The Visionary Philosopher

Wow.

As much as I've toyed with the concept of the Visionary Philosopher, it didn't occur to me that this would eventually evolve into a full-blown self-educational (heutagogic) level, that which I've been calling the PhV.

The PhV is best explained with this parable:

The Blind Men and the Elephant
John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887)

It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.

The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a WALL!"

The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, "Ho, what have we here,
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a SPEAR!"

The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a SNAKE!"

The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he:
"'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a TREE!"

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a FAN!"

The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a ROPE!"

And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!

Actually, there were 7 blind men in my parable.

The last one went around to the six to "see" what each saw, then compared those observations with previous observations with other animals, then with all this additional information, create a vision of what the complete elephant looked like.

Each of the six blind men could be seen to be PhDs in the narrow study that they had encountered, but it was only the last, the 7th that had employed vision to see the truest approximation. He is the PhV, the Visionary Philosopher.

The Animal Origins of Human Sexuality

I'm waiting for my accounts to be activated at A Voice for Men Forums. I have something I'd like to post there, and to have them put the boots to my proposal, if they should feel there is reason to do so. Here's what I was hoping to post:

What if we consider the natural environment prior to the existence of civilized mankind?

What if, among the many species nature allowed for on this planet at that time, there was one that stood upright, and took advantage of a natural niche where this animal could readily reprogram their own behaviours beyond the baseline of natural behaviours?

What if, despite this advantage, the frailness of this particular species was so great that they needed to be procreating perpetually?

What if nature’s way of keeping a species reproducing constantly was to make the male aroused as frequently as possible, certainly when in the company of females, and for the female to be ready to receive the male?

What if a consequence to this arrangement saw the male prepared to force the female to have sex (rape)?

What if the female, seeking to avoid being raped, chose instead to pre-empt the possibility, and sought out a gentle male to help safeguard her?

What if, as she latched onto her man, she made a point to study him, to learn his habits, his behavours so that she could adapt to them, and eventually present modifications that her partner could adopt to make their relationship mutually workable?

What if the woman came to be valued by her man by coming to know his battles, including his nagging need for sex, and in return, he’d give up most of his powers to her, knowing that he was well-represented in her mind, and that any decision she made for them, respected his needs as well as hers?

What if this trust bestowed on the woman by the man gave her a terrific feeling of importance, of being needed and valued, and though the word did not exist in the primitive mind, to be loved?

What if nature selected for women who had attained this feeling of importance and love, and in order to cement this relationship, rewarded her with a level of arousal that compared to the man’s? This would ensure that couples having reached this level of coherence would have many kids.

What if, conversely, any woman who sought to avoid the whole sexual demand of nature and wanted to be left alone, would spend their lives in constant fear of being raped, would never know the satisfaction of her man making her feel special, and finally, she would not have had a child to bring the profound fulfilment that nature intended?

What if …

You can find this proposal here.

_______________________________________________________________________

This is what I call the first approximation. It outlines the essential proposition, but lacks detail. The detail makes for a progressively more focussed explanation, but in the process of explaining complex mechanisms, the simplified explanation is the best way to introduce.

If I should see any traction on this site with posts, I'll do my best to explain, even if I need to begin the second approximation of this proposal.

Cheers!

Visionary Philosophy in Action ..... maybe

Repost: Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Most recent developments with the Ontario Education Ministry:

Financial Literacy in the Ontario Curriculum

https://news.ontario.ca/en/release/9631/financial-literacy-essential-to-student-success-stronger-economy

Financial Literacy Scope and Sequence of Expectations Grades 4-8 (.pdf)
Financial Literacy Scope and Sequence of Expectations Grade 9-12 (.pdf) 

Seems like the Ministry has taken on Financial Literacy with a vengeance. Interestingly, if you care to read through the pdfs listed above, you may note that this new focus seems to have been a long-standing missing piece of the education picture; financial literacy pulls many of the courses together, particularly the high school ones.

The post that follows is my original post on Financial Literacy
 _______________________________________________________

When the Premier of Ontario welcomed the public to offer ideas and feedback to our economic problems recently, I piped up with this letter:

    March 24, 2009

    Dear Premier McGuinty:

    I'd like to suggest a long-term remedy to both the present-day problem of effective economic stimulation to overcome this recession, as well as the problem of youth intransigence (and delinquency) within the high-school environment. I believe they share a common answer.

    What I'd like to propose is that the general aim of the whole high school curriculum be directed toward having students graduate with basic entrepreneurial skills. Please allow me to explain.

    Regardless of the interests and passions of youth, at some point they need to fit into the economy; they will need to hold a job and see a regular paycheque. What I'm proposing is that the whole of the high school curriculum possess components within each line of study that adds to the whole entrepreneurial skill set.

    For example, while Grade 9 math may be largely algebra and trigonometry (I'm guessing), there would also need to be a component that focuses on important business skills, like being able to do something as simple as quickly calculating the percentage tax on a purchase, or filling out a tax form.

    In English classes, books are read and discussed, but there would need to be a component where students need to author a simple formal letter. In a later grade, another component might be writing a proposal, either business or otherwise.

    In Civics/social studies, there would be a component that teaches students how to interface with the levels of government, perhaps even filling out forms like ones for the Youth Entrepreneurship programs offered by various governments.

    Even in history classes, there can be a segment that looks at the accessibility of government over the decades, and an investigation of conventional living in the past - pioneer villages are a great field trip to this end. There could be a small component in advanced history classes (grade 11 or 12) that did market gap analysis for early Canadian life, as opposed to modern day life. And these would only be small digressions from world and Canadian history.

    Finally, there could be specific classes that addresses entrepreneurial skills directly in grade 12, tying the many smaller components learned over the course of the prior 3 years that lets these kids hit the ground running, EVEN IF THEIR PASSIONS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH BUSINESS! They will know that whatever they wish to pursue, there is an economic reality tied to it.

    The net effect would be that each student would possess the knowledge to fit into the economy at the end of high school, and they'd also understand that gaining still more education (post-secondary) has huge personal economic consequences. Finally, they'll be too engaged to be idle, and those many entrepreneurial eyes will spawn niches and industries that we've never considered.

    Interestingly, our provincial government already has a test bed for this kind if schooling, though I don't know the details of their curriculum; it's Scarlett Heights Entrepreneurial Academy. I think their focus needs to become more common among our secondary schools in general.

    Is this not what we need?

    Thank you.


Now very recently, the provincial government agency overseeing education made this announcement:

    Financial Literacy Essential to Student Success, Stronger Economy

    November 2, 2009 10:18 AM
    McGuinty Government Integrating Financial Literacy Into Curriculum

    Starting in September 2011, Grade 4 to 12 students in Ontario will be learning to make informed choices and effective decisions about the use and management of money.

    The global economic challenges of the last year have highlighted the need to ensure a financially literate population.

    To determine how to introduce financial literacy into Ontario's curriculum, a working group, co-chaired by Parliamentary Assistant Leeanna Pendergast, will provide a report to the Ministry of Education's Curriculum Council in summer 2010.

    The working group will seek input from a variety of educational and financial sector experts to:

    § identify the core financial concepts that constitute "financial literacy"

    § develop a list of financial literacy concepts and skills

    § advise how to seamlessly integrate the list into the existing curriculum.

    The Ministry of Education will also work in partnership with the Investor Education Fund to develop resources and professional development opportunities for teachers.

---

Now did I precipitate this with my letter? Don't know, and really, don't care.

There's always a good possibility that this may have been on a to do list, and I simply pushed it up the agenda. Or others were calling for it as well, and I'm the straw that broke the camel's back. Regardless, it now seems to be in the works.

I'm not sure how much credit I can take for this progress, but there is a chance I had some small part to play.

---

Addendum:

More government announcements. I have no idea if my letter had anything to do with this, though there is a possibility that the provincial announcement imparted momentum to other government programs.

Metronews.ca
Monday, February 22, 2010
Page 14

Learning money skills

National task force will focus on financial literacy
 
“People just don’t know the basics.”
Laurie Campbell,
Credit Canada

Canada’s Task Force on Financial Literacy is launching a series of cross country conversations with Canadians about savings, debt, and their overall financial know how as it drafts a national strategy to create more financially educated citizens.

The task force will release its Leveraging Excellence consultation document today as a starting point to discuss issues including managing debt, saving and investing, retirement planning and preventing fraud.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty set up the group in June, citing his belief that improving Canadians’ knowledge of financial matters would contribute to a more stable economy.

Socio-economic change has meant Canadians will become increasingly responsible for their financial futures, while the financial marketplace is becoming more complex, Stewart wrote.

Laurie Campbell, executive director at Credit Canada and a member of the task force, said she hopes the consultation process will resonate with Canadians and the strategy developed will encourage everyone to become more engaged in their finances.

She said she works with people on a daily basis who don’t understand interest rates, or their credit card statements, and who lack money management skills.

“People just don’t know the basics. This is very concerning, because with that basic information they can get out of serious financial difficulties and make sure (a credit crisis) doesn’t happen again.”

THE CANADIAN PRESS

Even the Toronto SUN has weighed in on this matter recently.

