The awareness of nations
Submitted by infojunkie on Mon, 2006-05-08 16:52.
We are living in an age where societies need to have self-awareness. It is no longer sufficient to react on instinct, tradition, or habit. Society, as a problem-solving entity, needs to know its own strengths and weaknesses in order to survive and succeed in the globally connected world. And for this it needs to face its own behaviour critically and make rational decisions for self-improvement.
Many features of society will be questioned by this new awareness:
- Mass media: a tool for imprinting the collective mind, and such power should be aligned with society's goals instead of falling into the hands of manipulators.
- Dogma: the centuries-old spiritual authority has also been subverted. The knowledge contained in dogma needs to be separated from the associated authority, to be studied ontologically and for its own sake.
- Corporations: those economics-based nation-like entities that transcend national borders exist currently at a predator-prey stage. Its prey are individuals and other corporations, and such an adversarial stance does not benefit society. This attitude follows from the myth of scarce resources, which urgently needs to be deconstructed.
- Political action: it is hard to argue against the fact that power corrupts individuals, and that the best leaders accept their responsibility reluctantly. But politics are only useful when the masses are not aware, and thus need decision-making to be performed on their behalf. With awareness, hierarchical democratic groups can be formed to address decision-making at any level without the need for political action.
- Legal system: it has long been shown mathematically that any human system of rules will end up being inconsistent and incomplete. Jurisprudence hasn't yet caught up with that fact, and as a result the law is being turned into a game of experts looking for loopholes and omissions for monetary benefit, at the detriment of cooperation and progress.
Very nice post. I hope it
Very nice post. I hope it happens.
it has long been shown
it has long been shown mathematically that any human system of rules will end up being inconsistent and incomplete
So must we use a divine system of rules instead?
Human vs divine rules
I might have been riding too high a horse when I answered the first time. I didn't mean let's drop everything and let our dogmatists take back control. In fact, quite the opposite: we must continuously doubt our laws and review them for a better humanity, not for any ideological sake. Divine prescriptions (as expressed in various spiritual books and traditions) can only serve as a benchmark among others, measuring how much we are collectively converging towards the desirable end state.
Divine rules?
One can only wish, and I believe that man will rationally converge towards divine rules (or emotively diverge to their exact opposite). But my remark resulted from the simple observation that there is constant conflict between rule-makers and rule-followers, with the first group viewing their rules as absolute and ever-lasting, and the second gradually realizing the finiteness of the law and wanting to overthrow it wholesale.
The assumption of a rational society would have to entail a global consensus of human imperfection (which would squarely fit with evolution). This bit of humility would perhaps play a role in balancing the false holiness of the law.
Some would argue that man is
Some would argue that man is diverging (not converging) away from divine rules (that is, rules presumably set by a divine being). I think the societies that work better than others are the ones without absolute/ever-lasting laws. Those are societies which change their laws to match and better fit the development of the society. I think laws are an important tool to ensure an important value in societies, justice, and in that sense laws should be holy.