Monday, March 30, 2015

Kindness, Take Three: Love Everyone

Hi! Happy Monday!

All you need is love! Zoom zoom!

A couple of news items in the news lately have dovetailed nicely into my third take on kindness, love everyone.

  1. Indiana's bait and switch tactic of passing a Religious Freedom Restoration Act that goes beyond protecting a person from government religious oppression, but instead calls a business a person and then allows civil, person-to-person religious oppression. But hey, the law has the same name, RFRA!
    The problem with this statement [is that, well, it’s false. That becomes clear when you read and compare those tedious state statutes.  If you do that, you will find that the Indiana statute has two features the federal RFRA—and most state RFRAs—do not. First, the Indiana law explicitly allows any for-profit business to assert a right to “the free exercise of religion.” The federal RFRA doesn’t contain such language, and neither does any of the state RFRAs except South Carolina’s; in fact, Louisiana and Pennsylvania, explicitly exclude for-profit businesses from the protection of their RFRAs.
    The new Indiana statute also contains this odd language: “A person whose exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened, by a violation of this chapter may assert the violation or impending violation as a claim or defense in a judicial or administrative proceeding, regardless of whether the state or any other governmental entity is a party to the proceeding.” (My italics.) Neither the federal RFRA, nor 18 of the 19 state statutes cited by the Post, says anything like this; only the Texas RFRA, passed in 1999, contains similar language.
  2. Phil Roberts of Duck Dynasty on atheism:
    "Duck Dynasty" patriarch Phil Robertson delivered a bizarre speech in which he created a hypothetical scenario about an atheist being forced to watch his "little atheist daughters" get raped and then having his penis hacked off and shown to him.
Both of these stories share a common love thread: a lack of empathy. In both cases a lack of empathy leads to misguided morality.
  1. Anyone who thinks that sexuality is a choice has a problem with understanding empathy.
  2. Anyone who thinks fear is the only reason for morality, in this case fear of God, has a misunderstanding of morality.
So what is the right understanding of morality, love and how do they fit together regarding kindness? How do we love everyone?

The scientific answer is we don't know. Better stated is that we don't know with great confidence but we do know some things. Here  is what we know:
  1. Education is tightly coupled with religiosity.
  2. Cognitive dissonance is tightly coupled with religiosity.
  3. Instinct was replaced by emotions and empathy and this is a very recent evolutionary adaptation.
Education and religiosity

I am an anti-theist and not just an atheist. Christians and other religious folk have a fundamental misunderstanding about what this means. Christians think that us anti-theists are out to pass laws making religion illegal, as with communism. Uhh, no. That would be stupid. Why? Because religion is ignorance. Religion is ignorance. We know this because we have decades of research showing that the more educated someone correlates directly to less religiosity.  Scientists with PhDs are least religious group going with only 17% being religious. Religiosity is not just ignorance.  Ignorance is a very great part for most of us. Since it is impossible to outlaw stupidity then you cannot outlaw religion, ever. The best we can hope to do is to reduce religion's status to that of pop culture, like a favorite TV show.  So the job of an anti-theist is not to be against religion but to instead be for the very best education possible.

Cognitive dissonance and religiosity

Religious folks have doubts about God. The religious commonly have doubts about God answering prayers where some prayers are answered and then other prayers are completely ignored. Why! God! Why! These are not doubts. No, they are not. These are cognitive dissonance pains. Cognitive dissonance is when you try to hold two contradictory ideas in your head at the same time. This causes brain-freeze type stress and pain that the religious then often refer to as "doubt". God doesn't answer your prayers. We know this because the laws of physics have never been shown to be broken, not ever. No one has ever prayed a missing leg to grow back and supernatural forces don't exist. At some level of their brain every  religious person runs into this reality and when that reality runs afoul of a belief in prayer then "doubt" occurs.  To whit, prayer for healing has about as much effectiveness as a rain dance does for bringing rain here in California: that is to say none. Too bad! ha!

I, personally, have a very low natural threshold for cognitive dissonance. Again, this is something that happened to me at a very young age where I was taught the story of Noah's Ark like all children who go to Sunday school. Here was my take on Noah as a child: "God killed everyone on the planet. The ultimate evil act is to kill everyone on the planet and therefore God is the ultimate evil." I came to that conclusion on my own.  No cognitive dissonance. None. I have little capacity for believing evil can be defined as good. I was born that way. I just have no desire or capacity for much cognitive dissonance.

Instinct and religiosity

Humans have hardly any instinct like most animals, instead we have empathy and emotions. We look at rotting flesh; we feel disgusted and we feel so bad we cannot eat it. Blech! That's how it works. Or rather, that's how it is suppose to work. It is not just empathy and emotions either, our brains also seek patterns. For hundreds of years people did not eat tomatoes because red fruit usually meant poisoned fruit.

So here is a question for you: why do people like Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty feel that it is fear and not empathy that informs our morality? Well, the answer  in part stems from the fact that empathy, emotions and pattern matching are recent in the evolutionary time line and therefore are not "mature" enough in being uniform and constantly applied amongst humans. A wide variation exists in our capacities for empathy, cognitive dissonance and intelligence and this means a wide variation in moral capacity.

Religion was our first worst attempt at trying to "mind the gap" if you will in empathy. Everyone alive has an empathy for self-preservation, an empathy for themselves. There are people who have limited empathy beyond self preservation. For these people one can imagine perhaps that a false sense of agape empathy could be forged and substituted for missing agape empathy. That's where fear comes in. And religion. People with limited empathy for others do need fear of law breaking as a stand-in for agape empathy. What I find interesting about Phil Robertson twisted scenario is that he completely leaves out fear of the man-made laws. I'm sorry but if you get caught raping and killing then human laws are going to send you to jail and maybe even death.