__________________________________________________________

Tuesday, October 21, 2014
metronews.ca - Small Business Week

Number of small businesses increasing

More than a million in operation in 2012, with nearly 70 per cent of labour force

Small businesses — those with fewer than 100 employees — continue to make a vital contribution to Canada’s economy. According the most recent figures compiled by Statistics Canada and Industry Canada, more than 1.08 million small businesses operated in 2012, employing more than 7.7 million people, or nearly 70 per cent of this country’s private labour force.

And while many businesses fail in their first few years of operation, the total number of startups continues to climb. Between 2008-09, for instance, the number of startups was significantly larger than the number of discontinued or closed businesses — a difference of 22,000.

Several factors are driving the growth of entrepreneurship. One is the fundamental shift in the relationship between employers and employees — people rarely spend their whole careers at a single company anymore. Another is that many large companies recognize that it can be less expensive over the long term to obtain services and products from contractors rather than from employees. Finally, many people — especially young people — prefer an independent lifestyle; they place tremendous value on being able to determine their hours and working conditions.

A key trend in recent years is the rapid growth of female entrepreneurship. In 2011, almost 14 per cent of small businesses were solely owned by women, while more than 18 per cent were held in equal partnerships between men and women. Today, more than 820,000 Canadian women are self-employed and the number continues to climb, particularly among those younger than the age of 30.

Rosemary Brazeau joined the trend in 2011, when she opened Three Sisters Bakeshop in a residential Ottawa neighbourhood. After her longtime employer failed to survive the financial meltdown, she decided it was time to move in a new direction. Brazeau spotted an opportunity when a local business closed —  the second or third one to fail in recent years in the same small neighbourhood strip mall.

“I remember saying to myself, ‘I hope someone opens something that succeeds,’” Brazeau says. “That got me to thinking.”

Brazeau put her heart and soul into the project, renovating the space, securing suppliers, hiring employees, and negotiating leases and licences. When the bank wouldn’t loan enough money to finance the startup, Brazeau sold some property and dipped into her line of credit. Today, Three Sisters Bakeshop is a fixture in the neighbourhood. Each day brings a steady stream of locals dropping in for coffee, treats, and sandwiches.

“This is my second home,” she says. “I love being here with my customers.”

 – Peter Doyle

Originally published May 19, 2010

I submitted this letter to the Fraser Institute.

---

Dear Mr. Veldhuis:

Some time ago, I had concluded that the financial burden imposed on the Canadian family is onerous enough to see young couples limit the number of children they have to one, or worse, none.  

This is a huge problem for the Canadian economy because even a small drop in population, most importantly the working population, represents a drop in the tax base. That in turn, has huge repercussions on the infrastructure.

After years of consideration (including the articles I've added at the end, and attached), I concluded that the problem was a dishonest assessment of the cost of raising kids, complicated further by the onus placed on the parents, who the government assumes are the parents' luxuries. I explained this in the following essay.

---

The Generational Debt

A Proposed Option If Population Rates Keep Declining In Developed Nations

In the future, we will need to identify 'The Generational Debt.'

This isn't anything new, it's simply a means to identify something that has been largely assumed in the past.

Presently, we assume that all viable people will procreate on a one-to-one basis, so once they die, there will be a child filling that void. This is less and less the case today.

There has always been viable individuals who've died without leaving children. But now there is a whole subculture, the gay population, who are very viable, but completely unfruitful. If that wasn't enough, there is a growing segment of heterosexual couples who are also childless.

Finally, there are many couples who top out at a single child. None of this helps to maintain the current population.

But then, isn't the world coming close to being overpopulated, if it isn’t already? Why should we want to maintain the existing population?

Let us consider how the human population has managed to accelerate as it has at present.

Originally, primitive man was ruled by nature. The human couple spent much of their time foraging and occasionally they would supplement that with game.

The natural niche that our species thrived in took advantage of a largely un-prewired brain that allowed us to learn about our environment. This allowed us an adaptability that the rest of the natural world could only envy (If they could envy). However, this ‘largely un-prewired brain’ had also reached a critical mass in processing power that allowed us to develop symbols and languages, and subsequently consciousness.

Having attained language and consciousness, the social manifestation of this development was agriculture and civilization. With language/consciousness and agriculture/civilization, we attain the rudiments of our existence today.

As a consequence, a primitive farmer and his wife would have many kids because they could count on the land to feed them all. In return, they would be generating their own workforce to help them with the many jobs on a farm. This was true for North America as recently as a century ago, and is still true in many poor countries around the world.

Let us fast-forward to today: What happens in more affluent nations like North America and Europe? At least two things; agriculture is no longer the labor intensive work it once was, so the few modern farmers remaining no longer need or want large families; and two, urban couples can comfortably settle for one child, occasionally two kids.

