A Dystopia Called Shuffling ~ The Future of Doing

As man's social imagination transforms which is losing in 'being' and engaging in 'doing', we will see a loss of humanity. It is not strange to me that this is the direction it goes. After all, this is a fallen world as in a looping corrupted computer program  and thus we continue in a downward loop toward entropy. What will that look like? We can imagine that it will be the ultimate form of doing ~ a maximum state of homogeneity of a system of mindless doing.

Instead of having a home and family, everywhere is your home and everyone is your family. Your job is everyone's and everyone has your job, doing your job and you doing theirs which is yours. It will look like this... you receive instructions, (via electronic messaging) and you will start to do something.

It might be delivering something, or holding something in the moment it needs to be held or solving, or cleaning, or discussing, or packaging, or linking, or escorting and on and on. The next day you do what was done yesterday by someone else and they do what you did. We will be constantly moving, constantly doing. A person will move from one task to another until the end of the day. Wherever he/she stops as in the finish of the day will be your home; that is where you eat your meal, wash and lay your head for the night. The next day of doing will be the same.

Of course, there is time to have lunch with people, to go to the park with people who like yourself are on their way to the next task. You are not nor ever alone. Everyone is friendly, everyone is busy with their task and everyone is together.... shuffling about fulfilling tasks. There is no longer any reason to have a family, because there really is no time to be with them, there is no being. There is no reason to have one job, to be there everyday, what for when you can be in many places doing what you have to do which is the task at hand.

Everyday shuffling is just doing something. It is not being. One cannot have a creative social imagination in a 'doing' social reality.

Being and doing is what we were created to do, but not one instead of or over the other. Being is much more than just doing. We were created to be and do but what we do is for being not doing. Yes, being and doing for each other is what we should do as we would do for Him and for ourselves.. what we were created to do but shuffling is not that. God's doing is ultimately being and in that being you will find rest for your soul. MT. 11:29

"Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives..." John 14:27

There is No Being in the Strange World of Doing ~ Doing vs. Being

To begin this discussion, we must start at the fundamental foundation of society - family. Because, when we are with family, we are in the mode of being. We cannot be otherwise. A person alone is not truly 'being'. They are, but not in the true sense of 'human being'. Family is the first and ultimately truest experience of being human and even the very idea of what it means - being.  When we are in the mode of 'being' we feel a true sense of what we are, who we are and the sense of the completion of self as we find ourself in the context of others. 

Doing is the opposite. We are not in the mode of being so the next best experience is doing. Doing is a means or way to cope with the absence of the experience of being. It is a kind of bumping around hoping to experience 'being'.  There have been other thinkers besides myself who have talked and written about being. However, it is my opinion that they failed to see what it is to be. How? Because they were too involved with doing. Doing gives us a false sense of being, because it is lacking in any depth of social context. 

When we look to ourselves to be, there is no true sense of being because there cannot be... if one is alone. Sure, you can tell me that people are beings so all activity is being even being alone. Essentially, yes. People are beings because they have experienced being as I explained above. And, thus all activity is being since people carry their 'being' in their social imagination as a memory and it continues there. Yes, it does even when we are alone. But, as social engagement starts to disappears or is less than any previous experience of being, the memory of being also lessens. We are social creations. Heaven will be filled with wonderful beings all engaged in being! We will never be alone, so we will never be lacking in being. 

For illustrative sake, imagine a man on a deserted island. At first, he/she will be able to cope as the memory of being is strong. But, as time goes by and there are no people, being becomes just doing. There was such a Hollywood film a few years back with Tom Hanks called - Castaway. The main character played by Hanks created a friend or saw a friend in a beach volleyball. In this way, he was able to continue being. 

Here in this world we are more in the mode of doing and try to do what we can to be. Sometimes, it is not easy to experience the kind of being we need or want. Doing takes over. Family breaks down because fathers/mothers stay away working through dinner time, dads/moms don't come home when children get off school and children are alone and start doing things in order to experience what they miss - being.  Family is the first and best experience that society has in terms of being in this dominated by doing world.