In fact, we don't need religion's fear of the afterlife any more because in the real world we are good enough at punishing criminals that most everyone believes they will go to jail.

Love Everyone

Can you command everyone to love everyone? No. That's why the Bible is ineffective. It doesn't work and hence you end up with  Indiana and Phil Robertson. What you can do though is *manage* love of everyone. We need to manage folks who are of limited group empathy, help the sociopaths and psychopaths wherever possible. As people together we can all look in ourselves, admit our own empathy limitations and then rely on others with the better kindness skills and abilities to lead us.

And that is kindness take three, love everyone.

We love everyone not by artificially pretending to induce an empathy you don't have, but rather to manage the empathy you do have. Recognize your own empathy limitations and those of others. Recognize the kindness factors in others of 1.) education, 2.) cognitive dissonance and 3.) emotional empathy and then promote those folks with combinations of kindness factors as the kind of folks to lead us all in life.


The future is coming!

Well come! and well met!

Thursday, March 26, 2015

Kindness, Take Two

Hi! Party Friday!

Hope you all are doing swell well ell ll l...

So, last post was a kinda tongue-in-cheek post about thou shall not suffer an asshole for a boss. Now that wasn't very kind of me! woo hoo!

The point is fair enough. The point being that since we are no longer in survival mode then our collective agenda is quality of life. And that starts with the people we have leading us, no more assholes. Kind people please!

Still though that is not very kind of me to express a post promoting kindness in a very ungraceful fashion. <3

Welllll, that's cause I do have an important follow up point to make about the subject of kindness: kindness take two.

Mean people frustrate us. Mean people bring out the meanness in us or just turn us off. They certainly don't inspire us to be kind. We don't like to see that ugly response bubble up from within ourselves so we just walk away. Benjamin Franklin had another take on this topic of in his autobiography.

I continued this ... Habit of expressing my self in Terms of modest
Diffidence, never using when I advance any thing that may possibly be disputed, the Words, Certainly, undoubtedly, or any others that give the Air of Positiveness to an Opinion; but rather say, I conceive, or I apprehend a Thing to be so or so, It appears to me, or I should think it so or so for such and such Reasons, or I imagine it to be so, or it is so if I am not mistaken. This Habit I believe has been of great Advantage to me, when I have had occasion to inculate my Opinions and persuade Men into Measures that I have been from time to time engag'd in promoting. And as the chief ends of Conversation are to inform, or to be informed, to please or to persuade, I wish well meaning sensible Men would not lesson their Power of doing Good by a Positive assuming Manner that seldom fails to disgust, tends to create Opposition, and to defeat every one of those Purposes for which Speech was given us, to wit, giving or receiving Information, or Pleasure: For if you would inform, a positive dogmatical Manner in advancing your Sentiments, may provoke Contradiction and prevent candid Attention. If you wish Information and Improvement from the Knowledge of others and yet the same time express your self firmly fix'd in your present Opinions, modest sensible Men, who do not love Disputation, will probably leave you undisturb'd in the Possession of your Error; and such a Manner you can seldom hope to recommend your self in pleasing your Hearers, or to persuade those whose Concurrence you desire.
        --Benjamin Franklin, The Autobiography of B.F.
What I want to focus on here is the point Franklin makes that "modest sensible Men, who do not love Disputation, will probably leave you undisturb'd in the Possession of your Error;".  Plato said something along the same lines when he was explaining why it is that good honest people do not participate in politics. Plato's point in the book "The Republic" is that good honest people do not participate in politics because they will not sully themselves and compromise their principles. Since politics is always corrupt then, according Plato and similarly Franklin, good folk won't get involved.

Bullies like Steve Jobs know this. Jerks know that sensible people will just turn around and walk away.

Yesterday I put forth that it is in our human nature to promote bullies, jerks and assholes as leaders because that is what we respond too. Now I would like to point out that the human nature problem is actually much larger than just a tendency to promote assholes. The much larger picture is that the jerks are self-sustaining once entrenched where sensible people will stay away.

Collectively then as a species the challenge of overcoming having jerks for leaders is akin to an individual person who is an alcoholic trying to quit alcohol. In both cases human nature is the problem. In both cases the solution is not to pretend that there is a cure but rather to acknowledge a lifetime commitment to managing the problem is required. You are always an alcoholic, even when on the wagon. We all collectively will want assholes for bosses even when we have kind ones. 

If we really want a quality of life where our leaders are kind people...kind people who are no more corrupt than occasionally stealing an office pencil then we have to manage ourselves our entire lifetime. Everyday we must renew our commitment to manage our nature: outloud and with sickening repetition.

Blech. That managing ourselves stuff sounds just blech, doesn't it? What to do?

I know, party on! That's right we use human nature to solve a human nature problem. We create a pop culture management solution that reminds us in lyric, art, music, comedy, laughter and entertainment to be our better angels and only promote kind people! Now that's fun! Let us start some new traditions with new idioms, expressions and colloquialisms to remind us to stay the course with kind people. Our future movies should have heroes in Hollywood who are kind sensible people!

A dance off! Yes! Let's have some fun! And this "party on!" attitude will be a recurring theme as Irreni World Scale ideas are rolled out. We need to sell ourselves and sell each other on the kind of people we want to be and kind of world we want to live in! We do that with culture! art! sports! wine! song! and dance offs!

Dance off!


The future is coming!

Well come! and well met!

Tuesday, March 24, 2015


Hi! Happy Tuesday!

The human race is over!

We won! Woot! Celebrate!

Woo hooo!

Let me explain. For most of human history...nay most of human existence...we humans have scratched and clawed every single day just to survive. A race to survive. Because of this race then any and all means necessary could justified, up to and including war and genocide.