The population in affluent countries is going downward, so they must supplement their numbers from the poorer countries where many kids are still the norm. Frankly this is shameless poaching of poor countries talent: by the time a person possesses the means to consider emigrating, they usually possess some schooling or other abilities that allow them passage into an affluent country.

Those poor countries really can't afford to lose those people because they would represent the middle class that largely drives economies. The affluent countries make a point of skimming for the cream of the crop, and do very little in return for those poor countries they've poached. They may have foreign aid programs, but too often these grants or loans don't have the value of the manpower they have lost.

To answer the question about overpopulation: we may still be increasing in number for awhile, but the reasons for doing so are being undermined by the gradual increase in personal wealth. Yes, this may yet take awhile, but we will top out. The third world is already reported to be on its way: there is now a global problem with obesity, including them. This presupposes that they have enough wealth to get obese.

Enter 'The Generational Debt.'

More than anything, this is a means to track the cost of our having finite lives.

There is a traceable cost for what it takes for a pregnant mother to give birth to a child, all the way to a point where that child is no longer a child, but an employed member of a society.

Likewise, once a person retires, we can easily track what the cost of that person's life is until s/he dies. Government pension plans do this routinely.

These two expenses PER PERSON represents the Generational Debt of that person.

So everyone has a Generational Debt simply because they were born into a society. Most people will manage to be financially viable for their working lives, and be able to cover their generational debt, assuming that they don’t have children.

This generational debt has never been identified as such. It includes all specialized child healthcare, childcare, and schooling all the way to gainful employment, and other expenses. Presently, only the parents and governments see these bills, and they pay them on the assumption that that child will do so in turn. As I'd mentioned, this is getting to be less often the case.

We have never identified this expense on a per person basis, and so many have bailed on it. The result is that this debt hasn't been paid for. A couple with two children are lumbered with onerous costs of housing/mortgage, childcare, schooling, child upbringing/discipline, concerns regarding child security (i.e. pedophiles, etc), post secondary school financing, and a raft of incidentals.

Given the average income, this will leave little room for that couple with kids to pamper themselves or each other. Finally, they can count on being on the hook for about two decades.

It is no wonder that the divorce statistics continue to get worse; this kind of load would cause stress in even the best mannered couple.

It is true there is no more a rewarding project than raising kids, but if you don't mind forgoing this (you wont understand why it’s as rewarding as it is until you do have kids anyway), then you can keep your cash and spend it on yourself.

Many couples suspect that they are in for a massive pill in having kids, so they opt for a single one. Normally, as a parent, this can be a very big, emotional gamble: you will be spending a great deal of time and energy and your emotional investment will be to the max, and should that one child die before you do, you will never know a more crushing feeling.

The safety net against this was to have more than one child. However, with the great strides in medicine, and the safer societies that we enjoy, the death of that single child is becoming less of a concern. So the population dwindles.

The population will eventually dwindle everywhere except in the poorest areas. Gays, childless or 1 child couples will continue to lumber their kids as they grow old, and there will come a time where societies will have to address this problem directly, not by simply liberalizing immigration policies.

It will be at this time you'll be presented with your Generational debt. Everyone will be equally on the hook for this debt. If you have the prescribed 2.1 children, then you wont actually pay money; if you have no kids, you'll need to cough up.

In order to make this ‘bill’ palatable to the general public, it probably wont be presented as a new bill to be paid. It would be much easier to present it as an identified component of your taxes, in a manner similar to the property tax ‘mil rate’: it would be the Generational component.

This is the only way childless people can understand why they need to pay for all the costs that go toward ensuring a stable population. While I'm presenting this Generational Dept as the solution to a dwindling population, the matter is much more complex: I address only the overall mechanism.

For example, a couple may opt to produce two kids, but go to no effort or expense to raise them. This requires other supporting social mechanisms. Then there’s the matter that child-rearing is probably the most demanding of ALL aspects of a parent’s personality – ‘problem parents’ are most likely to raise ‘problem children’, even if the corrective social mechanisms are all in place and working (which they aren’t).

Another concern is that we are beginning to witness the post war baby boomers move into retirement, and suddenly the second part of the generational debt is taxing the public purse, even with all the focus on Registered Retirement Savings Plans. Our governments have attempted to pre-empt this load with pension reserves and by offering tax incentives for savings. All of these are embryonic forms of this Generational debt.

Eventually, the money amassed from the collection of this debt will allow the birth/death process to be transparent to economic concerns, and will enormously simplify government policies that forever attempt to juggle generational priorities with economic ones. A government will be able to say, ‘We need to stabilize the population’ and set a Generational Debt (tax) rate that will allow stable funding for family focussed programs.

