Site Under Construction
"There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come".
Attributed to Victor Hugo
Attributed to Victor Hugo
I trust the ideas in this book are not new to man.
All these ideas seemed to "float" independently around us, waiting for the time we could see them for what they really were: The reasons and purpose for the ultimate project awaiting humanity from the instant we appeared with an abstract mind.
That time is upon us.
It is time to realize that until science proves otherwise, man is the only creature in the universe that is in possession of that abstract mind.
An abstract mind is without contest the most powerful tool in the universe; An abstract mind , two hands and time is all that Man needs to discover the facts about the workings of nature... All the facts... about all the workings... of all of nature...
An abstract mind is the rarest scarcity in the universe; There corresponds only one abstract mind for fifteen GALAXIES in the cosmos, each galaxy containing trillions of stars and solar systems.
We have more than seven billion abstract minds "packed" on our planet!
What are the things man has always desired?
Maybe they can be summed up to the following:
1- Indefinite or a very long and healthy life (eternal youth),
And maybe a fourth:
4- Being protected /guided/taken care of (child - state).
Remember what paradise is supposed to be about:
- Being a spirit (eternal life in perfect health),
- In need of nothing (prosperity/abundance) and
- Being in bliss (a state of uninterrupted happiness and satisfaction).
- Dwelling close to the ultimate responsible figure (being taken care of).
The "heavenly" versions of our desires are the absolutes or the maximums of what we have dreamt about since day one, assuming there is a day one.
These desires were so uncompromising, that we created legends and myths, like the fountain of everlasting youth, the philosopher's stone, the corn of abundance, and so many others, just to be able to imagine the possibility of indulging them, even if only in legends and myths.
We did not stop there.
We made ourselves believe surreal stories that were supposed to have happened some five thousand years ago about the supposed creator of the entire universe appearing and supposedly initiating a contract of exclusivity rights with a part of our ancestry, simply to entertain the possibility of indulging our uncompromising desires...
Once we realize that all humanity basically desires the same few things, and that we are all endowed with the most powerful tool existing in the universe to create for ourselves all that we desire in great abundance, then the acknowledgement of both facts should instantly prompt the only evident course of action in every human mind:
Organizing humanity around a planetary scientific project, and insuring that we have everything we have always desired... in peace.
German and Dutch scientists from the turn of the twentieth century have been trying to show us that science can solve all our problems, but nobody believed them. Hundred years had to pass for us to realize that they were right:
Science is "magic" made real.
We may think that we cannot all be scientists even if we want to, since we may not be smart enough.
Be that as it may, science and knowledge are as vast as the universe; there is always a domain for each of us, but we should keep in mind that everybody need not be researchers. We simply need humanity making the human scientific project the central endeavor of mankind, and allocating it with the highest possible priority in all domains of human activity.
When the real potential of our abstract minds becomes part of our awareness, then every human without exception will finally see himself for what he really is; a part of the most powerful collective of the universe, the collective that for all purposes is the universe's only living awareness.
As an inescapable outcome of this awareness, man will become receptive to everything that allows him to cooperate, like "eclipsed" facts about personal determinism (see later), or ideas about a different organization of humanity (see later).
Man will do anything in his power to organize his collective in a manner allowing it to fulfill its destiny and become the most powerful collective of the universe, satisfy his desires first, and then... engage in whatever his future awareness leads him to.
Do all of us have the above-mentioned basic desires?
Do these constitute a consensus of human desires?
When the rational claim that the fulfillment of our desires which constitute our human consensus are not only possible but certain gets validated, will the necessity of working together to have them as soon as possible constitute another consensus?
The further we delay, more of us will needlessly die.
We will find the way to deal with the evident problems long life will cause in a world of scarcity, by working simultaneously on abundance and on the adaptation of the progression of our members to our though created in great abundance, but still non-infinite resources.
Why does Google research a "cyborg" version of "superior" intelligence or immortality, when we can have a better global outcome by naturally prolonging youth and life?
Humanity will decide together what to do and how to proceed once we start communicating horizontally in this age of unlimited communication.
