14 February 2010

The Organization of "God"

Not sure how/if this will be on the Spearhead, so I've unlocked comments.

First off, Happy Valentine's Day 2010, everyone.

It is pointless for me to try and assume credit for this idea, because, logically speaking, credit for it will be irrelevant if it actually works. However, if you must know, I feel confident enough in this idea that I will reveal to you all my "secret identity." Some of you may find it ironic (or perhaps not so ironic) that I was once a Baptist, but I do not consider myself personally religious these days. Nevertheless, stories help people understand concepts, hence, the biblical allegories. Adopt this system and it will literally resolve almost any logomachy non-violently. If you accept the premises, you must accept my conclusion.

Whether or not you want to understand this idea is up to you, whether or not you understand why this is the case. Keep that in mind.

This "ideology" is non-competitive with other ideologies in the sense that it is designed to persuade, if the possibility of persuasion exists. If not, it seeks to distance itself as far as possible from sources of conflict. Period. It can tolerate multiple copies of itself (ie, a "Christian" grouping, a "Muslim" grouping, and a "Jewish" grouping - different flavors of the same truth) without trying to destroy itself.

Don't call me John the Baptist just yet. And please. Do not freak out looking for Jesus. "John the Baptist" and "Jesus" are, after all, just "ideas" we use to help us structure our reality - specifically, the part of our reality that understands how societies are made. I believe I have realistically wedded belief with science and the result is mind-expanding.

Let me get right down to it. When it comes to understanding this post, there are three basic guidelines I'd remind you of:

1) You must not get lost in the details. If you do not believe in the system, it will not work for you. Period. Belief is like fuel for the engine, here. In other words, you must submit to the system in order for the system to protect you. "God's Plan."

2) Trust the system, and it will trust you. "Free will."

3) Belief is synergistic. "Love one another."

This is a process, which means it occurs in a sequence. You might say, you have to start at Alpha, in order to get to your perfect Omega. In other words, you must be at 0. The good news is, dividing by zero is a valid way to arrive at zero from any input instantaneously. Try it out for yourself if you are not yet at zero.

If you believe that you are part of the "war" - you will be part of the "war."

Genesis: In The Beginning, God Made Adam

When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens - and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no man to work the ground, but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground- the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.


Start at step 0, and go from there.


A, B, and C obviously represent the three core ideals which would make the theoretically-ideal human. I could tell you what I think the ideals would be, but the whole point of the system is that, given a long enough time frame - it will guarantee the "ideal" traits work themselves out, so it's irrelevant to speculate as to what these traits might end up being. If you do not have enough of any one of these traits, you do not have enough "tools" to begin building "the form." Here's the kicker - all you need is the bare minimum to get started, and then you can start unlocking your P value, or, your maximum potential. Belief provides fuel for this engine. But you don't have to believe me - you just have to believe yourself.

Here's one advantage to this conceptualization - any group could define these values as they would like to, for the purposes of that group. For example, a nation may say that an ideal citizen would have "respect for life" (A), "respect for liberty" (B), and "respect for the pursuit of happiness" (C). A military force, such as the Marine Corps, may define those values as Honor (A), Courage (B) and Commitment (C). If I were to make my own group (call it the Transcendentalists), I would define A as "human communication skills," B as "belief in oneself" and C as "willingness to act on that belief."

But now we're starting to break my first guideline - getting lost in the details - because in theory, there exists the literal "perfect" person who can thrive in any context (or group, or nation, or job, or organization...). This does not mean that every person can be the perfect person, but any person may in fact be the perfect person (though the odds of any one person being perfect are, obviously, quite low).

But Adam Needed Help

So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh. Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman,' for she was taken out of man." For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. Adam lay with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man."


The ideal grouping for most humans is probably the "nuclear" family - man, woman, and child. I am not advocating that this grouping be structured in any specific way - I am merely saying it is important. Certainly people will take this idea and do stupid things - treating either the man or the woman as subhuman, neglecting the child and all the other "evils" humans are capable of - but just because the premises of an argument form are false (the contents of the family are jacked up), that does not refute the validity of the form (the structure of the family is still valid).



Try as hard as you might, but it is an (un)fortunate probability of human existence that at some point, you will have to deal with other people. However, it is known that if you find people "like yourself," your odds of getting along are increased. This logical model shows the best way to be compatible with people - be of the same "form" if not necessarily the same "contents." This is like a logical syllogism, where any argument you make using the 8 valid forms is "valid" even if the premises that make up the argument are false - so long as the form is correct, the contents are irrelevant. (Of course, a "sound" argument is both valid and "true," but that's neither here nor there.) And how better to "combine" than to attempt to combine into a form that is representative of all the individuals yet greater than any of them?

Even though we are now dealing with a group, the concept is the exact same as above - a group can be formed for any number of purposes and be placed into any number of contexts, and in theory, there is the perfect group that can adapt and thrive in any situation. For example, in the Marine Corps, a unit may be formed to serve an Air Wing mission, an Infantry mission, or a Maintenance mission - but there may also be an ideal group structure that could adapt to any of those missions and thrive. A group is not limited to being composed of only three members, but a group cannot be formed (ideally) without three members - and it is entirely possible to have less than ideal group structures (where the total group does not retain the outline of a triangle, or worse still, where you take two triangles to make one shape, an instance of more is less! 1 + 1 = 1).

