>>> >     Excellent, I think this idea was first proposed by Voltare
>>> >     (voluntarism). but less the leaches who predate on the labour and/
>>> >     or life of others.

>>> >     On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Adam Gmail
>>> >     <adamlevinemobile@??? <mailto:adamlevinemobile@gmail.com>>
>>> wrote:

>>> >         It's about the tribe, tools for location independent community
>>> >         and collaboration mean local is a philosophical decision, you
>>> >         have many locals to pick yours from and you can even pick many.

>>> >         Morality is rules based, rules are localized so participating
>>> In
>>> >         disparate communities just means voluntarily opting in to
>>> >         multiple rule sets and moralities.

>>> >         It is good to have options.

>>> >         Sent from my iPad

>>> >         On Mar 15, 2014, at 2:32 AM, "jamileh s.t."
>>> >         <xiaziyna@??? <mailto:xiaziyna@googlemail.com>>
>>> wrote:

>>> >         > as humans evolved from we have developed very efficient
>>> >         computational devices. the ability to think on a group level is
>>> >         not something that comes easy to us as traditionally we would
>>> be
>>> >         part of a small and local community. being accustomed to such
>>> an
>>> >         environment it became typical for us to evaluate right and
>>> wrong
>>> >         for a small community mostly composed of family. the definition
>>> >         of right and wrong being something biological, something like
>>> >         "how can i preserve as many humans who are most closely related
>>> >         for as long as possible". we developed secondary systems for
>>> the
>>> >         prime directive "how can i improve living quality", "i feel
>>> pain
>>> >         when i touch fire", "i feel sadness when i lose a loved one".
>>> we
>>> >         are now at a point in history where we have veered sufficiently
>>> >         away from such basic needs and the ruleset does not completely
>>> >         suffice, we must now think on a group level, we are not
>>> >         concerned with death, we place emphasis on other needs.
>>> >         >
>>> >         > it's difficult to define what this new ruleset should be,
>>> >         should we completely abandon our earlier genetic tools in
>>> favour
>>> >         of computational answers? i don't think so completely, i think
>>> >         inherently those earlier systems lead to good outcomes and fast
>>> >         decisions. for example, before we developed the current eye, we
>>> >         had a more primitive eye system which saw at a much faster
>>> rate,
>>> >         but with alot poorer vision, you can imagine how this is good
>>> in
>>> >         certain situations and in the same way how our very rough
>>> >         genetic tools allow us to get a "feel" of the situation. you
>>> can
>>> >         say why do we need to stick to this arbitrary ruleset whose
>>> sole
>>> >         purpose is to preserve humanity, when maybe we can have another
>>> >         ruleset that does the same thing, maybe we don't need to be
>>> kind
>>> >         to each other but we can still survive on medicine and live for
>>> >         a long time. our genetic programming does allow for this, our
>>> >         genetic programming allows us the intellectual capacity to
>>> >         overcome our genetic programming. i believe this i
>>> >          s where we should use computational tools, we are beginning to
>>> >         connect the points that form the logistic map, the consequences
>>> >         of waste, the consequence of slavery, the consequences of
>>> >         hoarding information, these are all consequences which take
>>> >         effect over time, and now due to the rapid rate the world moves
>>> >         at, are taking place within our lifetimes. a caveman without
>>> >         computer could not predict such outcomes, like when they hunted
>>> >         to extinction the megafauna or killed off the neanderthals.

>>> >         >
>>> >         > so maybe "right" and "wrong" are not the correct words, but
>>> >         it's kind of recursive, they have come to embody our instincts,
>>> >         and are thus defined by our instincts.
>>> >         > _______________________________________________
>>> >         > unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net

>>> >         >
>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>> >         _______________________________________________
>>> >         unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net

>>> >     _______________________________________________
>>> >     unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>> >     https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem