From: | "Bruce Eggum" <bruceeggum(at)gmail.com> |
---|---|
Date: | Fri, 9 May 2008 17:22:47 -0500 |
Subject: | Re: [WDDM] Regarding the social network site |
What model of democracy to use?
It seems our "culture" is really undefined. We speak of our "founding" and than compare and suggest changes to be like some other model. We discuss many cultures ie: Athens, Kibbutzim, German, past wars and social upheaval examples searching for a perfect or replacement model.
But, these models are antiquated. They do not have the Internet with networks for communication, nor consider Solar power which could eliminate fossil fuel use in twenty years. Networking the world is allowing us to develop diplomacy in new ways. Instead of a static model we could be constantly improving our model. The Athens town meetings with 100 – 2000 people making a "democratic decision" (by the elite) is a poor model for us.
We have serious problems, a population of 6.7 Billion people and
growing. This is unsustainable yet "capitalism" requires "growth"
which has depended upon this population explosion for new
"customers". This culture of capitalism can not be sustained.
The following article indicates some of the new tools we have to work with which could help us develop a working and sustainable culture.
EXPECT
EXPONENTIAL PROGRESS
RAPID GAINS IN TECHNOLOGY POINT TO A BRIGHT
FUTURE
By Ray Kurzweil
Christian Science Monitor
April 18,
2008
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0418/p09s01-coop.html
I suggest we consider these new tools and take advantage of them. Forums of people all over the world bring people together in their ideas and methods for harmonization. Anyone can begin a Forum using Ning which is free. http://www.ning.com/ People of all ages are talking together and learning from each other. The product of these interactions will shape our culture of today. Forums which create Initiatives could post them to key websites for world wide discussion and finally Simpol.com for further evaluation and perhaps implementation.
Another method of communication is Kaizen. Although used in business ventures, it is also an excellent example of people communicating to improve their culture, way of life and their method of government. I think a culture of communication is really our desire. We all want to be "heard" and we all want to have some control of our own lives. Once we communicate, we can develop ways of decision making.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(改善) is Japanese for improvement. It is a Japanese philosophy that focuses on continuous improvement throughout all aspects of life. When applied to the workplace, Kaizen activities continually improve all functions of a business from manufacturing to management and from the CEO to the assembly line workers.[1] By improving the standardized activities and processes, Kaizen aims to eliminate waste (see Lean manufacturing). Kaizen was first implemented in several Japanese businesses during the country's recovery after World War II, including Toyota, and has since spread to businesses throughout the world[2].
Introduction
Kaizen is a daily activity whose purpose goes beyond simple productivity improvement. It is also a process that, when done correctly, humanizes the workplace, eliminates overly hard work (both mental and physical) "muri", and teaches people how to perform experiments on their work using the scientific method and how to learn to spot and eliminate waste in business processes.
To be most effective kaizen must operate with three principles in place:
consider the process and the results (not results-only) so that actions to achieve effects are surfaced;
systemic thinking of the whole process and not just that immediately in view (i.e. big picture, not solely the narrow view) in order to avoid creating problems elsewhere in the process; and
a learning, non-judgmental, non-blaming (because blaming is wasteful) approach and intent will allow the re-examination of the assumptions that resulted in the current process.
People at all levels of an organization can participate in kaizen, from the CEO down, as well as external stakeholders when applicable. The format for kaizen can be individual, suggestion system, small group, or large group. At Toyota, it is usually a local improvement within a workstation or local area and involves a small group in improving their own work environment and productivity. This group is often guided through the kaizen process by a line supervisor; sometimes this is the line supervisor's key role.
While kaizen (at Toyota) usually delivers small improvements, the culture of continual aligned small improvements and standardization yields large results in the form of compound productivity improvement. Hence the English usage of "kaizen" can be: "continuous improvement" or "continual improvement."
This philosophy differs from the "command-and-control" improvement programs of the mid-twentieth century. Kaizen methodology includes making changes and monitoring results, then adjusting. Large-scale pre-planning and extensive project scheduling are replaced by smaller experiments, which can be rapidly adapted as new improvements are suggested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So how can we utilize all these tools and bring people together? Once together, (cyber-web assembly) we can surly decide together how we want to proceed.
This is really exciting! Thanks to all for sharing and continuing this conversation.
Bruce
Well Georges,
I hold my hands up. I cannot compete with your wordsmithery. Furthermore your post is compelling. I accept the argument that kibbutzism is the only DD.
You said - 'One may, of course, create an infinity of axiomaticthat "DD" is founded on flamenco dancing.'
models and call them "DD", postulating for instance
Absolutely. It could be said that the blahblahblahs were our attempts at so doing.
While investigating the word 'axiom' though, I happened upon the following - 'A stipulative definition of a term carries a meaning which a speaker wants it to convey for the purpose of his or her discourse. Thus, the term may be new, or a stipulative definition may prescribe a new meaning to a term which is already in use.'
In which case, the blahblahblahs could be classed as 'stipulative definitions'.
Now, as I understand it, axioms are falsifiable but stipulative definitions are not.
Would I be correct , by the way, in surmising that you are or have been, a student of metaphysics?
--- ROY DAINE wrote:
> When you make a claim, the onus is upon you to
> prove your point, not for anyone else to disprove
> it.
===========
G:
Wrong. Rational theories and models repose in
falsifiability. They are never proved, but at best
not (yet) falsified. And I wrongly thought that
we both take it as granted that rational models
are by definition axiomatic, where axioms should
not be confused with definitions.
Now, DD is IMO a model of a social structure founded
on the following "K" axiom:
Each member has equal opportunity and weight to:
-propose a rule,
-to investigate and understand all proposals,
-to argue for or against any proposal,
-to influence the resolution.
This axiom may be easily falsified for all past and
present social systems with exception of Kibbutzim,
where it is not proved, but so far not falsified.
One may, of course, create an infinity of axiomatic
models and call them "DD", postulating for instance
that "DD" is founded on flamenco dancing.
Yet, some people may prefer the above "K" axiom
and investigate it, i.e. endeavor to falsify it
for given practical cases.
Georges.
===========