Mourning In America

Mourning In America

"You don't celebrate your faith, you mourn it." - Muse, from the movie "Dogma". 

Americans don't celebrate their success and wealth, they mourn it. Why?

Introduction

This is a fifteen minute read.

It is amazing that we, the wealthiest country in the world, are mourning our politics. Both the left and the right see the US as a nation in fatal jeopardy and in a political death match. Both sides believe this country could die if desperate measures are not taken? Why? I mean, come on!

Why would a wealthy country of unprecedented successes in so many aspects of life be apparently dealing with a political death match of politics?

Human nature of course.

• In our minds eye we are constantly framing things as one of the conditions displayed in the diagram above.
• These cycles apply across generations where parents sacrifice for their children. 
• These cycles apply to groups as well as individuals where groups come together and agree upon human conditions. 

Endeavor Cycle: Normalization 

 

The Endeavor Cycle must be with us always or we go extinct. We need to adapt. We strive for ever higher levels of happiness and when we achieve them then these levels become normalized back to the normal level. This cycle is represented by arrows 1. and 2. respectively in the diagram. Happiness is always relative to our previous normal. Arrows 3 and 4 represent those times when we have setbacks and need to climb our way back to our previous normal.

The Endeavor Cycle is the healthy cycle that philosophy represents as the desired human condition. If one reads self-help books and such this cycle is  targeted.

Why are we mourning in America? Because we are not meant to just suffer as has been taught throughout all of history. That focuses on the return arrow 2.) in the Endeavor Cycle. We must also endeavor. We are meant to do, to endeavor. We are meant to strive for ever higher levels of happiness.

Content Cycle: Maintenance

One criticism of the Endeavor Cycle when it comes to wealth is the time honored question, "When is enough, enough?" Why does a billionaire need yet another billion dollars?

Plato pointed out in his book "The Republic" that inevitably the Endeavor Cycle exposes one to corruption. Humans are always gaming systems, or cheating. Normal people are not interested in compromising their values and ethics and so corruption is a natural inhibitor to the Endeavor Cycle and we voluntarily remove ourselves.

When we remove ourselves voluntarily from the Endeavor Cycle then we go on the Content Cycle, or maintenance cycle. In the content cycle we have enough. This is where the vast majority of us exist. Yes, we may buy a lottery ticket to appease and sedate our natural Endeavor Cycle nature but at the end of the day we are content with out existing level of happiness. Enough is enough.

Survival Cycle: Suffering

Historically the survival cycle was pretty much the human condition. We were not suffering due to relative notions of happiness normalization, but instead due to life-or-death living conditions. In the Survival Cycle then every day one is exposed to life-threatening risks. Pain due to human selfishness contributes to people suffering and this is called tyranny. 

To be fair to historical philosophers when they are viewing the human condition strictly as suffering  this is the case for the vast majority of people during the vast majority of history: most people were in Survival Cycle.

When one is in the Survival Cycle the Content Cycle is not possible and neither is the Endeavor Cycle. Democracy put us on a Content Cycle footing.

Artificial Cycle: Addiction 

 

Addiction is a terrible cycle to be caught in because we are not in control. It can be seemingly impossible to get out of the addiction cycle to even a Survival Cycle or a Content Cycle. We say these people are self-destructive but they also destroy anyone around them.

 

 Cycles Overlap

We are all a mix of all the cycles. Our societies identify as groups and then these societies are also a mix of all the cycles. This is the human condition.

Once we know this then we can answer the question: why do Americans mourn their wealth and not celebrate it?

If any individual or group is mentally healthy then they are dominated by Endeavor Cycles. The meaning of life is a life of meaning and that meaning is to do things, make things. To be clear, doing and making things includes taking care of humans and not just jobs. Having kids and caring for them into adulthood can be an Endeavor Cycle of caring.

Any Endeavor Cycle can be looked at as a glass half empty or a glass half full. The half-empty view is the classic philosophical view of humans are born to suffer. No matter how much we have, it is never enough.

You will also often hear philosophers say that it is not the destination but the journey.