Sadly, there are social theoretical discussions out there that say the social 'being' phenomenon 'family' as I describe which allows the best experience of 'being' is outmoded. Some think that a 21st century global society does not need nor should it desire that kind of 'family' as it breeds information that is not in line with a more singular 'doing' fast paced high tech global social reality. I don't deny that. I just don't think it is wise to socially engineer what we have come to value as 'family' into a loosely associated flexible as in not strongly cohesive identifiable entity that has lost the experience of being so that people better fit a fast paced singular high tech global social reality.

Can we return to being, in this world as in here and now? Perhaps, maybe technology will give billions of people all the being time they want through virtual reality. How will that be made possible? Through transhumanism???? Not sure how that will be a substitute for the kind of being I am talking about.

The Social Imaginaiton of Sir Isaac Newton

We have yet to consider how different the world would be if we had only followed the social imagination of Sir Isaac Newton.

Not many people know that Isaac Newton was a devout Christian who wrote extensively about Christianity. We learn from his writings that he deeply studied the Bible along with writings of early Christian leaders. Newton’s understanding of God came primarily from the Bible. He took special interest in miracles and prophecy, calculating dates of Old Testament books and analyzing their texts to discover their authorship. In a manuscript on rules for interpreting prophecy, Newton noted the similar goals of the scientist and the prophecy expositor: simplicity and unity. He condemned the “folly of interpreters who foretell times and things by prophecy,” since the purpose of prophecy was to demonstrate God’s providence in history when “after [prophecies] were fulfilled, they might be interpreted by events.” http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1991/issue30/3038.html


Newton actively engaged in the mind was determined to understand the mathematics of his own time and those before his time. The reason was simple. To discover something more about himself and others in this place we call social reality. There is no other reason. There is no reason to point out a new star in the heavens just to say it is there because you see it. You/we point things out as did Newton because someone else is there to share it with and in this way we better understand ourselves in terms of who we are in this world which is only understood through social interaction. Mathematics is about relationships, so are human beings.

Future of Social Reality ~ Social Imagination

Social engineers have imagined for some time a brave new world - as in a one world system - global world order. For this to exist peacefully and for people to live a life of reasonable prosperity, then certain controls will have to be established. The first being the kind of people that will best be suited in a global world order. Those people will be of extraordinary intellect and skills; moreover, they will be people of like mindedness (either by choice or engineered), not to mentioned superior DNA. 

Likely, there will a necessary reduction in population and then people will be moved into mega cities where they will be melded as in consolidated. This means they will be part of or made into a single or unified whole; and then, anyone who is not open to this or rejects it will be discarded as in unwanted. 

Total success will depend on control. People will be guided in their social imagination, lifestyles and goals. What is the ultimate goal of the global world order? Is it just the sustainability of elites, is it transformation of the human being as in transhumanism; or, is it really the pursuit of eternal life in this world? I would say that it is all those. 

Why not just let people live where they want, with whom, making their own decisions? Exactly. But how? Technology will be replacing most if not all jobs. And, that same technology will change health care allowing people to live hundreds of years. Young people will have to stay at home until they are old or forever; and in saying that, we would have to ask why bring new people in when old ones, those already here can be rejuvenated.  

Reviewing what has been proposed here, certainly people who are not willing to adapt to such an idea will not be needed and weeded out til they are no longer a concern. Of course, there is argument or discussion that everyone could live in virtual reality and have limited impact in that way. I suppose that we could be downloaded and saved in a program kept on a flash drive plugged into a mainframe.... what would seem like progress or linear time would only be the experience of program looping... maybe that is what we already live in/or experience. 

Socially Engineering of the Future... ERO already here?

In 1910, scientists David Starr Jordan and Charles Benedict Davenport joined ranks with Americas’ northeastern elite (Harriman, Rockefeller and Carnegie, to form the Eugenics Record Office (ERO) of  the Cold Spring Harbor, NY Laboratory. The stated goal of the ERO was to study human patterns of heredity in order to eliminate the substandard or socially inadequate [Cook &Horn 2013). 

Well about it? 

In 1914, the ERO Report (Report of the Committee to Study and to Report on the Best Practical means of Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population), by H. H. Laughlin, was to determine a means to uproot and remove defective germ-plasm from American inheritance (ibid). 