While this dept would be paid regularly and consumed regurlarly, a portion of it would need to go into a pension reserve. This reserve would be paid out as required to pensioners, but would be invested in mortgages to families and family-supporting infrastructure (i.e. health centers, etc.) that could also be profitable charging for non-family usage.

The mortgage rate would be based on inflation and administration alone, as in not-for-profit, so that housing for families would be uncoupled from business and non-family loans. Like this, a family could afford a house big enough for that family, instead of being fiscally penalized and left to live in less desirable (and more affordable) housing. There is a philosophical elegance to this mechanism: we would not be charging compound interest, a form of taxation on the future, on those who would chose to generate the future. This should find acceptance even with Muslims who eschew usury.

Finally, while the Generational debt would serve to keep children from living in poverty, in order to avoid seeing some couples turn into ‘baby factories’, there could be criteria to establish a couple's suitability as parents. Should they prove to be model parents, they could make this a quasi-full-time occupation that would be further financed by the government. Unsuitable parents would still be supported to the 2.1 kid level (2 kids per family with 3 kids for one in 10 such families). This should allay any fears of genetic predominance for any reason.

Whether this Generational Debt is accepted or not, it exists nonetheless. This essay only tries to identify it and make it work for those who need it, the family.

Global:ideas:bank

Thank you for your patience.

Joe Egerszegi

Toronto, Canada

---

Published march 14, 2007

Metronews.ca

Birthrate stalled below death-replacement rate
More families stopping after single child
Aaron Harris/Canadian press

Nine-year-old Graham Ritchie-Newbigin, centre, plays a game with his parents Iain Newbigin, left, and Sally Ritchie at their home in Toronto. The Toronto couple’s decision to stop after one child isn’t unusual in Canada, according to the recent census.

Sally Ritchie is the youngest of eight children, but when it came time with her husband to start their own family, she had no illusions about repeating the pattern of the stereotypical big happy family.

"It was either one or two, but after I had one, that was that," says Ritchie, whose son Graham is nine. "Nowadays, it’s very, very difficult to have more than one child and be sure that you’re going to be able to put them through university and provide them with the home."

The Toronto couple’s decision to stop after one child isn’t unusual. Statistics Canada’s latest census figures released yesterday show the country’s fertility rate, the average number of children a woman will have between age 15 and 49, stalled at 1.5., far below the 2.1 per woman it takes to replace the dying population.

Better contraception, career women who delay marriage and babies, and a divorce rate of almost 50 per cent are keeping the birth rate down. 

---

November 16, 2009 5:08 a.m.

Struggling to find a home
Vince Talotta/TorStar news service

Colleen Richards and her family — husband Phil and children Justin, 18 (not in photo), Jesse, 17, and Josie, 14 (not in photo), have moved five times in five years due to job loss and high rents in Brampton.

After five moves in as many years due to high rent and utility costs, the roof — literally — fell in on Brampton mother Colleen Richards and her family.

“It actually fell on my head,” says Richards of the day last spring when the soggy living room ceiling in the family’s mouldy two-bedroom apartment finally gave way.

“After all these years of struggling, it really struck me. We shouldn’t have to live this way,” says Richards, who has been slinging coffee at Tim Horton’s since 2001 when her husband was laid off from Chrysler. He has since retrained as a chef and is working in a restaurant.

“We’re hard-working people. We don’t mind working hard. We’d just like a fair shake.” But in communities such as Brampton, where subsidized housing is scarce, the Richards and their three teenaged children — like so many other low-income families — have few options.

“We were nearly homeless. But there are so many different levels before you become truly homeless,” says Richards, whose family was featured in a documentary film about homelessness in Toronto released last month by the Sky Works Charitable Foundation. “What is so troubling, is that ours is not a unique story.”

Some 647,000 Ontarians pay more than 30 per cent of their income on rent; more than 129,000 households are waiting up to 20 years for a social housing unit where rents are geared to income.

http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/local/article/370173--struggling-to-find-a-home

---

October 22, 2013 | 1:13 am

Why living alone at 30 isn’t just for lonely spinsters anymore

MetroNews.ca By Jessica Napier

I will always cherish the brief couple of years that I lived entirely on my own; it was a beautiful period of independence, self-actualization and cereal for dinner. And while I have no desire to be romantically unattached again, I do find myself occasionally craving the single lifestyle.

I miss the lack of accountability that comes with living alone and the ability to indulge in all of that secret, single-girl behaviour I feel obligated to hide from my boyfriend like painting my nails in bed while watching very bad reality television.

