Ahmed wrote: The man without virtue is the product of the particular societal framework in question here
It is not false but a man of a first people, a natural man, does not live in virtue either.
His mind is just as corrupted by his ego as ours.
Only his framework, the means at his disposal, make him seem more virtuous than us.
By "corrupt mind" I mean, self-centered, ready to lie to preserve a personal gain.
It is necessary to understand "spirit corrupted by its own interest", in short an ego very present in the center.
In a tribe, deception will be frowned upon by the community (local culture and morality) which will curb the initial selfish intention of the individual (calculation of interest, I eat this honey alone and then make myself look bad by the group. if I am discovered or I share it to show myself well? Whatever the choice it is an egoic calculation, based on the corruption of personal interest)
Non-virtue is naturally present in every human being.
You have to do a hell of a job of understanding, clearing the mind to leave the space of freedom to virtue. (27 years that I am on the spot in dilettante and nada!
Some will say that it is impossible to be virtuous (resigned or easy position, no personal questioning), others, very few, epsilon, argue that it is possible and the only beneficial way for humanity .
Ahmed wrote: As for "turnkey" systems, sorry to disappoint you, but any system is, by definition, harmful (since it locks in its original definition) and we must turn away from hope, even on a purely theoretical basis. , of a simple substitution.
By system I mean a set of fairly broad rules / principles to follow, such as "healthy and sustainable" for example, which nevertheless offer a significant area of freedom.
It is obviously necessary to show intelligence in the application of principles and not to fall into systematism. Otherwise we are paralyzed. We should stop breathing (CO2
), or even commit suicide en masse.
But "as healthy and sustainable as possible, rather than profitable at all costs", would be an outline of a system.
A guideline to try to follow, collectively, democratically.
For a while I thought direct democracy was possible on a large scale, like that of a country via current digital means.
In fact, digital exchanges are turning into a nightmare, with some exceptions or unless you already know people well.
An important part of non-verbal communication does not pass, the responsibility in the exchange that we have in front of a flesh individual is not present either.
I deduce that direct democracy must be done face-to-face (sometimes stormy too…) and therefore necessarily on a small scale.
Another point of view on the subject welcome ...
Ahmed wrote: Only a common and conscious development of what would be desirable is possible and therefore does not prejudge the result. The "concern" being that the growth of inequalities goes against any democratic manifestation, since we can only discuss between equals (or not too unequal!). .
Alas too true!
The first peoples in destitution do well there.
As your smiley suggests, "destitution" is a meaningless concept for these people. .
The smiley was for Western arrogance, "we are still no more idiots than these savages!"
The bottom line is that we have the means (science and technology) that allow us to live more comfortably than them, while respecting living things, including humans.
Do we have the mentality, the intention ??? I feel that it is emerging, more than ever anyway, but is it sufficient and on time ???
Ahmed wrote:Sustainability is first and foremost a question of how much energy is dissipated. Even among the people most convinced of this, energy addiction remains a manifestation of this widespread alienation ...
And type of energy: If the energy is renewable or in unlimited quantity, healthy and sustainable over a long period. This last form does not yet exist. In practice, therefore, renewable energy remains.
Do not confuse quantity available and quantity used.
Only the human will, and the system that we have "chosen" *, dictates the use of quantity.
* as long as it is not refuted, it is because we have chosen it.
Currently there are no human pilots in the economy plane, just soulless rules but nothing prevents them from putting them back, via "healthy and sustainable as much as possible and with direct democracy". Which supposes a good level of information of the individuals exercising this direct democracy, yet another problem ...
By good level of information, I mean a sufficient level, above ignorance, therefore.
We will try the 3 posts per day max