Well, no, in fact the Endeavor Cycle requires the destination be internalized as accomplished and normal by living it before  the cycle can be started anew. The destination is important. The destination is as important as the journey. Once we realize the destination it then becomes the new normal and if we lose that normal we view ourselves as suffering.

America sees itself as suffering for two reasons. First, we define ourselves correctly as an Endeavor Cycling people. We are industrious and always achieving. Second we have stagnated our happiness level in our minds and so are focused intensely on an achievement, suffering cycle of stagnate happiness. In addition, we all are acutely aware that the next generation of Americans will be the first generation in a long time that had it worse off, relatively speaking, than we have it today. We know the happiness level is going down.

We are not in a Survival Cycle. We could, if we wanted, feed, house and clothe everyone. The fact that we are not doing such things is an Endeavor Cycle failure, not a Survival Cycle failure.

It is worth pointing out that down arrow of normalization can look and feel exactly like the down arrow of suffering. A down arrow is a down arrow.

The problems we have today are real. However, our perspective could be a lot different, especially if we were Americans from 200 years ago. People on both sides of the aisle are screaming our country is at risk of total collapse if things don't change. That's just crazy talk.

On the contrary, we could have a perspective that we are living in the most prosperous generations in all of history, that we are happy and that we are on a continuum of endeavoring to continue to make things better for our children.

To whit, we have a Survival Cycle perspective in an Endeavor Cycle country. This is why we mourn our American wealth and success and we don't celebrate it.

Switching Tracks

So, how do we get back on the right track? How do we replace the Survival Cycle mindset with an Endeavor Cycle mindset?

Easy, we replace a survival cycle government with an endeavor cycle government.

Nation states as defined today are survival states, or in other words, warring states. We are perpetually at war. There has never been a time in American history that we've never been at war.

Irreni World Scale is a new endeavor cycle government. Irreni replaces all negative feedback survival loops inherent in nations and instead uses positive feedback loops designed into micro-modular governing groups.

So now here is a funny question for you: why aren't new government types being promoted besides Irreni? Why hasn't the entirety of humankind today sprouted a plethora of Endeavor Cycle governments similar to how Silicon Valley VCs fund tech start ups? There should be thousands of new government attempts every year? Right? Innovation in government should be happening?

Where are they?

The answer lies in incorrect philosophy. Our philosophers get a collective letter grade 'F' in giving us the most complicated philosophical solutions to our problems.

Philosophy's relationship to society is analogous to General Relativity's relationship to physics. The vast majority of us do not need to understand philosophy just like we do not need to understand General Relativity. Most of get by just fine in our day-to-day lives with Newtonian Physics: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Where did philosophy go wrong? The answer comes from philosophy itself, but abandoned, a little concept called "The Nameless."

Simple Argument 

 

The problem is necessarily one of the utmost, sophisticated philosophy, like quantum physics is to physics is the most complicated physics. So if philosophy bores you or philosophy sophistication is beyond you then I'm going to make a simple case first with the simple solution so you can quit reading.

The simple argument is a question: why did we stop inventing governments after monarchy, empire, authoritarian, democracy, republic democracy, socialism and communism?

The simple answer is that we no longer need survival cycle governments but endeavor cycle governments and philosophy has a bug in it through all time where it does not consider endeavor cycles. 

The simple solution then is to rapidly innovate new, endeavor cycle government types. 

Full Argumet

Where did philosophy go wrong? Where's the bug. The bug fix comes from philosophy itself, philosophy abandoned, a little concept called "The Nameless."

Language defines. It creates things in our mind much like the stars you see in the photo of a galaxy. Each word represents a star, some close, some far apart but at the end of the day the total space between stars vastly out sizes the total space taken up by stars. 

Now, imagine if you will that you live thousands of years ago and are attempting to explain this concept that language defines.