Worldwide, the number of adults living alone has tripled in half a century. For the first time in Canadian history there are now more single-person households than couple households with children. In major cities, we are increasingly alone together: domestically separated but profoundly connected by our communal urban experiences — in restaurants, bars, gyms, museums — and through social-media platforms.

In the new CBC documentary Flying Solo, producer and director Scott Harper examines the dramatic shift in our culture towards living alone — its origins, influences and the repercussions for our society at large. The documentary, which premieres Thursday on CBC’s Doc Zone, follows a diverse variety of individuals living alone in cities across Canada and the United States.

The major benefit of independent living is the selfish autonomy it provides; when you have your own space to come home to it can be “me time” all the time. It’s the freedom to do as you please that appeals to single dwellers, says Harper: “To go to bed and get up on your clock, to eat what and when you like, to travel and to spend time with whomever you want without having to check in with anyone.”

Of course, flying solo does have its downsides. Single-income households are inherently more expensive and can lead to feelings of isolation. Without roommates or a spouse, solitary residents can risk feeling alienated if they don’t take proactive measures to remain socially active.

But Canadian cities aren’t full of lonely spinsters and incorrigible bachelors. Instead, we are witnessing the emergence of a new breed of people in their 20s and 30s who aren’t rushing to settle down and procreate but are instead focused on nurturing their own individuality and spending time with their extended social circles of friends and co-workers.

We’re creating new urban tribes and debunking the traditional nuclear family model in the process.

“As a group, solos are reshaping the economy, politics, the environment and of course the future of the family itself,” says Harper.  “I think that there still is — and probably always will be — a desire for partnerships and kids — it’s just that now the stigma over opting out of being a part of that, and choosing to live on your own, is over.”

---

Now if you actually got this far, and you've considered what I've written here and you find NO validity in my arguments, even a short "Sorry, you got it all wrong" is welcome. 

I've been watching this issue for years and have yet to see how it would be unworkable, but then these are the efforts of a single person, and it's possible I may have overlooked something.

Again, thank you.

Proposed Model of the Mind

I proposed a model of the human mind on a forum dealing with schizophrenia. I suspect they wont know what to think of it: they're dealing with this illness from a genetic and brain chemistry perspective, while I likened the matter to computers. Here's my submission.

In my 34 years of self-investigation (about 25 of it fully documented), I've had reason to consider the structure of the mind. I'd like to present this to you. Please forgive the layman terminology. Also, I use computer terminology that I'll try to explain as needed.

The mind is approximately organized into two parts: there is what I've called the Operating System - that which directs us without (much) conscious consideration, and the Editor of that Operating System.

The Operating System is originally implanted with innate coding that tells us how to suckle, breathe, eat, sleep, have sex, etc. I call these the hardwired operational directives. When sensory input is of a suitably nature, one of these directives, or routines is triggered or initiated. We evolved this much in order to survive within raw nature.

Then some 10 thousand years ago, we develop language. In the mind, this represents an area where the motor controls for speech, the linguistic symbols, the auditory deciphering, and later the written representations are kept, largely in a single area (though I have NO idea if this translates into an actual physiological region in the brain).

If the Operating System contained the executable code that got triggered as the sensory input from the environment demanded, then the Editor manipulated the source code (linguistic structures) to fabricate pseudo-executable code.

In computer programming, someone writing computer code does so in a high-level language, then compiles that code to achieve the executable code that actually does the processing. Virtually nobody writes directly executable code, written in the binary or hexadecimal that the computer processor actually runs with; this would be an onerous task, and one that would only work with the one microprocessor it had been written for.

Our conscious minds are similar: our editor writes directions for us which may or may not work practically. What then happens is that we will experiment with our proposed pseudo-executable code, and as we see success through repetition, that pseudo-code will become 'compiled' and will become our operational directive for the next time we encounter the same circumstance for which we generated that new directive (behaviour).

Given a mind that typically has these two parts, there are ways in which this operation can be compromised. If the mind has too much noise in it from say excessive sensory input, this would compromise the ability of the Editor to form properly, much like when we are in such a loud, noisy environment where 'we can't hear ourselves think'. This would be the circumstance that would lead such a person to be considered autistic.

Alternatively, a mind can potentially have too little sensory input, and with a great deal of emphasis on communication skills, some minds may be prone to developing more than one editor. In such a circumstance, there would be the primary editor, the one with the motor skills to communicate, but then there could be secondary editors that could only speak to the primary one. This is where someone would hear voices.

What would such voices say? Since all these editors still deal with the same Operating System, when a person suffering this problem encountered a situation for which s/he had no suitable behaviour (executable code), where the single Editor would step in and try to think up a new strategy (or ask someone else how to deal with the problem), now there are, in effect too many cooks, each with their own idea how to fix the problem.