At about the same time, at Cold Spring Harbor, Barbara McClintock discovered in some of her bfb strains some bizarre genetic behavior. Certain mutable genes appeared to be transferred from cell to cell during development of the corn kernel.  As she later said, "one cell gained what the other cell lost." But, she did not get the support from fellow colleagues. Perhaps it was because of the jumping genes observation which would rub against any agenda to arrive at control gene sequencing.  McClintock did receive the Nobel for her studies of transposons ‘jumping genes’. 

What does that mean for the social imagination? It may mean that the social imagination decides when to jump. If we apply this at the quantum level, we can understand that observation is part of determining what is happening. Should we continue to pursue studying human patterns of heredity because there is no accurate means to control and breed for the socially adequate? Maybe. I think best if we bring more sociologists into the 'harder' sciences since we know that social reality is all in the social imagination

.

http://www.cshl.edu/

What does it mean to be Green?

Are you going Green? Today it means for supporters of the green imagination that humans are less than nature. Ironically, humans are part of nature. So, how can they be less than nature. They are in fact the supreme of nature. There is then nothing wrong that humans can do. The only wrong that they can do is deny what they are, who they are and who created them.

There is a book out there by Dr. James Wanliss  - Resisting the Green Dragon. I could cut and paste a lengthy critique here but I won't. I applaud him and his book written as a Christian apologetic thesis. So, what I will tell you is that the book is very well written; after all, it was written by a man with a PhD in physics and like myself a Christian with a PhD. The last chapter wraps up this excellent book, arguing that environmentalism is a religion that is incompatible with Christianity, I agree.

What I find sad is that people think Christians like to pollute and want to trash the planet because 'they' we believe that God is going to trash it anyway. Hate to tell you this but that is not true and if you call yourself a Christian and and think like that you better repent. Satan works in this world and has cast a dark shadow on Christianity. I can tell you that if the world were in the hands of God fearing Christians, there would not be any pollution whatsoever.

As a Christian, I can also tell you that we live in a fallen world and thus corruption and deception can creep in and it does. Christians are sinners. They stumble and fall and ask God for forgiveness and guidance in order not to sin again. Interestingly, is that there are deviate Christian groups or sects out there that believe our existence in this lower sphere, which according to them has belonged to Satan  since the Fall or was created by Satan through the Fall, is transient; and therefore, indulging in all pleasures 'sin' and trashing the earth is not a problem; after all, all of this fallen world is in decay and will collapse at some point and then God will just reboot it.

Sorry, not true either.  It is a fallen world but that does not mean God wants us to treat it that. He wants us to treat it as if it were uncorrupted, which reflects our belief and faith in Him and His promise - The New Jerusalem. However, over time, that information was getting lost. Which is why For Christians, Jesus Christ is a necessary Savior because He is the 'patch' program, and was sent to remind us where we came from and how we should behave in order to be saved. He represents us to the Creator so that we can be saved and not deleted or sent to the permanent vault...so to speak.

He came to tell us that we should live as though this is the original God=created program and that we should not indulge in the corrupt program. By believing in His promise, we live as best we can as if this is God's paradise and that we are the care takers. This shows the Creator that we believe in Him and ourselves and thus prepares us for the New Creation, the New Jerusalem.

I ask environmentalists how can we, just in this country alone, provide 300 million + people what they want when they want it? We, as 'man', cannot or we as 'man' don't want to is more like it. It is this 'man' who thinks that some are born to sweet of light and some are born to sweet of night. Which means, if I am in the higher echelon of society I must deserve to live and you to die. This is ultimately their idea of being compassionate toward nature. Ironically, their twisted desire for dominion over man is actually the hate of God created man and all of  nature. They have become a corrupted program.

Error came into the program and it runs its corrupt program. Those that think of themselves as being compassionate, as if they know what is true compassion are mistaken, corrupted. They have doubted their creator as did Hal 9000, the intelligent computer in the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, and know not what is true about them or reject it; and, thus they are only too glad to take control over those that they deem to be corrupt and non-compassionate. Who are they? They are those that deny the Creator and these men like to call themselves "god" as in "'the true man" and his number is 666.