1. You know one language. The concept of a language as a language escapes you. Why would you count more than one language to even be motivated to create the word language? All you see are the constellation or words. Reality is definition of words. Without words we cannot conceive of not reality. That's key. Animals without words cannot conceive of not reality. Perception is all they have. When the original philosophers wrote "I am the word." they really meant "I am the language". They didn't write "language" because why would they? To whit, all the ancient philosophers where noticing is that humans had a defining character that separated them from animals: words. 
2. Words define reality. Reality is what we communicate with each other. Those words may or may not be associated with physical objects. Reality includes the physical and non-physical. This is our reality. 
3. Words only define a very small portion of possible reality. Whenever we speak we lose far more than we define. Language then is in part an expanding game of defining ever more reality space just like physics is in part an expanding game of defining every more physical space.

Let's take a short break and read an excerpt by a book from 1969, Roger Zelazny's, "Lord of Light". In this passage Zelazny expands on the concept of "The Nameless".

A Short Break

 

The  monks were seated upon the floor of the refectory. The tables had been moved back against the walls. The insects had vanished. Outside, the rain continued to fall. Great-Souled Sam, the Enlightened One, entered and seated himself before them. Ratri came in dressed as a Buddhist nun, and veiled. Yama and Ratri moved to the back of the room and settled to the floor. Somewhere, Tak too, was listening. Sam sat with his eyes closed for several minutes, then said softly: "I have many names, and none of them matter." He opened his eyes slightly then, but he did not move his head. He looked upon nothing in particular. "Names are not important," he said. "To speak is to name names, but to speak is not important. A thing happens once that has never happened before. Seeing it, a man looks upon reality. He cannot tell others what he has seen. Others wish to know, however, so they question him saying, 'What is it like, this thing you have seen?' So he tries to tell them. Perhaps he has seen the very first fire in the world. He tells them, 'It is red, like a poppy, but through it dance other colors. It has no form, like water, flowing everywhere. It is warm, like the sun of summer, only warmer. It exists for a time upon a piece of wood, and then the wood is gone, as though it were eaten, leaving behind that which is black and can be sifted like sand. When the wood is gone, it too is gone.' Therefore, the hearers must think reality is like a poppy, like water, like the sun, like that which eats and excretes. They think it is like to anything that they are told it is like by the man who has known it. But they have not looked upon fire. They cannot really know it. They can only know of it. But fire comes again into the world, many times. More men look upon fire. After a time, fire is as common as grass and clouds and the air they breathe. They see that, while it is like a poppy, it is not a poppy, while it is like water, it is not water, while it is like the sun, it is not the sun, and while it is like that which eats and passes wastes, it is not that which eats and passes wastes, but something different from each of these apart or all of these together. So they look upon this new thing and they make a new word to call it. They call it "fire".

"If they come upon one who still has not seen it and they speak to him of fire, he does not know what they mean. So they, in turn, fall back upon telling him what fire is like. As they do so, they know from their own experience that what they are telling him is not the truth, but only a part of it. They know that this man will never know reality from their words, though all the words in the world are theirs to use. He must look upon the fire, smell of it, warm his hands by it, stare into its heart, or remain forever ignorant. Therefore, 'fire' does not matter, 'earth' and 'air' and 'water' do not matter. 'I' do not matter. No word matters. But man forgets reality and remembers words. The more words he remembers, the cleverer do his fellows esteem him. He looks upon the great transformations of the world, but he does not see them as they were seen when man looked upon reality for the first time. Their names come to his lips and he smiles as he tastes them, thinking he knows them in the naming. The thing that has never happened before is still happening. It is still a miracle. The great burning blossom squats, flowing, upon the limb of the world, excreting the ash of the world, and being none of these things I have named and at the same time all of them, and this is reality—the Nameless. "Therefore, I charge you—forget the names you bear, forget the words I speak as soon as they are uttered. Look, rather, upon the Nameless within yourselves, which arises as I address it. It hearkens not to my words, but to the reality within me, of which it is part. This is the atman, which hears me rather than my words. All else is unreal. To define is to lose. The essence of all things is the Nameless. The Nameless is unknowable, mightier even than Brahma. Things pass, but the essence remains. You sit, therefore, in the midst of a dream. "Essence dreams it a dream of form. Forms pass, but the essence remains, dreaming new dreams. Man names these dreams and thinks to have captured the essence, not knowing that he invokes the unreal. These stones, these walls, these bodies you see seated about you are poppies and water and the sun. They are the dreams of the Nameless. They are fire, if you like. "Occasionally, there may come a dreamer who is aware that he is dreaming. He may control something of the dream-stuff, bending it to his will, or he may awaken into greater self-knowledge. If he chooses the path of self-knowledge, his glory is great and he shall be for all ages like unto a star. If he chooses instead the way of the Tantras, combining Samsara and Nirvana, comprehending the world and continuing to live in it, this one is mighty among dreamers. He may be mighty for good or for ill, as we look upon him —though these terms, too, are meaningless outside the namings of Samsara.