Furthermore, if the primary editor tries to employ a possible solution, the secondary editor(s) can denounce and ridicule the primary.

If this model is genuinely workable, what tests could be done to deal with schizophrenia? First, there would need to be a revelation discussion with a schizophrenic patient explaining about the secondary editor. Then strategies could be discussed on how to deal with them.

One strategy would be to simply ignore such voices altogether, since in a mind that isn't trained to deal with secondary editors, they will be VERY distracting.

In order to pad out/ignore the voices, sensory triggers can be heightened, and even sequences like singing musical passages or dance steps can help swamp out voices (all voices).

A trickier approach might be to harness those voices in the same way that any person might journal (tweet) their daily occurrences: think of that secondary voice as another person giving an opinion on the patient's life, BUT DOING SO COLLABORATIVELY. I have absolutely NO idea if this would work.

For that matter, I present this as an abductive model that I know I'll surely evolve in my notes.

What would happen if those notes suddenly got moved into my head? With discipline, it might be a very powerful behaviour-modifying tool...

I have no idea if they'll even respond to this. I'm betting it's WAY too 'left field'. Doesn't matter: better proposed than not.

The Pastoralization of the Modern Lifestyle

Western culture has reached a point in technological advancement where we have gone too far.  We are no longer bettering our our lives with more, more, more.  Today, we still think that we need more: a bigger house, a fancier car, more relaxation time, more pay, more sex, etc.  We now need to deal in quality, not quantity.

The fundamental problem we can't seem to address is that for all the modern trappings we are surrounded by, we ourselves are still the product of hundreds of thousands of years of evolution (or God's creation, if you like) and our bodies are designed to expect certain environmental limits.  Most notably, these limits deal with our physical energy usage and our eating.

Today, we have reached physical exertion levels that are scandalously low.  A person working in an office in front of a computer all day, who drives to and from work, and goes home in the evening to watch tv may get away with using less than 1000 calories in that day.

This has huge consequences in the health of that person as we've come to see.  All of diabetes, high blood pressure, cancers, and a host of other ailments stem from this problem. If this weren't enough, the problem is further aggravated by the foods we eat.  The first defining event that made us civilized was agriculture; most typically the growing and harvesting of grains.

Grains possess many nutrients, minerals, proteins and oils we need, however there is a great deal of carbohydrate that goes with it.  All carbohydrates, whether starch or sugars, eventually all break down into simple sugars, most usually glucose.  We have far too much glucose in our blood.  Exercise uses it up.  Conclusion: move more and eat less carbs.  Nothing new here.

The problem we have is with the self discipline necessary to do this.  We fail with alarming regularity.  So what is the fix?  Let me digress for a moment.

After the Second World War, the Allied Forces, who had won the war over Germany in Europe, wanted to see Germany rendered industrially neutered so that Germany could never contemplate any further technologically inspired conflict.  Basically, they (primarily FDR) wanted to see them left somewhat primitive, and technologically backward.  This was Pastoralization.

In a manner of speaking, this is what we will be needing: we need a measure of pastoralization in our lifestyles.  The Amish Mennonites live this way now, and though we may not be abandoning our cars and tvs in the near future, we can choose either to accept the natural demands of our bodies (2000+ calorie physical exertion per day, and hunter/gatherer diet) and discipline ourselves (with little success), or simply don't include those items that are effectively toxic to a healthy lifestyle.

We can try a third option, and that is to use technology to simulate what we need naturally.  This works to a limited degree because the nature that we look to simulate often possesses subtleties that we often miss.

An example may be a combination of an interactive treadmill that may be coupled to a shoot-em up computer game projected onto screens around the treadmill.  This kind of technology attempts to get people active and do so in a fun way.

Another means to get people active would be to build environments that incorporated pleasant ways to exercise.  An example may be a large office building with a huge internal atrium.  This atrium could spiral around at a gentle incline from ground level to the top.  To make the long spiral walk more pleasant, the sides of the spiralling atrium walkway could be heavily planted with exotic plants, perhaps even housing limited animal life like birds.  Finally, if this whole jungle walkway has a sprinkler system to water plants overnight, this may even serve as a fire exit.

My suggestions here are only to indicate possibilities; the intent is to adapt our environment to simplify physical activity without requiring us to go out of our way for it.

As for the hunter/gatherer meal requirements, we may see whole new services spring up based on fresh fruit and vegetable delivery services.  Presently, the produce that temperate climate communities get are fresh and tasty only when the local producers harvest.  Otherwise, many types of produce may look appealing, but don't taste anything like they look (tomatoes are notorious for this).  There may be local 'ripening' greenhouses and take imported produce and do a final ripening, if this is at all possible.  This is very much an area of growth (lousy pun, sorry).

