Homepage of the site 'What to do with your life?'
      

How to halt the slow degradation of the social fabric, which leads to civil war?

The four main causes of social fabric degradation are:

   •   

excessive rise in inequalities,

   •   

the proliferation of jobs that are not directly useful,

   •   

loss of trust in the elites,

   •   

and the rise of 'everyone has their own truth'.

Excessive rise in inequalities corresponds to an excessive concentration of the means of production. This concentration is made possible by the excessive size of enterprises (formerly, in a mainly agricultural society, by the excessive size of estates).

The proliferation of jobs that are not directly useful corresponds to the Parkinson's Law not being taken into account, and therefore not being counteracted, which leads to increased social tensions due to the growing pressure from the non-productive on the productive.

The loss of trust in the elites results from the poor quality of their decisions in terms of rigor of reasoning and of conformity to the general interest.

The rise of 'everyone has their own truth' is a greater fragmentation of beliefs linked to the arrival of weakly regulated social networks, which amplifies the undermining work started by opinion newspapers. Historically, the stability of the social fabric was not achieved by fighting beliefs, but by trying to impose one, often through religion. However, such a solution is no longer applicable since the second revolution of humanity, namely the technological revolution. Indeed, the modern scientific method that caused it also tends to discredit any belief constructed for political purposes.

To restore the social fabric, it is necessary:

   •   

To limit production entities to a reasonable size.

   •   

To fight Parkinson's Law step by step, by periodically refocusing each production entity on its reason for being.

   •   

To implement a mechanism ensuring a higher quality of collective decisions.

   •   

To fight against beliefs.

The book From Capital to Reason describes a social organization that covers these four points:

   •   

Production entities are limited to about a hundred people.

   •   

They are audited periodically to ensure their alignment with their reason for being in the smallest details.

   •   

A concept of strategic rating is implemented, allowing:
To better select who will be entrusted with collective decisions, and to verify their quality.
To make every individual aware of their actual capacity to conduct the analysis leading to a quality collective decision, i.e., not based on beliefs or special interests.

Comment

Regarding the four causes mentioned of the gradual degradation of the social fabric, the first (excessive rise in inequalities) corresponds to the feeling of injustice, the second (proliferation of jobs that are not directly useful) to excessive hierarchical pressure, and the other two (loss of trust in the elites and the rise of 'everyone has their own truth') correspond to the feeling of distrust.
The loss of trust in the elites corresponds to the objective loss of trust, linked to their unsatisfactory mode of operation, and the rise of 'everyone has their own truth' corresponds to the subjective loss of trust, linked to the rise of beliefs at the expense of reason.

Deepening

Regarding the proliferation of jobs that are not directly useful:
'What does Parkinson's Law teach us?'

Regarding the loss of trust in the elites:
'Why do humans reason so largely incorrectly?' and 'What conditions must be met to produce serious reasoning? Problem-solving.'
'How to make decisions conforming to the general interest?'
'Why is trust an indispensable and undermined component?'
'Are our politicians worse than their predecessors?'

Regarding the notion of beliefs:
'Why is every belief dangerous?'

And finally, regarding the proposed solution:
'What is important for living together well?'
'What social organization would allow us to live in harmony?'

 

2022-06-29 15:01:54 Cyril Fighting against beliefs AND disinformation

"La méthode scientifique tend à discréditer toute croyance"...
Le scientifique le plus brillant et intellectuellement honnête reste limité par la qualité des données sur lesquelles il appuie son raisonnement.

Le "chacun sa vérité" évoqué n'est pas seulement lié aux croyances, mais également à la distorsions des faits, voire à la création de faux faits (fake news).
Un raisonnement, même scientifique, ne garantit rien si les prémisses sont fausses.

Cet article de Fakir mets bien en lumière à la fois la difficulté d'éviter les manipulations de la vérité, et les compromis que nous faisons plus ou moins consciemment en tant qu'individus :
https://www.fakirpresse.info/moi-journaliste-fantome-au-service-des-lobbies

Sur la majorité des sujets sociétaux et politiques, la première bataille est celle des faits, que peu sont en mesure de vérifier. Plus subtil encore que la distorsion : la sélection. Je pars de ma conclusion, et je ne retiens que les faits - éventuellement vérifiables - qui me permettent de démontrer ma conclusion.

J'ai l'impression qu'établir ce que sont les faits est souvent plus difficile que d'évaluer la qualité de l'analyse qui part de ces faits...

New comment

On behalf of:

Message title:

Message: