THE PARADIGM OF
voluntary commonality
voluntary commonality
part one:
"WHAT CAN A FISH KNOW ABOUT THE WATER IN WHICH IT SWIMS ALL ITS LIFE?"
Albert Einstein
Albert Einstein
The current global civilisation is based on the hierarchical model of the state developed in ancient Rome nearly 2000 years ago. It is evident that this model is becoming obsolete as humankind is facing a set of unprecedented, highly destructive challenges, particularly the rapid emergence of global communication networks and of new wealth-producing manufacturing technologies.
Consequently, the rift between the existing social order and the way the societies it is trying to manage functions is widening at an increasingly rapid rate. It is evident that there is an acute need to address the inadequacies of the current model and take a fresh look at the very fundamentals of humans' coexistence.
To solve problems, it is necessary to consider the case in which it does not arise.
Consequently, the rift between the existing social order and the way the societies it is trying to manage functions is widening at an increasingly rapid rate. It is evident that there is an acute need to address the inadequacies of the current model and take a fresh look at the very fundamentals of humans' coexistence.
To solve problems, it is necessary to consider the case in which it does not arise.
COMMONALITY
a joint way of achieving a common objective.
a joint way of achieving a common objective.
- The elementary act of commonality is the mutual exchange of goodness which, in essence, represents an exchange of mutual commitments.
- The order, method, form of interaction of people in the elementary acts of the exchange of goods is essentially a Social Contract. A Social Contract is a set of conditioned habits and nothing more.
Commonality types
There are two different models of commonality: (a) "the forced commonality", when parties are obligated to act in a certain way by a decree, a law or a prescription, and (b) "the voluntary commonality" when they act by invitation to work toward a common objective and to achieve parity.
There are two different models of commonality: (a) "the forced commonality", when parties are obligated to act in a certain way by a decree, a law or a prescription, and (b) "the voluntary commonality" when they act by invitation to work toward a common objective and to achieve parity.
- In forced commonality, the benefit of one is detrimental to the other
- In the "voluntary commonality" model the limits of one's personal freedom stay within the "no-harm-to-anyone" zone.
Costs
When interacting in forced commonality, costs as a "tax on the senseless" feed a social cluster that is interested in preserving the model as the basis of its own well-being and as a recognized world order.
When interacting in forced commonality, costs as a "tax on the senseless" feed a social cluster that is interested in preserving the model as the basis of its own well-being and as a recognized world order.
- Tax on the sensless – this, in fact, is not secured by any claim rights to all involved participants.
- When interacting in voluntary commonality, there are no costs. There is no meaningless in it.
Contradiction
All of us simultaneously exist within these two antagonistic realities: the "voluntary commonality" model where we interact with our kin, and the "forced commonality" model where we can exist as victims and oppressors simultaneously.
All of us simultaneously exist within these two antagonistic realities: the "voluntary commonality" model where we interact with our kin, and the "forced commonality" model where we can exist as victims and oppressors simultaneously.
- Suffering does not stem from our wishes as such. It emerges only when one must act against another person's will and limit his freedom in order to achieve a personal objective. This contradicts the true nature of homo sapience.
- Yet, people continue to live within the existing social reality out of habit or fear. Such duality of existence and consciousness is inherent to everyone who simultaneously participates in the two models of commonality noted above.
People do not realize the absurdity around what is happening,
because they observe it from birth.
because they observe it from birth.
Fruits of forced commonality
The state declares public welfare to be the main purpose for its existence. Yet, the state legitimizes coercion, force and violence as natural and widely acceptable social norms.
However, such norms beget defective economies and faulty monetary systems serving them.
The absurdity of our lives is, in fact, the summary result of established social habits of the individual members of the society.
However, such norms beget defective economies and faulty monetary systems serving them.
The absurdity of our lives is, in fact, the summary result of established social habits of the individual members of the society.
You will never change anything if you fight the existing reality. If you want to change something, create a new model so that the old one is simply obsolete.
Buckminster Fuller
American architect, systems theorist, author, designer, and inventor.
EXODUS Paradigm
We are truly happy when we are among "our kin", i.e.
a) those who do not strive to limit for their own purposes our freedom,
b) those who recognize their own uniqueness but also are capable of admiring the uniqueness of others,
c) those who are able of developing new reality-changing ideas through a joint creative effort with others, and
d) those who do not wage battles with the absurd but dissolve it, as fighting the absurd automatically turns the combatant into part of that absurdity and into its co-author.
a) those who do not strive to limit for their own purposes our freedom,
b) those who recognize their own uniqueness but also are capable of admiring the uniqueness of others,
c) those who are able of developing new reality-changing ideas through a joint creative effort with others, and
d) those who do not wage battles with the absurd but dissolve it, as fighting the absurd automatically turns the combatant into part of that absurdity and into its co-author.
exodus
Consider voluntary commonality as task of describing the interaction of the two actors in the elementary act of exchanging mutual goods.
Zone of insensitivity
Participants of voluntary commonality interact with each other by mutual goodwill and operate with a "zone of insensitivity" in the "borders of freedom" of each.
- A zone of insensitivity of each can be considered a resource necessary to meet basic needs and fulfill social obligations.
- Simultaneously, each of the participant is an organic part of the compulsory model in the amount of its personal consumption in the external financial contour.
De-centralized community
The subject of voluntary commonality is limited in its interaction with other "Dunbar number" - an average of 150 people. 150 subjects of parity compatibility have 11150 links and can be considered as a de-centralized community.
The subject of voluntary commonality is limited in its interaction with other "Dunbar number" - an average of 150 people. 150 subjects of parity compatibility have 11150 links and can be considered as a de-centralized community.
- Such a de-centralized community interacts with other similar compulsory rules, generating costs that feed the present social reality.
- Costs can be estimated at 70% of the monetary way of exchanging the benefits of the two actors.
Tax on the Meaningless
Imagine 6500 subjects of parity, multiplied by 150 people (the Dunbar number) as a de-centralized cluster of 1 million subjects.
Imagine 6500 subjects of parity, multiplied by 150 people (the Dunbar number) as a de-centralized cluster of 1 million subjects.
- Suppose that the average level of consumption of each participant is $ 1000 per month. Then the cumulative volume of monthly consumption is 1 billion dollars, and the "zone of insensitivity", taken as 10% of the volume of consumption, is $ 100 million.
- A "tax on the meaningless" may be estimated as $ 700 mln.
The development of p2p links in such a cluster makes it possible to create self-sufficient de-centralized communities that tend to merge, releasing a "tax on the meaningless".
Network of Mutual Social Insurance
The number of possible links grows with the increase in the number of participants.
The number of possible links grows with the increase in the number of participants.
- This, in turn, would open up a way to build a global network for mutual social support and assistance.
- Redistribution of the risks of many to the level of harmlessness of each - this is the purpose and meaning of self-organization of reasonable people.
NAVPAKI point
Direct interaction inside a group of individuals would result in growth of their well-being through offering to members of the cluster better deals on goods and services than what may be available to them in a conventional manner.
Direct interaction inside a group of individuals would result in growth of their well-being through offering to members of the cluster better deals on goods and services than what may be available to them in a conventional manner.
- While monetary enumeration continues to act as a way to formalize mutual obligations, lack of "tax-on-the-absurd" frees additional resources and allows to increase the volume of common good. Moreover, at the Navpaki juncture there would come a release from financial captivity.
- A positive balance of mutual obligations and the lowering of risks facilitate the participant's existence in the environment of freedom limited only by his own will and among his own kin.
Thus, the task is reduced to overcoming the Dunbar number and manifesting the existing elementary disparate clusters into a single decentralized network.
Katie:
How can we overcome the "Dunbar number" and "manifest" the existing clusters of parity compatibility as a network?
exodus:
For this purpose, a meaning common to all disparate clusters and an "instrument" when using the participants to form a de-centralized network should appear. And the general restrictions arising from the meaning of voluntary commonality.
Katie:
"Constructive" is a voluntary commonality, which has applied value?
Support:
Yes, certainly. Actual, applied value. Unlike the "semantic compatibility", where the division of the common sense is desirable and sufficient, in "constructive" - it is always a common good as a goal and it is actual and desirable for everyone.
exodus
The only limitation and natural principles of voluntary commonality
Restriction: No Self-harm
Motivation: Good will
Value: Attention
Assets: Intention / Responsibility
Logic: Common sense
Motivation: Good will
Value: Attention
Assets: Intention / Responsibility
Logic: Common sense
Attention has the highest value.
It allows to re-assess one's own social habits, to reject the superfluous, and to formulate the new habits and relationships befitting the changing reality.
It allows to re-assess one's own social habits, to reject the superfluous, and to formulate the new habits and relationships befitting the changing reality.
- Absence of mutual claims expedites interaction and reduces any management task to binary logic.
- The participants create tasks, the machine calculates the processes and keeps them going.
Katie:
How to understand "rethink irrelevant social habits"?
exodus:
For example: it is customary to give flowers to an artist after a concert as a token of gratitude and love, but now for many Creators hard times have come and they are literally starving - in fact they do not need flowers, but they need a bowl of soup. But there is no such social habit that 100 people 20 dollars a month he was sent and he could create, without thinking about a piece of bread. Because the artist inspires and inspiration has no price. It brings meaning to existence beyond need
Katie:
How to understand "non-self-harm" as a restriction?
exodus:
Causing myself to harm the participant limits my opportunity for constructive parity with him. Because its damage is my damage, and I do not want to harm myself. As previously stated, constructive is always an actual and applied task. A person who is ready to harm himself is destructive. Nobody wants to be a victim, or accept someone's sacrifice from those who want to be themselves among their own.
- The core of the Exodus' operating system contains tools to record commitments numerically, the procedures and the rules to notify other participants, and the algorithms to manage the obligations.
- The open code offers wide possibilities for creating new applications befitting each emerging initiative.
- Exodus does not belong to anyone and is a system for technical control and management of mutual agreements. In effect, it is "an organizer", i.e., an instrument allowing to identify isolated existing clusters and bring them into an integrated network.
- The result of the process would be a qualitatively new type of human interaction and, ultimately, a new qualitatively different civilization.
exodus
Algorithm of self-organization.
- Any relevant initiative is recorded in Exodus in the form of intentions, notification rules and scenarios for their modification.
- Thus, the initiative is displayed in the Exodus as an application, the relevance of which can be limited by time or event.
- A new initiative will be recorded in Exodus as a set of commitments, as well as the rules of notification and scenarios for altering those commitments. Thus, the initiative is reflected in Exodus in the form of an application whose usage may be limited in time or by a specific event.
- Obligations for immediate execution" form the distributed assets of an individual participant.
- The participant manages those assets in order to settle accounts with other members of the network, or converts them into money for payments outside the network.
Katie:
Why the "Exodus" paradigm?
exodus:
"Paradigm" - the most vivid model or example, serving as a standard of thinking. "Exodus" is the name of the Second Book of Moses "Exodus." Since we are discussing a holistic model for describing the desired type of consistency, which includes: a way of thinking about oneself and another, the way of interaction, the tools for ensuring self-organization and the resulting strategy. Therefore.
Katie:
How can I get to the Exodus?
exodus:
Since the Exodus records already created agreements, you can be invited to an existing application by someone from the participants. You can also register but in this case you need another person with whom you can formalize mutual intentions.
Katie:
What kinds of intentions and obligations are fixed in the Exodus and how?
exodus:
Financial "intentions" and "obligations" are recorded in the form of a simple record of figures. "Intention" is a potential commitment.
A commitment in fact - promissory notes of different types, determined by mutual arrangements in each particular case.
A commitment in fact - promissory notes of different types, determined by mutual arrangements in each particular case.
exodus
part two:
the self-organization strategy of the decentralized network
the self-organization strategy of the decentralized network
Everyone looks at the top of the pyramid, forgetting that it stands on the ground.
Axiom:
Every reasonable person lives around him like they are. Reasonable is he who does not wish himself harm.
The number of possible social ties is limited by the specifics of a person's thinking, equal to the "Dunbar number".