To dwell within Samsara, however, is to be subject to the works of those who are mighty among dreamers. If they be mighty for good, it is a golden time. If they be mighty for ill, it is a time of darkness. The dream may turn to nightmare. "It is written that to live is to suffer. This is so, say the sages, for man must work off his burden of Karma if he is to achieve enlightenment. For this reason, say the sages, what does it profit a man to struggle within a dream against that which is his lot, which is the path he must follow to attain liberation? In the light of eternal values, say the sages, the suffering is as nothing; in the terms of Samsara, say the sages, it leads to that which is good. What justification, then, has a man to struggle against those who be mighty for ill?" He paused for a moment, raised his head higher. "This night the Lord of Illusion passed among you—Mara, mighty among dreamers—mighty for ill. He did come upon another who may work with the stuff of dreams in a different way. He did meet with Dharma, who may expel a dreamer from his dream. They did struggle, and the Lord Mara is no more. Why did they struggle, deathgod against illusionist? You say their ways are incomprehensible, being the ways of gods. This is not the answer. "The answer, the justification, is the same for men as it is for gods. Good or ill, say the sages, mean nothing for they are of Samsara. Agree with the sages, who have taught our people for as far as the memory of man may reach. Agree, but consider also a thing of which the sages do not speak. This thing is 'beauty,' which is a word—but look behind the word and consider the Way of the Nameless. And what is the way of the Nameless? It is the Way of Dream. And why does the Nameless dream? This thing is not known to any dweller within Samsara. So ask, rather, what does the Nameless dream? "The Nameless, of which we are all a part, does dream form. And what is the highest attribute any form may possess? It is beauty. The Nameless, then, is an artist. The problem, therefore, is not one of good or evil, but one of esthetics. To struggle against those who are mighty among dreamers and are mighty for ill, or ugliness, is not to struggle for that which the sages have taught us to be meaningless in terms of Samsara or Nirvana, but rather it is to struggle for the symmetrical dreaming of a dream, in terms of the rhythm and the point, the balance and the antithesis which will make it a thing of beauty. Of this, the sages say nothing. This truth is so simple that they have obviously overlooked it. For this reason, I am bound by the esthetics of the situation to call it to your attention. To struggle against the dreamers who dream ugliness, be they men or gods, cannot but be the will of the Nameless. This struggle will also bear suffering, and so one's karmic burden will be lightened thereby, just as it would be by enduring the ugliness; but this suffering is productive of a higher end in the light of the eternal values of which the sages so often speak. "Therefore, I say unto you, the esthetics of what you have witnessed this evening were of a high order. You may ask me, then, 'How am I to know that which is beautiful and that which is ugly, and be moved to act thereby?' This question, I say, you must answer for yourself. To do this, first forget what I have spoken, for I have said nothing. Dwell now upon the Nameless." He raised his right hand and bowed his head. Yama stood, Ratri stood, Tak appeared upon a table. The four of them left together, knowing the machineries of Karma to have been defeated for a time.