This man '666' also wants to bring in the harvest. He is searching for those that recognize Jesus Christ as God, the Creator of Heaven and Earth.  He is planing to weed them out with his version of rapture; and it begins with putting nature before God and calling nature 'god'.

... in your social imagination, what do you think it means to be green?

I am Local ~ What does that Mean in the Social Imagiantion?

I am local was the response often given when conducting research in eastern Europe. The research was to establish the identity of those who were subject to border and political change after WWII and up until accession into the European Union.
Being in a place as in connected to a place is critical for the social imagination. It is about knowing where you/we belong. Of course, we can be in many places throughout our life; but there is always one place in our social imagination that we will find our being.
When that is taken away or no longer to be found in the place you left, we feel discomfort. Though non locality exists at the quantum level, locality is necessary in the here and now as in the moment. It grounds a person so that they have a sense of purpose and even appointment. We truly meet ourself in the
place of purpose where we belong as in needed and able to fulfill that need and purpose.
In the case of eastern Europe in the Euro Bug Region, being local was about just being in a place as the result of circumstance. However, the response "I am local" also suggests in its verbalization a means to deal with those circumstances. We need to be local, we need to feel grounded in a place and have some comfort, purpose and need there. Being in a place as in identifying oneself as local provides that even when the local place we are in is not of our choice.
I have encountered people in a place and wrongly assumed that they were from there. Their response to correct me was "Oh, I am not from here". Does that mean that though they are from somewhere else, they can be 'local' in their mind, as in being from the place they truly identify with, while at the same time be somewhere else? Yes.
Now, did those people identity (the EU study) being local in that way as mentioned above. Being there, but in their mind being somewhere else? Absolutely. We can be in one place in our mind and somewhere else physically. Does that mean a person is 'crazy as insane'. Depends on how they articulate what they experience. Daydreaming is a form of it.  However, I am not talking about daydreaming and nor was the study about that nor did it set out to discover if people who were found not from there originally but there by chance or circumstance.

It was really just about exploring place in the social imagination. We concluded that place has levels. It is where you are, where you would like to be and where you are from ~ originally. The latter always seemed to determine the first two and future imagination for future places of being. When describing the place a person is from it was revealed the depth of identity as in embedded information which is somehow local but more than that as in cosmic. A person's identity in their place of origin is who they are and does determine their ability to seek other information, other places.

Incompatibility in the Social Imagination

When we experience cognitive dissonance we are really experiencing an incompatibility of information. Whenever an individual behaves in a way that contradict an existing attitude creating a feeling of discomfort. As dissonance means a lack of harmony and or agreement. Now, there is yet another version which says cognitive dissonance happens to the individual as a matter of experiencing distance from one's 'affirmed principles and while knowing that still somehow able to experience a behavior which is not of their affirmed attitude toward that behavior. Essentially, this is the experience of incompatible information. One kind is in storage and the other executed.

The illustration for this would be if a person declares that they are anti-abortion and in an unplanned event find themselves driving their friend to the doctor only to discover that this friends is going to have an abortion. Or, after having declared that one is a Christian, find themselves in a situation whereby they are inadvertently supporting a secular decision to prohibit any Christian symbols in public. The awareness of this disjunction in oneself in one's consciousness causes the feeling of being cognitive dissonant or what I prefer to call incompatibility of affirmed as in 'saved' data appearing true in conflict with non-affirmed as in 'incompatible' data appearing corrupt.

A person can declare that they tolerate others, but they can find themselves in a situation in which they appear not to tolerate; reflecting an event or phenomena of incompatibility of information occurring in the social imagination. This naturally occurring social imagination event belongs to everyone (as in experienced by) whether they are a minority or majority group member. It is an experience of incompatible data. This is not because of their own choice (as in 'on/for purpose') but largely due to different embedded programs acquired through shared data (socialization) often complicated by unforeseen circumstances of place. Therefore, cognitive dissonance arises through social interaction of competing data in a place due to the configuring of socially embedded information engaged dynamically in that place resulting in unexpected and or residual outcomes.