetrical systemic flaws induced via perception based on limited sensu/logo symmetry? Game of GO? What is systemic advocacy after all? Symmetry, asymmetry, transymmetry? Look forward to the papers that will come forth from this. Thanks Mx. Merlin, et al... A fuzzy data fusion approach was used for human sperm morphology recognition analysis using 3-CCD camera image data. Fuzzy operators were used to create the relationship between abnormal sperm morphology and normal sperm aberrations after digitizing the i... http://www.iiisci.org/Journal/sci/Abstract.asp?var=&id=P192273 Digitizing the i! Replace the word sperm with a word of your own choosing such as MEST, say? Or... system. And if the i be theta? A fuzzy data fusion approach was used for human system morphology recognition analysis using e-meter auditing/auditor image data. Fuzzy operators were used to create the relationship between abnormal system morphology and normal system aberrations after digitizing the i... And for the 3-CCD camera image data maybe 'biometric feedback instrument such as the e-meter of LRH? Jeezus am I just being Bozoish here? By bozo I presume you mean clown, mx? ;) 15 Oct 2008 @ 13:52 by mx @189.68.218.39 : Logo for the Conference.. history would be cool if someone proposes a nice logo for the conference. Vaxen, yes, one needs to look at solutions also in 'non-indigenous' (if that ever originally exised) contexts... or, let's say, the Western lines of thinking before they got meddled with. 15 Oct 2008 @ 14:02 by vaxen : What about... in a proto time before west was west and east was east? Indi-Genous. In Di Genous? Di meaning two or dyadic? In the formation of the dyads? Or in the bi formation of the inward state? Thanks mx... This will be food for nice thinging and thinking... How many cans could a Toucan can if a Toucan could can cans? I can, you can, he/she/ it can Couldn't we? 15 Oct 2008 @ 14:14 by mx @189.68.218.39 : canning.. we could, we can, we should, we shall thanks vaxen 15 Oct 2008 @ 14:35 by vaxen : PREFACE PIERRE TEILHARD de CHARDIN The egocentric ideal of a future reserved for those who have managed to attain egotistically the extremity of 'everyone for himself' is false and against nature... The outcome of the world, the gates of the future, the entry into the super-human -- these are not thrown open to a few of the priveged or to one chosen people to the exclusion of all others. They will only open to an advance of all together, in a direction in which all together can join and find completion in a spiritual renovation of the earth... No evolutionary future awaits man except in association with all other men. JONAS SALK Matter at each level of complexity appears to consist of two interdependent, nonidentical elements in dynamic interaction and in integral relation to each other. It appears that an interacting, dynamic, asymmetrical binary relationship is the fundamental module of order in the cosmos. I have the impression that the interactions in these dynamic asymmetrical binary systems underlie all phenomena in nature...The most fundamental phenomena in the universe is relationship. It then becomes possible to recognize the underlying unity in all the diversity of the phenomena of life. http://www.newciv.org/ISSS_Primer/seminar.html "Systemics is based on action." - You're welcome, Skipper. ;) 15 Oct 2008 @ 16:10 by vaxen : HCI... Perhaps there really are no flaws and if asymmetrically one considers the whole as constantly becoming, as we do in the English language, then that newness of being that we feel in the now could be applied to the self factor of the Human Computer Interface and it's development towards being more than just a fraction of the whole but representative thereof in it's entireness thus bridging that seeming divide between supposed matter and non matter. Material and spiritual estates. Any estate planners amongst us? Colin T. Schmidt * Centre for Research in Pragmatics, Philosophy of Language and Communication, The Sorbonne University, Paris, France email: Colin T. Schmidt (coschmi@idf.ext.jussieu.fr) *Correspondence to Colin T. Schmidt, 20, Place des Géants, 38100 Grenoble, France Index Terms human computer interaction • cognition • screen design • systems design Abstract Since simulating human communication is dependant on the evolution of this very activity, all efforts in the field of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) are intuitively bound to be too late. Little sign of this fact is reflected in the literature. In stride with the foresight of French philosopher Francis Jacques, the present work explores the systemological approach of dialogism as a new way of couching the problem of person-machine dialogue. The difficulties encountered in the heat of design are only indirectly addressed; shedding light upon standard new interface = new solution philosophies implicit in current bipolar metaphors for human-computer relationships is the major motivation. The posture taken differs from current HCI stances insofar as a machine is taken to be only part of the solution, and works towards establishing a viewpoint from which HCI technology - a chapter of the new Cognitive Science Order - is seen to evolve with the ever-changing demands of users: Dialogism contains no individuality. Popular stances are qualified as monological since two separate incompatible information processing systems are therein put forth, the Self and the Other. But the particularity of this communication does not lie in the chain of emission, transmission, and reception states of which it is made, but in the relevance that such behavior acquires in sustaining the biological circularity of Man. Thus as humans developing designership skills, accepting that our subjectivity moderates this process becomes paramount. The author's conviction is that an HCI community reflecting upon the future of interface will gain bona fide self-awareness from conceptualizing the Machine as a component of society, rather than an entity separate from it. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/39633/abstract 17 Oct 2008 @ 18:54 by Ed Dawson @76.168.215.49 : Vaxen, so you understand my view So you know where I am coing from... My "heroes" are people like: Spooner http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysander_Spooner Stirner: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Stirner and Heinlein: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Heinlein who in his fiction advocated "pragmatic anarchism". I tend toward free market anarchism (AKA Libertarianism), and individualist anarchism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualist_anarchism So as an individualist (albeit an ethical one) I have to ask how a kibbutz style society would deal with a person who insisted on owning a piece of land and defending it. Would this be tolerated, or boycotted, or crushed using force? So I guess that is my main concern here: what if someone disagrees and insists on not abiding by the program? cheers Ed 18 Oct 2008 @ 10:04 by Merlin Silk @76.168.217.251 : use of the wiki Instead of intertwining several communications here in the comment section of the blog - why not start using the wiki for that purpose - and you will have to get familiar with it anyways. Here is how the wiki can be used: You want to start a thread, so you write a post/page/article about it. The wiki software now has a discussion page for each page and that is where these discussion can take place. So, get yourselves a logon on the site www.systemicflawsandsolutions.com I also want to get a feel for it what still needs to be done - possible a different group of users, etc. so I would like the site to be used and hear complaints and suggestions. 18 Oct 2008 @ 15:17 by mx @189.68.208.124 : Wiki ready - logo still needed the basic setup is ready at www.systemicflawsandsolutions.com Please start by creating an account and leave a note on your planned contribution(s) even if they are not ready yet, so that we have an overview of what to expect. If you already know you will cover a topic that will fall into a NEW heading (section), please leave a know on the discussion forum on the Wiki first. GZ: is it possible to do an e-mail account (or forwarding) to a cover-all address at systemicflawsandsolutions.com ? 19 Oct 2008 @ 07:18 by Merlin Silk @76.168.217.251 : email I am getting away more and more to have email addresses with the specific domain but instead recommend to just get another gmail account and let them handle all the spam. They are better at it - period. Sure, there is a reason for info@domain.com but these tings get so much spam, and especially when you have a catch all. I stopped with a catch all when my spam messages reached about 1200 for one domain. A gmail account with the name of this site would be a good way to allow others to send messages. Another one to send messages to registered user is a link like this [[Special:Emailuser/Admin|drop me a message]] in your wiki text. A mail is sent through the site without any chance for a email harvester to get the address. This gives me the opportunity to remind all you people who are getting an account in hordes now to add your user name [[User:xxxxxx]] to the community portal and then write something about yourself in this profile - see, your name is red after you added it and it should be blue - meaning there is a page behind that link. 19 Oct 2008 @ 14:05 by mx @189.68.212.212 : systemic.flaws.and.solutions@gmail.com ok.. here is the 'official' e-mail address: systemic.flaws.and.solutions@gmail.com 10 Jul 2015 @ 06:02 by zifeng787ties @50.23.131.206 : http://www.reachingkayo.com/ custom suit shop mens ties Silk Neckties necktiebow.com reachingkayo cloth factory Cheap Neckties how to tie ties ties black neck ties cheap neck ties cheap ties dress ties men neck ties mens neck ties mens ties neck tie tie neck ties neckties mens ties mens neck ties men neck ties cheap ties ties black neck ties cheap neck ties cheap ties dress ties men neck ties mens neck ties mens ties neck tie tie neck ties neckties mens ties mens neck ties men neck ties cheap ties ties black neck ties cheap neck ties cheap ties dress ties men neck ties men's neck ties men's ties neck tie tie neck ties neckties mens ties men's neck ties men neck ties cheap ties tie ties tie a tie tie a necktie Learn how to tie a tie tie bar men's tie tie a bowtie suit haute couture customization suit Suit customization tie customization tailored shirt men's tailored shirt men's ties men's suit business suit leisure shirt leisure suit men's leisure suit men neck ties cheap leisure suit ties factory necktie factory in Shengzhou SHENGZHOU Reachingkayo AND NECKTIE FACTORY cheap ties necktie factory necktie factory suppliers mens necktie manufacturers scarf factory cloth company ties company scarf company cloth suppliers cloth manufacturers cloth suppliers black neck ties cheap neck ties heap ties dress ties men neck ties mens neck ties mens ties neck tie tie neck ties neckties mens ties mens neck ties men neck ties 29 Apr 2016 @ 05:11 by Bandar Togel @103.12.162.4 : brilliant! I would like to share this ar Togel Online Singapore Togel Online Hongkong Bandar Togel Singapore Bandar Togel Togel Online Terpercaya Bandar Togel Online Terpercaya Togel Online Agen Togel Online Terpercaya Agen Togel Online Other articles in Articles 23 Sep 2016 @ 17:18: A summary of the summaries of Max Sandor's projects 23 Sep 2016 @ 17:04: Project Summary 6. Game Theory - why and how do we manifest? 23 Sep 2016 @ 17:02: Project Summary 5: Polar Dynamics - theory and praxis of polarities 23 Sep 2016 @ 17:01: Project Summary 4: Quantum Fá - a practical guide to this Universe 23 Sep 2016 @ 16:45: Project Summary 3: The Book of Numbers 22 Sep 2016 @ 16:12: Project Summary 2: UrTon - the basis of spoken languages 18 Sep 2016 @ 00:32: Project Summary 1: The ConCur Paradigm - the structure of Reality 9 Aug 2016 @ 14:35: Robot Psychologist (by Awaz) 9 Aug 2016 @ 14:35: Project Summary 7: Archetypology of the Human Being 1 Aug 2016 @ 00:40: Victory, submission or what else? Sign and symbol of the Rio 2016 Kickoff
|
13 Oct 2008 @ 14:42, by Max Sandor