Then something happened. Technology. Technology happened. Technology allowed us to farm and feed and since then we've been on a slow technological pace of winning the human race. Until? We won! We invented the atomic bomb! Boom! The atomic bomb meant game for the over arms race!  Literally. If any country invades these United States of America they have a big kablooey surprise waiting for them. After the advent of farming the human race converged on an arms race until the atomic bomb was the end of the line. Any weapon more destructive than an atomic bomb would also destroy whomever used the weapon thus rendering that more powerful weapon useless.

Kindness. I will connect the dots from human race to kindness in just a few more sentences. 

The United Nations released a report after the advent of the atomic bomb and guess what? Ninety-percent of wars since 1950 have been civil wars. Just civil wars. Flash forward to 2011 and Steven Pinker publishes a book entitled, "Our Better Angels", where Steven Pinker has a compiled an overwhelming set of statistics that supports a stunning fact that human violence is on a huge, huge decline. Huge decline. I invite you to read the book if you need to convince yourself. Violence is on a huge decline. Forget the blood and gore TV is showing you, that has nothing to do with statistics.

So what does this have to do with kindness? Well, it has to do with the fact that we are no longer in a food survival race and no longer in an arms survival race. The human race is over, we won. Now we are transitioning into a new era of quality of life. Quality of life is now the purpose of life and not survival.

That is such a huge statement it bears repeating. The human race is over, we won, and the next stage of human purpose is quality of life. And hence kindness.

Martin Luther King Jr. once said something to the effect that, "the state of technological advancement today is such that we have guided missiles and misguided men."

Have you ever asked yourself if perhaps we should slow down, even for just a mere moment this whirlwind torrent of technological advancement pace we are on? Should we take a pause just to collect our breathe?

Well, should we? The answer to this question cannot come from science because there are too many unknowns. The answer is a case of us asking ourselves what do we want?

Science and technology have given us so many unprecedented levels of quality of life never before imagined by humans it is hard to imagine any case can be made in slowing technology down? Education is something most humans never contemplated until recently and now public education is a norm such that we can truly appreciate what we have, who we are, what nature is and our place in it.


So with all that now I would like to offer you an answer to the question regarding technological pace.

You ready? The answer is not directly, but indirectly by targeting a quality of life that targets kindness. There it is. Kindness.

No more mean leaders. Period. That's it, no more nasty leaders.

Kindness is so, so, so important to me. How important? You ever notice how as you look up the management food chain in a corporation you start to see nothing by assholes? Pricks? Mean people? Mean people suck.  Executives are dicks. Jerks of the highest order imaginable.  I guarantee you if you walk into the boardroom meeting of any Fortune 500 company you are then walking into a room of very, very mean people. Nasty.

Why is that? You ever wonder? I have the answer for you. The answer is pretty easy actually.

Human nature. People, us, for whatever reason gravitate towards assholes for leaders. Meh. In my industry of computers all of them, all of them, are grade A jerks. From Larry Ellison to Bill Gates. From Steve Jobs to Scott McNeally. From Elon Musk to Mark Zuckerberg. Grade A assholes you never, ever want to invite into your home if you care about kindness.

It is human nature that we like and trust assholes for leaders. No doubt about it. Not me. Like I said, I'm big on kindness. Many people with my abilities get college degrees in part to start a profession but also in part to make money. Me? I wanted a profession but I promised myself I would never, ever work for an asshole ever again. Not ever. Quality of life of every moment is more important to me than chasing money. I will not suffer an asshole for a dollar.

So I became a contractor. I promised myself that I will always be a leaf node on an org chart. To be sure I live in the real world. Since I have graduated from college I've had to deal with my share of jerks, but only tangentially. If my direct boss to whom I report as a contractor ever changes to someone who is an asshole that doesn't support me, well, I just don't renew my contract. Everyone is happy, done and done.

We should not directly dampen the pace of technological advancement per se, but indirectly. We should recognize that the human race is over and we are now pursuing the quality of life and that means we can choose to commit to no more mean people leading us. We can afford it. The quality of life means we can now afford to overlook, bypass and ignore leaders who are not kind. Do not suffer an asshole for a boss ever again: no matter how smart, how talented or how special. Not ever. Do not suffer a mean person to hold you hostage no matter how much talent they have. We have no motive to do so.

We have enough technology today to lead by kind leaders and forgo our human nature to promote jerks, or even be captive by them when they are not leaders. Oh sure it will be a challenge to pull this off. It won't come natural. We'll have to constantly remind ourselves to never put assholes in positions of leadership or critical need. But it will be worth our quality of life.

And here's the thing. You know those assholes? Once they know they have to meet a new kindness standard to advance in life then most of them will meet the kindness standard unless their genetics are such that their personality is immutable.

Irreni World Scale is built on promoting quality of life and not a human race. The six-degrees of separation voting, aka vote-for-who-know, enables voting only for kind people. Vote for your kind friend and kind neighbor. If we all did that then the mean people do not stand a chance.

Kindness. Irreni World Scale is built upon a new foundation for a new building of human endeavor; a building promoting quality of life. Let us commit ourselves to this foundation together by committing to never again to allow assholes to lead us. Promote kindness. Fuck the assholes. *~wink*~


The future is coming!

Well come! and well met!

Monday, March 23, 2015

Elon Musk on Humanity's Future

Hi! Happy Monday!

Elon Musk has a lot of money. Boys and their toys.

Elon Musk is a geek like me. He's a programmer, he built the Tesla company and he is behind SpaceX. What's not to like? Awesome!  In the link I shared above we have an interview with on my favs, Neil Degrasse Tyson. Fun stuff!

Sadly, the future being presented here is not one I can get behind. That is because the number one problem that humans and technology needs to solve today is human management.

Human management.