Science is the only tool by which we could make these desires come true in the real world for all of us, leaving no one behind, and in the process, ending all conflict.
If these desires do have consensus, then the will and the only way to get them in this life (science) should have the same consensus, or else something is wrong.
Science will eventually get us there, and only the scientists can estimate how fast; their estimates will seem like "tomorrow" once humanity and the resources of the planet get mobilized for it.
A planetary commitment to science will "pierce the ceiling" of knowledge "overnight", and give us what we want, "immediately", without creating cyborgs.
Abundance will be the reality of life for everybody, and if we start now, probably in ten years' time youth and life will seem forever compared to what we have today.
No need to imagine legendary objects like the cup of the crucifix, the fountain of youth or the philosopher's stone to give some of us extremely long and healthy lives.
No need to imagine the corn of abundance to grant some of us unlimited quantities of what we need.
No need to imagine religions that promise what we desire in this life or in an afterlife to some of us.
Being so many on a single planet, "bumping" into each other and considering ourselves as very common is our circumstantial error incessantly repeated by self-proclaimed "elites", who don't know better than creating hierarchy whenever and wherever they can and as multi-leveled as they can, revealing a tragic lack of awareness in the process.
All the traits of personal behavior, be they "evil" or "good", are the result of living in a world of scarcity and collective competition for scarcities. Survival and well-being dictated that we be "good" to our collective, and "bad" to the others, throughout all of human existence.
Our personal behavior never has any incidence on the intrinsic value of our abstract mind.
Our intolerable and disgusting traits should be considered as minor, temporary irritations in comparison to the huge support we can offer while cooperating.
Responsible, safe science that will grant us all our desires is what we will be cooperating for.
Nothing is impossible for our abstract minds working in the realm of science.
All we need is time, which will be cut shorter and shorter as we make a planetary investment in both scientists and budgets.
Imagine humanity still hunting - gathering.
The entire planet would live in scarcity and would sustain only a fraction of its current population, with permanent conflicts over food and the like; Cities and civilization would be impossible.
But we observed that when some parts of the plant were put back in the earth, under certain conditions it produced more of the plant.
This simple observation was a scientific breakthrough.
No entity taught us anything. We observed, deduced and invented agriculture.
No, Chronos did not teach us agriculture (or maybe he did, who am I to know)...
No entity takes or shares credit for anything we discover.
We used our mind to produce by ourselves what we needed instead of fighting over them, and in doing that, we changed the rules of the game; the given.
The specificity of our mind inevitably does that... Always.
It was this idea and the capacity of producing by ourselves what we needed, that led to the first tremendous change in the human condition on our planet by producing relative abundance (agriculture and farming), making civilization possible.
Surely this civilization is not perfect, but it contains in itself the grains of a better civilization by repeating the procedure. We just have to notice that it's time to change the rules of the game and "the given", again, by producing still more abundance, be it in years of life, or necessities.
Using our abstract minds we will produce abundance by ourselves for ourselves instead of fighting over scarcities, and will let us and our descendants remember these times as the time of the second tremendous change that produced the "next level" civilization; better, abundant, peaceful and responsible.
The actual survival trait of competition for scarce resources will evolve to the survival trait of cooperation for creating abundant resources very fast, maybe in only two generations, which is the admitted time necessary to allow a viable change of consciousness.
For one moment, let us forget about all that do not "enjoy" human consensus, like actual economic systems, systems of government, even monotheisms that reject and dismiss each other, cause and allow the aberration of fanaticism by forming "God determined" clans that render any unity of man undesirable by divine design.
Let's look for consensus and nothing else.
Isn't consensus beyond Democracy?
Isn't consensus the "dream state" of any Democracy?
Isn't consensus the ultimate logical argument?
No argument, no idea, not even a single word can be uttered against the consensus without immediately invalidating the word and the source of the word.
So let's look beyond democracy.
Let's find the human consensus.
We will be delighted to find all of humanity choosing the same basic desires to be part of the human consensus, regardless of any system of government, organization of society, level of prosperity or religion, because these will be things we all crave;
It is our collective consensus, our human consensus.