Our meat diets could see some significant changes as well.  Wild meat has many more nutrients in it than does farm livestock.  Yes, it can be 'gamey' tasting, but preparations and recipes can correct or take advantage of that.  Also, there are whole ranges of other game that we may find questionable, but other cultures know to value.  For example, when was the last time you were served pigeon soup?  This is much more in keeping with the hunter/gatherer diet.

If the truth be known, we've only barely started to experiment with the many naturally available (not farm raised) meats.  The cooking industry has yet to unleash their inventiveness and make 'weird' foods desirable.

While we can adapt our environment to better suit our primitive needs, there will probably come a point where we need to effectively 'declare war' on what can only be called 'the Blob Lifestyle.'

What is the Blob Lifestyle?  Consider what we view most desirable today:  Fancy cars, large tvs, boats, planes, RVs, home amenities to reduce home workload, etc.  What's common to all of these?  They are all done sitting.  The Blob Lifestyle is a sedentary one; lots of 'ree-laxing.'

Under normal natural circumstances, this preference for relaxing is an important survival strategy - it ensures that we retain as much energy as possible, so that in times of famine, we don't squander what energy we've managed to accumulate (as fat). Clearly, this is no longer the case: we have far too much retained energy from our sedentary lifestyles and far too much relaxing.

Henceforth, this must become a big no-no in affluent societies.  We need revolutionary thinking that accepts our abundant energy supplies and our minimized energy usage.  Put bluntly, even after we have made as many adjustments to our environment as possible to get us active, we'll need to declare excessive relaxing as undesirable.

'You're relaxing too much.'

Social deficiencies in North America in 2009

What I'd like to present here are what years of meticulous social troubleshooting have allowed me to conclude.

When I first started this blog, I was hesitant to post this list because I wasn't sure how it would be received. Two things have changed since then: first, I've moved into a larger investigation where these predictions are only a subset of a larger project; and second, I'm not sure that there are many who bother to read this blog. So I'm not very worried anymore. Also, I dumped my pseudonym.

• Civilization has undermined a primitive motivation for the woman to aggressively pursue her man in order to avoid rape. This balance will need to be re-established. Since legalizing rape is socially abhorrent, the alternative will be for us to evolve a culture where the woman is assumed to be the pursuer;
  
  

• Family solidarity is seriously stressed because children are viewed as the luxury of the parents, and not as a prerequisite to the existence of civilization (and the economy in today’s terms);
  
  

• America, to the south of us, was lumbered by poorly conceived articles of incorporation such that their government is largely paralyzed, and the democratic process has been off-loaded onto their judiciary. The greater problem eclipsing this one, is that those same national documents (American Constitution and Declaration of Independence) have set the individual as the priority over the public good, resulting in a systematic imbalance between individual and social priorities.
  
  Romanticised historic reverence has dogmatically made this imbalance national folklore, though decades of progressive bristling has seen some small progress to re-balance. The most telling indicator of this problem is their high crime statistics, particularly for a western democracy;
  
  

• Public education is not underscored by the primary requirement for an entrepreneurial apprenticeship, which would enable all graduates to know how they’ll eventually fit into the economy, in addition to any passions or interests they may have;
  
  

• The modern western lifestyle has lowered the daily physical energy usage far below what our bodies need to maintain good health;
  
  

• Democratic principles need to trickle down into our smaller associations, most notably our businesses. The labour/management rift is a legacy of last-century rapacious capitalism, which progressive societies have identified as tepidly serving the public good, while engaging huge public assets and infrastructure.
  
  While it is universally understood that the entrepreneur who has birthed a successful commercial enterprise is entitled to the fruits of their work, there needs to be evolved relationships within these smaller institutions that doesn’t demand dissonance within the business;
  
  

• In a manner similar to the social demand made of everyone to serve on a jury at some point in their lives, this requirement will need to be extended to policing as well. We will need to establish what vocations have a socially interactive element to them (like bus driving, company managers, retailers, teachers, etc) and suggest modest police training as a requirement in addition to the primary job.
  
  Also, those people who gravitate towards lawlessness would similarly need to intern as an auxiliary peace officers in order to understand why lawlessness is unlawful. This would be an important part of their community service. This kind of engagement of the public in policing would undermine fears of rising totalitarian state-driven police forces, and would go a long way to reconcile gun ownership, particular in America, Colombia, and other western democracy-aspiring nations with high crime rates due to universal access to firearms.
  
  

This is the short list.