Assume for the moment that climate change is everything we are being warned about. Or, assume maybe there is an asteroid headed  towards Earth and we get one year's notice. Does the human management that exists on this planet today have the capabilities to manage either crisis? Hardly.  Not by a long shot. Don't get me wrong; people cannot live by bread alone and we need collective dreams like going to Mars. However, Elon's dreams are not collective. Elon's dreams for are rich folks, rich folks' money and his talk of humanity is cynically thrown in for cover, sorry to say. Elon Musk is into his toys.

Human management on Earth needs more power and for that human management needs to be far more federated than it is today. President Obama cannot represent and manage 400 million people. No one can. It is just far to inefficient. Too slow.

Irreni World Scale uses the very latest of technology to turn power on its head and build power from the ground up. The right to individual currency along with the vote bank and vote-only-for-who-you-know, aka six-degrees-of-separation voting give everyone more power and more franchise. Declaring the moon to be public domain property and then putting a data center on the moon with all public domain data ensures information remains public to the maximum extent possible. Allowing public vote buying among all people flips corruption on its head and decentralizes it, effectively neutralizing corruption by diluting it. Public vote buying gives corruption a competition it has never had before. 

Irreni World Scale tackles the problem of human management by layering power structures from the bottom up rather than centralized power layering down as we have today and historically. The Irreni model aims to optimize the potential of all humans who have the potential and capability to exercise power in a coordinated fashion.

Solve the human management problem first before going to Mars.


The future is coming!

Well come! and well met!

Sunday, March 22, 2015

The God Gene

Hi! Zappy Sunday!

Ok, I've given this blog post a controversial title. Muh ha ha!

This blog in general is about about helping people build the world and scale the world. Irreni means innovation replaces revolution, engineering replaces ideology.  My last blog post offered up a scalable solution for dialog, putting aside ideology in favor of creating a space for common dialog and thus engineering conversations that do not require the supernatural ideology.

This blog post is mostly a tangent about where things are going with atheist ideology. 

If you have a couple of hours to kill I'd like to recommend a debate that talks about the God Gene.

First off, there is no god gene. Just as there is no gay gene. However it is useful to talk about both types of genes as a kinda shorthand way of saying "natural".

Even though there are no such genes there is scientific evidence that correlates both homosexuality and religion with genetic traits. Religion is taught to children and yet children reject that teaching. I think most religious folk would be surprised to learn that most atheists become atheists during puberty. I did. Homosexuality is not taught to children and yet children become homosexual during puberty. Given both traits fly in the face of parental upbringing then the compulsion to become not-religious or homosexual in the face of strong counter, social forces suggest a genetic component. Ergo, we talk about a gay gene and a god gene even though neither have any evidence, only a deduction that they exist.

You see what I did there? I tied this blog post to the previous one. Why are scientists willing to make decisions based upon deduction for the origins of homosexuality and religious nature and yet not willing to embrace deductive arguments with the universe origins? Eh? Why don't scientists apply a strict adherence of the null-hypothesis for homosexuality and religion nature? Is this shear hypocricy?

Well, some of this is self-serving. Most scientists are not self serving. However, there is more to it then that. The more to it is that homosexuals and atheists are denigrated throughout most of the world. There exists a real need to combat discrimination. 

The god gene concept explains why religion is found in every culture across time and space. Like homosexuality the god gene explains why some of us are not religious because we do not have the gene.

In the video linked above Lewis Wolpert offers up that the god gene was beneficial to survival and therefore won out and most of us are religious.

At issue though is that the god gene is no longer beneficial. And that is where the future is going with ideology. The god gene is no longer beneficial to our survival. The god gene will be bred out.

Why? There are a couple of  great scenes in the "Jaynestown" episode of the television episode "Firefly". In the first scene Shepherd Book gives a most excellent argument for religion: you don't fix faith, faith fixes you. Shepherd Book says this as River, a super genius, rips up his Bible. River is criticizing the Noah's Ark story saying the story is broken, it doesn't make any sense. In the second scene River runs away from Shepherd Book because when his hair is let down then his hair is scary. What? This tongue in cheek humor is meant to make a cheesy statement: we are all irrational about something.

Dr. Lawerence Krauss admits the fact that all humans are irrational about something, even the most rational of us are irrational. Every scientist and atheist will admit this. We all have unsubstantiated beliefs.

So why do atheists and scientists all the slam religion? Because scientists look to classify their irrational beliefs as just that and treat them accordingly. Those of us without the god gene understand that our irrational nature works against us and are constantly looking to identify, quarantine and irridicate the irrational when possible.

The god gene effect as we understand it today represents a barrier to reason. Are scientists atheists because they became convinced of atheism or are scientists atheists because they lack the god gene?

Evidence is piling up that scientists are non-religious because they are best able to put aside their propensity to value irrationality.  Scientists may exhibit irrationality but they at least understand it for what it is. The religious, on the other hand, embrace their irrationality as rational. That is an obstacle to science.

The god gene. The god gene doesn't exist but the natural propensity for some people to embrace spirituality does.  The propensity impedes reason. Reason is the grist for world scale. People who are best able to put aside their irrationality will be best positioned to handle the complexities of world scale. The most religious will be the least able to manage world scale and thus be reduced to being subjugated by word scale or violence against world scale.

Finally, the god gene has been challenged in the media lately with by what is being called "The New Atheist Movement". This "new" movement is not new. It is the same movement as was there previously with the same old arguments about whether god or the supernatural exists.

That is not a new atheist movement. The new atheist movement will be to choose to side with either being human or to side with the supernatural. There still exists in the new atheist movement the notion that if god put in an appearance then the atheist would believe.

What is the new atheist movement? The new atheist movement is declare independence from all supernatural forces. Align with the supernatural or align with the humans. That is the future that is coming. The arguments about whether god exists will soon be replaced with even if the supernatural exists humans should only side with humans. Free will severs any all ties with the supernatural.