Can this awareness of an existing human consensus and the possibility of fulfilling all its constituent human desires in this life, eventually change the human condition and its foreseeable endgame to a better one?
Ultimately, isn't anybody different from everybody? Can we find two people exactly the same? Then the characteristic of being different is universal.
How idiotic is it to consider a universal characteristic as a source of conflict, instead of considering it a gift from life in the form of an unlimited source of options?
Let's get together and talk.
All of us if possible...
It should be possible to create an open source platform in this age of unlimited communication.
If we agree on the desires that "enjoy" consensus, then we should set in motion some preliminary first steps mentioned at the end of the book if we find them pertinent.
It is irrelevant what I, You or a subset of mankind desires, even if it is the "most extensive" or "most worthy".
Only the consensus is relevant.
What we should see is that conflicts do not arise from different desires but from taking turns at egotistically and greedily satisfying the same desires, at the expense of others.
Consensus, the apprehension of being the most powerful collective in the universe, and the inevitable cooperation they will both create, are the only things that will naturally reduce or eliminate the tyranny of uncontrolled elements like "chance" or supposed "divine will" from deciding on our differences and similarities, playing around with our lives, creating our conflicts, and keeping our destiny dangerously diminished.
Belief systems being what they are will never constitute a consensus, but an active, violent and arrogant difference or a partisanship.
All communities or people being told or made to believe that their religion will unite humanity, should sometimes consider the fact that since religion is not one but many, then there is a high probability that this idea of a united humanity under one religion might imply another religion uniting humanity...
The proof of creation or creator(s) will certainly unite humanity. Unluckily we are not there yet, and will never get there by the existing belief systems which were (and still are being) "revealed" by prophets and gurus, which might very well "hear divine voices" or be in contact with the "beyond", but as in Babylon, don't always speak the same language while "transmitting" what they hear, and you probably know for what purpose...
Representative democracy (the democracy that is practiced today) can never unite humanity, since it shuts the door to public participation in the regulation of public life once the representatives are elected. Yes we can sanction them by not electing them again, but practically we can only do as much, and the harm will already be done.
Considerate, direct democracy (see "Democracy") may unite humanity, but in spite of possessing the means of implementing it, we still close our eyes every time we hear the lullabies of already living in "the best system ever" spread by the privately owned, omnipresent mass media for some, or the government, monarchy or tyranny controlled, omnipresent mass media for others.
Everybody is living in the "best system ever"...
In all actual systems of government including representative democracy, the mass media, our only source of "organized" consciousness that renders everyone complaisant with how things are in their society, can never be independent, even if they all eventually become "public", because being public still means being dependent on decisions of our elected "representatives" at best.
Economic systems can never unite humanity since they all admit, deal with, and manage scarcities.
Nothing involving scarcities can unite humanity.
I am well aware that living in scarcity is what we have for now, but it does not change the issue of current Economic systems being incapable of constituting planetary consensus, since the best they can do is create some kind of a priority of access to scarcities...
Belief systems, representative democracy, economic and financial systems never had, do not have, will never have, and should never have consensus.
All these systems may at best be considered as a kind of wealth in variety of human experience, but can never have significance on human unity, since they are like horses tearing mankind apart instead of making it advance in the direction everybody would want it to go, which is the direction of our consensus.
They all had their chance and failed. They caused and are still causing further artificial divisions among men, this time bordering the insane. They should all be replaced by a rational organization of humanity.
The current irrational human organization based upon mere consequences (good - bad) of a cause (scarcity), must be replaced by a rational organization based on a plan to engage and annihilate the cause itself.
As long as man mistakes consequences for the cause, he will only "exist" to treat consequences, because the untreated cause will always produce consequences.
Annihilating the cause can only be achieved on a planetary scale, by communicating horizontally, planning horizontally, initiating everything horizontally and maybe even governing horizontally.
This "rational" organization of humanity is the first step to implementing the human scientific project to acquire what all of us desire.
"All of us" being our entire species, the "horizontal" should only acknowledge the frontier of our species...
These are things we should do by ourselves, since nobody will do it for us.
We cannot rely and never need to rely and/or wait indefinitely until a benevolent God or gods or angels or supernatural beings or spirits or aliens decide to communicate to us the science we need.
They have not done that in the past and will not do it now, as much as it stimulates or comforts some of us to believe in unproven hypothesis of the sort.
Whatever makes humanity wait for solutions from "beyond" instead of trusting his own mind to create what he needs and desires, is a sterile and a sterilizing religion, be it about God, gods, or ... aliens. The operative sentence should always be: "Let's find out".
Whatever we have discovered as science, we have discovered ourselves.
Whatever plan we think any "higher" being(s) have made for us, is ours to make as a human collective.
It always was.
The planetary scientific endeavor is our ultimate possible collective action.
If we desire to act, the journey will be guided by our consensus and the endgame will be having all that we have always desired, including peace and peace of mind.
The alternative is non - action and staying this course in a world of scarcity, leading to a tragic endgame of which we already have glimpses.
It might be that monotheisms or all belief systems decide to collectively fight the planetary scientific endeavor, considering the human scientific project a machination of the devil himself, who supposedly wants to distance man from his monotheism-presented creator.
They might believe that surrendering his fate to "Him" is the only thing any "spiritually superior" man should do.
If the scientific project gets implemented in spite of these "superiors" and starts yielding results, then these same "superiors" will want to enjoy these results, and still try to find a way to keep themselves superior; something like God making all the "others" toil, to grant them, the "superiors", with whatever they want...
Instead of feeling idiotic and parasitic, they will still convince themselves of their "superiority"...
Although nothing can be done about that, it is of no real consequence but only a temporary irritation, since their descendants will inescapably come to work alongside ours'.
Being the only way to acquire all the desires of our consensus here and now (hopefully as soon as possible...), the scientific endeavor will satisfy and be adopted by both directions of human interest; self - interest and common interest which will lead to self - interest again.
Is consensus and anything emanating from it egotistic or altruistic?
Can any difference exist in consensus that is the point of convergence of all our "differences"?
Facts will solve mankind's problems, not "truths".
"Truths" are the problem.
"Truths" need to be validated by every individual or believed in, and in most cases are perspective-dependent. Truths can be admitted by some, rejected by others, and will always serve as pretext for dividing and creating useless problems.
All monotheisms/religions are based on "truths", are many, and contradictory. They can only serve as pretexts for dividing mankind and creating virtual problems with real consequences.
Truths DEMAND and AMBITION consensus.
Facts COMMAND and CREATE consensus.
Truths want to achieve a consensus by trying to convince the greatest possible number of individuals, hence the DEMAND. Validation by statistics is the purpose of truths, besides the fact that everybody might have his own truth.
Facts on the other hand impose themselves. No thinking person can ever reject a fact he comes in contact with, hence the COMMAND. Validation by statistics is inexistent in facts, and nobody can have "his own" fact.
The only way to reject a fact is not knowing it, or living in denial.
"And they lived happily ever after"... a consensus for a happy ending.
Belief systems make us believe in their promise of a somehow similar "grace" in this life, or in the afterlife, but only to the "faithful", by appealing to our desires.
This book tries to insist on the existing certitude of achieving this "fairytale ending" for everybody in this life, by appealing only to the mind.
Though I cannot "prove" here and now (neither can I "reveal"...) that science will supply us with everything we want, I can however call upon everybody's personal experience with science, and make them think about what science could do if it becomes the central endeavor of humanity, living in total cooperation.
Can anybody think that multi - multiplying the quality and the quantity of scientists along with the labs and the budgets will have no direct consequence on the rate of advancement of scientific inquiry?
If what is appealed to and triggered is faith, man will use his abstract mind to HOPE this "fairytale ending".
But if what is appealed to and triggered is rationality, man will use his abstract mind to CREATE this "fairytale ending".
This book is written to meet this specific end:
A "Covenant" among men.
We can only "have faith", "trust" or "hope" that belief systems will deliver what they promise...
Whatever belief systems promise,
Science WILL deliver.