The ability to be a "triangle" or ideal form is not determined by such silly factors as race, biological sex, age, or any other external factor. It comes from within.

What Happens When We Believe In "The Plan"

For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the Lord, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope... "I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go; I will guide you with My eye..." A man’s heart plans his way, but the Lord directs his steps.


This idea is unstoppable if you are a logical person. Spreading it, however, will take work and expertise. Some people will be more capable of others than spreading it, but ultimately that is irrelevant. It will spread - I have already "spread" it to many more people than I would have thought possible, in my private life. Each new person I spread it to makes me believe in the idea more and increases my efficiency in spreading it. Belief is synergistic and contagious.

I have developed several conceptual models of how to spread this idea, which I will now share with you.



This is what true, solo "Game" looks like at its most basic, functional components. You have a person who believes in an idea, and that person may be alone, "against a group." But so long as the group has the ability to believe in the idea, using proper technique, it will be possible to convince them of the validity of the idea. Through effective technique, those people will be convinced. The stronger the triangle's belief in his or herself in this context, the larger the halo effect of their belief (modeled by red circle), which is in competition with the combined "halo of belief" of the "opposition." I have modeled someone strong in belief and with good technique, and we can see that three people are at disadvantage against one "true believer." It is, however, possible that you will encounter opposition that refuses to budge in their beliefs, for whatever reason. For all effective purposes, they are incapable of believing in triangle. What to do? Here's the model:



I made the belief dominance even more obvious in this picture. Here the believer isolates those who can never agree, and engages in one way communication - after all, being "heard" is a privilege, and not a right, furthermore, if you cannot speak the same language (agree on important terms, such as "rape," "marriage," "patriarchy" to name a few) then why bother angering yourself or the other person? Respond as you must to be civil and respectful, but that's about it. Focus on those who you can help, and help them.

What happens when you "roll three deep in the club," or otherwise go out with your friends and encounter a group of people that may need some convincing? Here's what happens:

This is even easier than going it alone. After all, the group of believers has the advantage of numbers (1 + 1 + 1 = 5 versus 1 + 1 + 1 = 1. Don't believe me yet? Then you may never. Which is fine! You don't have to believe me.). The tactics are fundamentally the same as when going it alone, though obviously the details will change. But remember the first guideline? You can't get lost in the details. If you understand the concept, the details will handle themselves for you. What happens when you are out-gunned? See below.



Same tactics apply in the individual setting. Here we have a group strength of five (1 + 1 + 1 = 5) against a combined group strength of three. Here's how three well organized, true "believers" can out gun 17 ineffectually organized non-believers, using math:
  • (1 + 1 + 1 = 5)
  • vs.
  • (1 + 1 + 1 = 1) + (1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 1) + (1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 1) = 3
  • Because 5 > 3, 5 wins.
This is the power of organizational efficiency fueled by belief. Three "good triangles" can handily and nonviolently deal with seventeen "good (any shape except a triangle)." Do you believe yet?

The New Face of "Warfare," What Massive Nonviolent Conflict Resolution "Looks Like;" Do You Believe?



This is what "war" will look like. This is a model for "evolution" too. More on that in a second, actually. In any case, the best part of this is that violence is absolutely unnecessary for this to succeed, except in self-defense. Ideally, we would hope our opposition would not seek violent action against us, but we must be prepared for that grim alternative. This is an idea for which I can live and die - is it an idea for which you can live and die, too?

And don't worry, brothers (and sisters). Even if I (or anyone else who believes!) should die, the idea will live on:


Conclusions

I have the details. But it would be a waste of my time to talk about them if you do not believe in the idea. There is no question that this idea works - the only question is how fast it will work and whether you will be a triangle or whether you will be any other shape of your choosing. You do not have to be a triangle, you do not have to play my "game." But I am fairly convinced that my game will be a lot more fun to play (result in synergized happiness and contentment) than any other game. Of course, shitty games come out every day, and people still buy them. And nobody cares about my opinion when it comes to games.

The only question at this point that truly matters is - do you believe? If you do, just leave a simple comment... "I believe."

If you are having trouble believing, you may not be at step zero. If that is the case, I have three simple suggestions for you to be able to get to step zero:

1) Transcend your personal problems. Follow the conceptual process of rage, despair, release, and transcendence when it comes to doing this.

2) Transcend your organizational (family, job, nation, etc) problems. Follow the conceptual process of rage, despair, release, and transcendence when it comes to doing this.

3) Figure out how to divide by zero.

After that, make your own choice - one of those choices could be to believe. I suggest you try it, but remember, you don't have to. Just don't force your beliefs on me. Thanks! Here's what I think the world looks like, by the way:

6 comments:

vysota said...

To quote Rick James "cocaine's a hell of a drug".

J. Durden said...

I wonder if cocaine gets better the more you believe in it.

Side note: I've never done drugs.

J. Durden said...

To those who would doubt this, I caution you to remember - the devil is in the details. ;)

vysota said...

It's too bad you've never done drugs. At least then you'd have an excuse.

Anonymous said...

Thought provoking.
I absolutely understand what you're getting at here.
But from my assessment your model will only ever work on the small scale. If that is your intention then that's fine. But this model will not impact on wider society as many factors are not accounted for.

Allen Stenis said...

Dude those three triangles look like the tri-force from Zelda.