That is the thinking this about to come down the line as a natural extension of the god gene evidence coming to the fore. The god gene effect impedes rational thought. The god gene effect is going to be seen as a determinant to the human agenda and those with the god gene are going to be asked to choose between the supernatural or their fellow humans. If the supernatural exists and puts in an appearance the future atheist will not align with any supernatural force under any conditions. Free will baby. Anti-theism as necessary for survival is coming. Catering to irrationality as rationality is no longer beneficial.


The future is coming!

Well come! and well met!

Tips on Philosophy, Phi-tips

Hi! Groovy Sunday!

How ya' all doin'? Well I hope.

Phi-tips! Phi-tips are things you stick in your ear before you stick in your Q-Tips! Ha!

How does one discuss the supernatural in the information age?

Phi-tips! That's what these phi-tips are about, helping you to consume information with confidence.

First, the tips and then the long windedness.

  1. Decision thresholds.

    There are two fundamental decision thresholds: control and whimsy. I typically refer to the two fundamental levels of "control" and "whimsy" as "decision making" and "pop culture" respectively. I make purchasing decisions every day for pop culture that have no control aspects. I buy music and sci-fi t-shirts. These are decisions...but these decisions do not rise the level of decision making about controlling people. Those of us who are atheists have no problem with religion, sports, Justin Beaver or any other pop culture people want to subscribe too. All atheists enjoy pop culture. When viewed in that light religion is just a pop culture.  All adherents are self subscribing in pop culture. Where atheists have a problem with theists, or any pop culture, is when a self-subscribed behavior is being  pushed on others, like an agenda to prevent gay marriage that is controlling lives of others outside that religion. As long as any religion, Justin Beaver fans or other pop cultures are not setting public policy to control peoples lives then pop culture decision making is mostly harmless. The people who subscribe to pop culture may take it very serious but to those on the outside of the pop culture the pop culture is just whimsy. I'm a fanatic about a TV show called, "Firefly". When I am criticized that this pop culture fanaticism may be too much I just shrug. They may be right. Its my life.

  2. Null Hypothesis.

    The null hypothesis can be stated that truth requires evidence, no evidence then no truth.

  3. Evidence gaps.

    Evidence gaps arise when there are unknown variables that go into decision making.  Human behavior is not well understood and so most programs to manage human behavior, especially on the world scale level,  require reason built upon numerous evidence gaps. For example, oft times in lieu of any evidence of causality then we rely on correlation. The problem with ignoring evidence gaps when discussing arguments and not calling out evidence gaps habitually is that in our conversations we forget to mention that while correlation may be the best evidence available today that in fact correlation can be completely erroneous. Relentless acknowledgement of evidence gaps can go a long way to putting contentious issues such as gun control and climate change into a proper decision perspective. 


When the first two phi-tips, one for each ear, are applied appropriately then folks who may not otherwise get along can converge to agreement. The third phi-tip improves communication. Acknowledging evidence gaps is crucial to admitting that while a decision needs to be made the solution has a risk.

Lately I've been watching debates on Youtube about philosophy, religion vs. atheism, that kind of thing. I'm doing this because scaling the world is going to require bringing people together who currently do not otherwise get along.  What I've observed is that religious debates can be made moot by requiring the above first two phi-tips.

Do gods exist? and if so which gods are real? These are two fundamental questions that keep people apart and are preventing world scale. Let's apply the first two phi-tips and see what happens. Assume all parities agree to use the two phi-tips as fertile soil for common ground when discussing the supernatural. The null hypothesis implies that ideas can be called delusions without supporting evidence and therefore there is no need to disprove a reasonable argument. This flies counter to history where historically the logic of arguments was to prove or to disprove. The null hypothesis removes the burden of disproof.  To further illustrate then I'm going to posit two arguments and compare and contrast.

Argument 1:

Let's take the null hypothesis out of the realm of the supernatural for a moment and just apply the null hypothesis to the real world. I will make the claim that alien life exists on billions of planets throughout the universe. I make this claim based upon evidence. The evidence is that within the last century it was discovered that the basic building blocks of life are ubiquitous throughout the universe; hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen. Further, evolution and biochemistry are such that we are close to closing the evidence gap of inert matter transitioning to life. Therefore life exists on other planets is a fact. Now prove me wrong.

Argument 2:

The above argument is identical to modern arguments that gods exist. The universe had a beginning with the big bang and therefore must have a first cause. The prime mover/universe creator does not have a beginning and is timeless and space-less and hence doesn't need a creator. Therefore some god exists and doesn't need a creator. Some god created the universe then is a fact. Now prove me wrong.

The two arguments are identical in formulation. The key difference is that one invokes the supernatural, gods exist, and the other does not. The notion here is to knock down the type of argument being used, to either prove or disprove. In the modern world we apply the null hypothesis to the supernatural, not prove or disprove.  Both Argument 1. and Argument 2. rely on a pre-science notion of arguing via to prove or to disprove some reasonable argument. In the days before science reasonable arguments had little evidence and huge evidence gaps and that needed to be filled or overlooked in order to provide any argument whatsoever. All sides were lacking evidence and deduction was fundamental to evidence. Two-thousand years ago little evidence was known about our physical nature. Claims that supernatural forces were at work were reasonable. The supernatural two-thousand years ago was taken for granted by most everyone. The supernatural was assumed. That assumption is now off the table. That is how to talk about the supernatural in the information age.

Argument 1. above stating that alien life exists throughout the universe is a reasonable argument. Yet, today you will not hear a single scientist put for this argument forth as solid proof that there exists alien life on other planets. This is because in the modern era the null-hypothesis is the default truth position: no evidence no truth. This same thinking for scientists apply to Argument 2. about god arguments. There is no evidence for god but there is a deductive argument, the universe has a beginning and requires a beginner. There is no direct evidence for this beginner/universe creator and so the scientist dismisses this the same as dismissing alien life on other planets. Deductive arguments exist but are not considered as truth.