This restriction separates existing clusters generating hierarchical power models.
Interaction in the parity cluster occurs according to the same algorithm, which determines the requirements for the self-organization tool:
numerical fixation of mutual intentions and rules, binding of notifications to the calendar, dispatcher of personal intentions and obligations and confirmation of fulfillment of obligations.
The general sense with the use of the "organizer of social interaction" shows scattered clusters in a single network.
Every reasonable person lives around him like they are. Reasonable is he who does not wish himself harm.
The number of possible social ties is limited by the specifics of a person's thinking, equal to the "Dunbar number".
This restriction separates existing clusters generating hierarchical power models.
Interaction in the parity cluster occurs according to the same algorithm, which determines the requirements for the self-organization tool:
numerical fixation of mutual intentions and rules, binding of notifications to the calendar, dispatcher of personal intentions and obligations and confirmation of fulfillment of obligations.
The general sense with the use of the "organizer of social interaction" shows scattered clusters in a single network.
Economy 3.0
Initiatives:
The application-organizer of gratuitous assistance to needy N2O to ensure unconditional income (description) and the organizer of mutual intentions of redistribution of possible damage to one in the zone of vulnerability of many (description).
Initiatives "demonstrate" Network, and in fact the system of social protection of participants, and opens up a qualitatively different in effectiveness way of interaction directly by offering surpluses with calculations that do not contain a "tax" on the meaningless.
Saved costs automatically increase the "zone of harmlessness" which is transferred to the involvement of new participants through H2O.
Mutual recalculations of obligations lead to a decrease in dependence on "external" calculations and at the same time to an increase in the capabilities of each of the participants.
The application-organizer of gratuitous assistance to needy N2O to ensure unconditional income (description) and the organizer of mutual intentions of redistribution of possible damage to one in the zone of vulnerability of many (description).
Initiatives "demonstrate" Network, and in fact the system of social protection of participants, and opens up a qualitatively different in effectiveness way of interaction directly by offering surpluses with calculations that do not contain a "tax" on the meaningless.
Saved costs automatically increase the "zone of harmlessness" which is transferred to the involvement of new participants through H2O.
Mutual recalculations of obligations lead to a decrease in dependence on "external" calculations and at the same time to an increase in the capabilities of each of the participants.
Glossary
basic terms and concepts
Commonality
Joint implementation (activity) or co-experience of common meaning by two or more subjects.The fundamental basis of commonality is the multiplication of the common good.And the elementary act of interaction is the mutual exchange of goods. In fact, it is the exchange of mutual commitments.
Semantic commonality
Semantic commonality
Semantic commonality
The mutual meaning, the idea, co-experienced by two or more subjects of commonality. The semantic commonality is a necessary condition for constructive commonality.
Constructive commonality
Joint implementation of coordinated activities to solve an actual applied problem.
Constructive commonality can be forced or parity.
Constructive commonality can be forced or parity.
Forced (prescriptive, coercive).
The profit of one brings harm to another against his will.
Violence (in the broadest context) is an instrument for achieving personal good.
This type of compatibility is the legally approved basis for the current model of the global social contract.
Violence (in the broadest context) is an instrument for achieving personal good.
This type of compatibility is the legally approved basis for the current model of the global social contract.
Voluntary (inviting).
Built on the value of freedom.
The unifying motive of parity is the desire of everyone to their own good, which is considered to be reciprocally desirable with others.
Voluntary commonality implies only an invitation to consistency and categorically excludes the suppression of the will of the other as a natural norm of power relations.
The unifying motive of parity is the desire of everyone to their own good, which is considered to be reciprocally desirable with others.
Voluntary commonality implies only an invitation to consistency and categorically excludes the suppression of the will of the other as a natural norm of power relations.
Social contract
A set of well-established social habits, laws and requirements that determine the interaction of subjects in constructive compatibility.
The Dunbar number
Limitation on the number of permanent social ties that a person can support. Maintaining such connections presupposes knowledge of the distinctive features of the individual, his character, and also his social position, which requires considerable intellectual abilities.This limitation of thinking underlies the hierarchical power model of society.