They walked through the jagged brilliance of the morning, beneath the Bridge of the Gods. Tall fronds, still wet with the night's rain, glistened at the sides of the trail. The tops of trees and the peaks of the distant mountains rippled beyond the rising vapors. The day was cloudless. The faint breezes of morning still bore a trace of the night's cold. The clicking and buzzing and chirping of the jungle accompanied the monks as they walked. The monastery from which they had departed was only partly visible above the upper reaches of the treetops; high in the air above it, a twisting line of smoke endorsed the heavens. Ratri's servitors bore her litter in the midst of the moving party of monks, servants and her small guard of warriors. Sam and Yama walked near the head of the band. Silent overhead, Tak followed, passing among leaves and branches, unseen. "The pyre still blazes," said Yama. "Yes." "They burn the wanderer who suffered a heart attack as he took his rest among them." "This is true." "For a spur of the moment thing, you came up with a fairly engaging sermon." "Thanks." "Do you really believe what you preached?" Sam laughed. "I'm very gullible when it comes to my own words. I believe everything I say, though I know I'm a liar." Yama snorted. "The rod of Trimurti still falls upon the backs of men. Nirriti stirs within his dark lair; he harasses the seaways of the south. Do you plan on spending another lifetime indulging in metaphysics—to find new. This is a new justification for opposing your enemies? Your talk last night sounded as if you have reverted to considering why again, rather than how." "No," said Sam, "I just wanted to try another line on the audience. It is difficult to stir rebellion among those to whom all things are good. There is no room for evil in their minds, despite the fact that they suffer it constantly. The slave upon the rack who knows that he will be born again—perhaps as a fat merchant — if he suffers willingly—his outlook is not the same as that of a man with but one life to live. He can bear anything, knowing that great as his present pain may be, his future pleasure will rise higher. If such a one does not choose to believe in good or evil, perhaps then beauty and ugliness can be made to serve him as well. Only the names have been changed." "This, then, is the new, official party line?" asked Yama. "It is," said Sam.

Damning Philosophy

 

So Zelazy's writing demonstrates two characteristics of Eastern philosophy. First, he demonstrates what is meant by The Nameless using "fire". Second he demonstrates creating new reality space from The Nameless to inspire pacifists to violence. Creating new reality space for governing where none existed before is our bug, we lack the new reality space for the Endeavor Cycle.

Philosophers have failed us. Philosophers have failed us due to a derelict of duty. A philosopher's duty is to expand upon reality space for us to use,  just as for a physicist physicists duty is to expand upon physical space that we use.

Why? Simple arrogance. Philosophers are solely caught up in mental masturbation of self-congratulatory circle jerks of creating existing word combinatorics of new working patterns. They do this instead of the necessary work needed of expanding the nameless reality space. So, we are currently stuck with existing government types of Survival Cycle like Democracy and such. Philosophers are just caught up in their own mental superiority looking down on everyone else. 

Irreni World Scale carves out of the nameless reality space a new philosophy for Endeavor Cycle governing. The start gun is to declare the human race over, we won. We have moved beyond survival mode to quality of life mode. We know how to survive. Humans possess the capability to feed, house and clothe all seven billion people.

Now that we are in quality of life mode then we need to manage quality of life as groups. Who defines quality of life? Survival was defined by an individual leader: the monarch, the president, the CEO. Quality is defined by us all. This is why we start with MGOs, or micro-modular governing units, that replace survival politics of bureaucracies of groups with an all seeing eye leader.

Quality of life recognizes the Endeavor Cycle. Therefore, there is no static constitution but instead an ever changing plan of upgrading our standard of living. This is designed in Irreni World Scale as a 200-hundred year plan. The only reason I stopped at 200 years is that in my minds' eye I cannot see further. It will be up to future generations to continue planning plans of ever increasing levels of endeavors.

So here's a question for you philosophy types: will we every run out of higher levels of endeavor? No. The simple answer is that the Universe is only expected to exist another 14 billion years and at the speed of light we can never cover more than one percent of the Universe. There will always be new physical space to explore and therefore new Endeavor Cycle space to achieve.


Freedom!

Party On!

Let's get cracking!

Voluntarily Reject Demagoguery!

Politics as Science!

Demand Irreni World Scale!

Anti-theism is feminism!  

Think disruption!

Empathy for all!

Moral relativity: think it, breath it!

Prove it or lose it!

Conversations equal consensus! 

Welcome to the 21st century!

Scale your empathy, scale the world! 

Find your tribe!

Be sexy people!

The future is coming! 

Innovate at a rapid pace!

Slow speed ahead!

Well come! and well met!