Strategically if the null hypothesis is the default position then are all prove-disprove deductive reasonable arguments no longer to be used? Are these deductive arguments archaic? The scientific application of the null hypothesis as *the* only valid argument for discussing the supernatural is disingenuous scientifically as a blanket statement. Science relies on deductive arguments every single day. These deductive arguments are used to fill in the evidence gaps. Every day we need to make life-or-death decisions in the face of unknowns. War being a good example. We have no evidence killing terrorists will be disperse them completely from Earth, but there is a deductive argument. Climate change is another example. Yes, man-made climate change is a scientific fact. What that fact means and how to mitigate that meaning relies on deductive arguments, or guessing. Presumably reversing the man made change will reset things but what if we have passed a catalyst point and set off a reaction no longer under our control where reversing our carbon emissions is pointless?

The question then is why is the null hypothesis required in some cases and not in others? The answer is lost on most philosophers that I've read. The answer is that use of deduction depends on whether there are control threshold decisions that need to be made. If there are no control threshold decisions requiring us to subvert the null-hypothesis and use deductive arguments then the null hypothesis is the only strategy that should be applied. In the ideal world we understand 100% the consequences of our actions. We are nowhere near achieving that ideal.

However, we have no compelling decisions to be made with respect to the supernatural. Religion and their various gods have been reduced to pop culture status, whimsy decisions. There is no need for control threshold decisions that combine the supernatural with the natural world. None. All religious decisions are personal, about personal behavior and personal belief about the after life. To whit, in 1969 the New York Times ran with a headline that "God is Dead." What the NYT really should have printed is that "God is a Novelty." Religion today is just a novelty as with any other pop culture phenomena. And that's okay.

There is absolutely no evidence that the supernatural influences the natural world today. Therefore the null-hypothesis applies to all things supernatural and not just the notion of the existence of gods. In other words if evidence could be shown that public prayer has any supernatural merit then deductive arguments for the supernatural can be given even if we do not understand why prayer works. To date no religion has been able to show supernatural forces are measurable naturally. There has never been shown the laws of nature have ever been suspended.


In conclusion the phi-tips afford common ground for decision making between groups subscribing to the supernatural. Science does rely on the deductive arguments when making decisions in the face of evidence gaps. However, deductive arguments are a stop-gap applied until such a time as a better evidence is provided. In the modern era there is no evidence gap that would benefit from the application of a supernatural appeal. There has never been any evidence that supernatural appeals such as prayer have any efficacy whatsoever so deductively there is no reason to apply them. Further, excellent deductive arguments about the origins of the universe do not rise to the level of decision making on planet Earth. Pop culture decisions yes, control and policy decision making no. These arguments are nothing more than mere curiosities. As such then the null hypothesis is appropriately required by scientists or atheists as the standard for the supernatural. Deductive reasoning should only be used when decisions are needed and no evidence is available. Religion and the supernatural do not meet a deductive reasoning standard because the supernatural has never been shown to have efficacy in the natural world and origins of the universe impact no Earthly decision. Creator arguments are true but moot. It has never been shown that the laws of nature have been suspended.


The future is coming!

Well come! and well met!

Monday, March 16, 2015

Self Leadership

Hi! Happy Monday!

How ya' doin'?

Today? Self leadership!

What is self leadership? Well, glad you asked!

You have a choice.

Either the government forces you to do something or you do it on your own terms.

And here's the kicker. If the government forces you to do something then you are going to resent that government. Not like that government. Bad government, bad. No one likes to be controlled. Not Democrat. Not Republican. Not no one.

Let's do a compare and contrast: recycling vs. CFLs, compact florescent light bulbs.

So be honest here. Of the two choices being recycling and CFLs, which went down better: the recycling programs that were rolled out gradually over time with financial incentive for returning things or being told to adopt CFLs?

There is no Federal program today mandating recycling. Yet recycling is everywhere.

We are faced with a onslaught of efficiency choices with climate change. The question is will we do so with self-leadership or are we going to wait for the government to force us?

Yesterday I blogged about choices. Food inefficiency of eating meat means less food for a future 10 billion people. Here's a thought, we could all gradually start start incorporating tofu turkey into our diets, slowly over years, or we can wait until the government rations or cuts us off completely. One of these scenarios we can convince ourselves what we are doing is our choice and maybe go down easier.

Self leadership.

Yesterday I blogged that the first couple of steps to personal power is a.) admit world scale problems exist as world scale problems and b.) rally for world scale solutions. Well now there is a third step, a c.), self leadership. Get together with your family and friends and voluntarily gradually go vegetarian. Do world scale changes on your own terms, with your family creating new holiday traditions and food experiences in a positive fashion. You'll feel world scale good and family good. Good!

Self leadership.


The future is coming!

Well come! and well met!


Sunday, March 15, 2015

Personal Power

Hi! Happy Sunday!

Two posts today! Woot!

I just posted about hope. That we can all exercise personal power by acknowledging and rallying around world scale agendas such as climate change, food and water.

In many of my previous posts I've blogged about personal power but did not call things out as such. For example, the vote bank and voting only for who you know are two personal power changes for the information age. I've also written about making bribery legal and part of the voting process. These ideas are far fetched and probably more confusing than enlightening on their face.

This post starts at the beginning of personal power: distribute or centralize. I will not end up at a conclusion resulting in explaining the vote bank, six-degree voting and legal bribery; but the arguments here will motivate closer to understanding the reasoning behind those notions.

In the beginning.

In the beginning there is power. How do we distribute this power? Power in success is distributed on three axis: belief, will and capability. Power in failure converges on corruption. To the extent that any human power system maintains a distribution based upon desired beliefs, collective will and optimal capability all in the face of our nature of corruption will determine the success of that power. Success is defined loosely here to mean life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all. Failure means tyranny.

The US started a new paradigm of belief, will and capability as a human power system. The Constitution provided the belief, our will to support that Constitution or collective will and our representatives our capability.

Things have changed.

Slavery, the genocide of Native Americans and many other tragedies and travesties of the US expose the fact that American Democracy is not ideal or even close. American Democracy was, however, an improvement on monarchy, centralized power, despotism and corruption.

In conclusion

In conclusion the American system of Democracy has devolved to that which it rebelled against: centralized power resulting in despotism and corruption.  The only two differences: one difference is what remains of past ideals such as free speech and right-to-bare arms and the second difference is the number of people in the central circle of power is greatly enlarged over that of a monarchy.

What next?

American Democracy is dead. Corruption has rotted Washington DC to its very core and tyranny is on our doorstep. We are all being spied upon and there is an army of 630,000 police officers in this country. Here is an interesting homework assignment for you: this country has 630,000 police officers, identify how many countries have a standing military larger than our collective US police force?

What next?

Power can either be centralized or it can be distributed.  When distributed then that means there are more people wielding power. The conclusion then is that we the people must be willing to take on wielding more power or forever be resigned to the tyranny of centralized despotism.

Guess what that means? We gotta give up doing nothing and thinking it is something.  We gotta give up political media addiction. As an atheist there is a meme in atheist circles that if you want to fool yourself that you are doing something then pray. Prayer is defined to be doing nothing but convincing yourself you are doing something. Prayer is not the only popular fakery of doing nothing, however:  so is reading political media.

We as Americans and around the world have convinced ourselves that by consuming political media we are doing something. We are not. Reading a political opinion that supports your desired beliefs and undermines some supposed opposition is not doing anything. At all.

We as a Americans are going to have to break our addiction to political opinion as doing action. We have no choice. Think about the three axis of power: belief, will and capability. The Constitution is too naive and no longer stands up as our collective 400 million people, nuanced belief and so is not our collective will. Our representatives are totally laughable as capable. You and I could make far better decisions than our jack asses in Congress. Anyone could argue that the capability of our representatives today is not even in the top half of educated Americans capable of running government. The people in Washington DC are contemptibly incompetent.

As a result of power failure then corruption has taken hold as it always does. The US is dying inside.

Stepping up

Moving on is a common meme these days. A web site and social group formed after Bill Clinton's indiscretions and is still around today.  But we don't need to move on. We need to step up. We need to come to grips that we need to actually wield personal power and that being political news junkies is not doing it.

We have a choice. We either resolve to act or we resign to tyranny. And to start we must admit our common power failure in that the belief, will and capability of our US power system as was initiated in 1776 has rotted away and is no longer in play. It is time to step up and take responsibility for what has failed and build anew. Together. The belief and will to start up successful power that scales must come from the 400 million folks in it or it will not come at all. That means you.


The future is coming!

Well come! and well met!


Hi! Happy Sunday!

The future is coming!

What does that even mean? ha! As a futurist I've been blogging my ideas for awhile now. My blog here is mostly of a personal nature. And by personal nature I mean that these are mostly notes to myself. A journal of sorts. The blog posts are not intended so much as a vehicle of persuasion. There is no story telling per se. These blog posts have no motivation to connect the dots that good writing of complicated ideas should have. I know this. Today, I'm going to add a little motivation.

I was going to entitle this post "Personal Power" as it is a follow on to my previous post, Sharing Power.

However, as I was driving down to Menlo Park this morning to have a breakfast I came up with a some motivation and renamed this blog post "Hope".

The future of thinking in world scale is coming.

Food and water are a problem on a world scale. There are 7 billion people on this planet today and predictions are for 10 billion people by 2025 or some such. Food and water are a problem today and are going to be an even bigger problem tomorrow. As a result of food and water shortages then land usage inefficiency in growing food is a life-or-death problem. There have been predictions made recently and even efforts today undertaken to move towards world-wide vegetarian diets for food efficiency reasons and not because of an animal cruelty agenda. We have a serious human problem. Growing animals as food is very inefficient. This is a world scale solution to a world scale problem that we as Americans and Earthlings are not willing to collectively admit...yet.

The future is coming. 

Climate change, food and water are issues being discussed in the public media today as a world scale problem needing world-wide solutions. The objective of Irrenni World Scale is not to address the physical nature of world scale but the political nature of world scale. The tag line, "The future is coming", is meant to mean the future of thinking in world scale is coming. We are not there yet. We are knocking on the World Scale door with heavy climate change hands.

The future of thinking in world scale is coming and everyone one of us have new personal power roles to play. One import personal power role initially is for us to simply acknowledge world scale agendas like climate change and to rally around these agendas. Nationalism is dead. We have entered not only the information age but the world scale age. What happens in Vegas does not stay in Vegas.

The future is coming.

Motivation. Nine-to-five is going to die.  I was driving to Menlo Park this morning luxuriating in a soon to be extinct experience: light Sunday traffic.

Before I get into why nine-to-five is going to die, soon, I'd like to point out that predicting the future as sci-fi writers and futurists such as myself embark in is not a practice of magic or prophecy, but instead is is simply extrapolation: understanding human nature and nature. The best example of this I've read was a sci-fi book where one of the characters was a futurist. The futurist was traveling in space with a young student. The futurist and his young student detected two alien ships off in a distance from their spaceship. After a scan of the two ships the futurist was able to state that the two ships were not only of different planets but of different times. The young student was curious as to how the futurist could know this from just scanning the ship exteriors? The answer was technological complexity and design. Just as our cars have evolved to be more aerodynamic and so look similar to be efficient then so will spaceships. Technological complexity  is directly proportional to efficiency. An aerodynamic car cannot be designed without a solid understanding of aerodynamics. Our first automobiles were not aerodynamic. This concept applies to spaceships and the idea behind technological complexity is that the design for the most efficient spaceship will converge to set of natural characteristics independent of time, place or planet of origin.

 Motivation. Nine-to-five is going to die. The notion that a nine-to-five work day is going to die is not much of a reach. That is why I'm labeling this blog post "hope" and using this idea as motivation. The efficiency of energy use greatly impacts climate change. Imagine if traffic were spread evenly 24 hours-per-day, 7 days-per-week? If cars use less gas in less traffic then the a 24 hour business cycle has less impact on climate change. Everyone has the personal power today to rally behind this world scale efficiency solution. The solution is to use taxes to incentivise business hours to a 24-hour rotation. Easy peasy. Further, we can do away with time zones and move towards a universal clock.

Doing away with nine-to-five is just common sense. Oh there will be challenges such as humans thrive on a circadian, sunrise-to-sunset cycle. So scientific studies will need to be done into sleep patterns so as to truly come to a 24-hour cycle. Perhaps all that is needed is something as simple as artificial sunlight and ambient birds chirping. Ha!

Hope. The hope for the world is tackling problems with a world scale perspective. That hope is on us. Our personal power is to acknowledge world scale problems such as with climate change, food and water. As we open the door to world scale problems and solutions we open the door to world scale social groups and that is where Irreni comes to party! 


The future is coming!

Well come! and well met!


Friday, March 6, 2015

Sharing Power

Hi! Happy Friday!

Zoom zoom!

Experimentation Required

Just a reminder that claims made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Lately I've been posting some fairly sophisticated empathy social group ideas. One of the many pillars of Irreni is the call for experimentation. As the future models for scaling social groups come online in the information age then empathetically it is important not to just adopt change en mass without starting at the small group level. Even if by chance such large implementations succeed at any level. like say going straight from a few policemen wearing body cameras to all 630,000 police officers wearing body cameras, the efficacy of these programs will be much higher going through rigorous rounds of proving experiments with groups of all sizes.

We need to sell our new social ideas and get buy in  of the people, by the people and for the people. We should refrain from rolling out large scale initiatives such as with Obamacare without first doing the hard work of experimenting at all levels of groups in between small and large.

Irreni is calling for role playing and the arts to fulfil the marketing aspects of buy-in for social group changes. Music, movies, dance and art of all kind should be used to express our social desires. The future is coming and this future of new social groups should be what we expressly want, and not implemented as mandates. Yes it should.

Sharing Power

Mybrid's observations of sharing power:

  1. Concentrated power is the only human model as of 2015. 
  2. Sharing power among us runs counter to human nature as human history has shown. 
  3. Sharing power is weird. Sharing even more power will feel even more weird. 
  4. Sharing power takes work on everyone's part. 
  5. Most humans avoid power, see all of the above. History has shown people will not rise up en mass and overthrow  despots, tyranny and oppression. Today Americans feel impotent to do anything at all to change what everyone knows is broken.
  6. Voting is our first, worst attempt at sharing power. Voting is the weakest, laziest, and least effective way of sharing power. Voting is to sharing power as religion is to managing human nature; they both represent humankind's first worst attempts. Time to get into the 21st century.


    "There is something exceedingly ridiculous in the composition of concentrated power in Washington D.C.; it first excludes a congress person from the means of empathy, yet empowers a congress person to act in cases where the highest judgment of empathy is required. The state of Washington D.C. shuts them from the world, yet the business of a Washington D.C. requires them to know empathy thoroughly; wherefore the different parts, by unnaturally opposing and destroying each other, prove the whole character to be absurd and useless." - Thomas Paine

    Here is some homework for you. Take the writings of Thomas Paine, say "Common Sense", and substitute the words  'king' and 'monarchy' with 'Washington DC' as I just did above. Convince yourself the US has come full circle and is the same predicament as it was in 1776. It is time for a government overhaul. Voting has run its course and it is time to distribute power with technology.

    Paine's observations of the ridiculous nature of concentrated power as seen through the through the lens of monarchy applies today to Washington D.C.  and  to the scale of the United States government's influence of its citizens along with its influence of people worldwide. We have exchanged a monarchy for Washington D.C. I encourage you to go back and read Paine's writings and convince yourself of this.

    Democracy literally was our first worst attempt to share power. Democracy failed in Greece and Rome. It has now failed in the US and voting is only a shell of its former self. 


    Where are the alternatives?

    Where are the alternatives to Democracy today? Irreni is one such alternative. Irreni combines the best knowledge that we have of human nature today and couples that knowledge with the best technology available and technology yet to be invented and distributes power in ways previously unimaginable because the technology to do so never existed before.

    Why are there no other technology-based governing alternatives? People cling to the words socialism, communism, democracy, republic and capitalism the same as the good people clung to the word monarchy in the past. Why?

    It is hard to let go. Face it. Humans suck at changing governing models. If one  only takes away a single lesson  from the book of "Dune" it is this: humans suck so bad at changing governing models that the despotism of concentrated power is inevitable and will eventually concentrate to a power that cannot be broken.

    Fortunately we are not there yet. It is time to break up the concentrated power and distribute power among us all. This will be painful in that most of us want to be power lazy and not do power work, we just concentrate our power on our friends and family. We can no longer afford this luxury. If Washington D.C. is not stopped there may come a point where it is Frank Herbert who wrote "Dune" predicts.

    Fortunately we are not there yet, where genetic engineering is such that the rich people can engineer superior children and logically declare a superiority that was farcically once called the divine right of kings in the past.

    Fortunately we are not there yet; we are not a place in time where concentrated power cannot be challenged. Time to make our collective move. Time for Irreni and other new models for sharing power to begin!


    The future is coming!

    Well come! and well met!