Uplift Article on Wikidelphia

From Wikidelphia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Document Comment Forum The document below has a numbered blue "comment dot" () following selected items. Click a blue dot to add your comment regarding that item. A glasses icon () indicates existing comments on an item; click it to see them. Click the buttons above to navigate between views. You can add a general comment here: Add a general comment

Show comments in-line


      Draft document by Larry Victor   October 2, 2010 2

This is intended as but one chapter in a larger document about UPLIFT.

This is not an “abstract” or summary of this larger document. The term “abstract” is used in the sense that this is one, of many projections, or “abstractions” from the whole. Major and significant features of the whole UPLIFT conceptual scheme are missing in this document. 3


      This section could stand alone, and be expanded. It presents a context for comprehending UPLIFT in terms of a new model for basic reality, the evolution of humankind, and the rise and fall of civilizations. 4

      This section should be heavily illustrated with dynamic diagrams demonstrating visually the social networking and connectivity concepts and the trinity model of self/data/world. 5

      This present version is a very rough draft.


      All our explanations about things in our environments are models, or internal representations, simplifications, abstractions from an assumed “deeper reality". 7

      Actually, this is all we can ever know about anything. And anything we say or write about everything is about a model. 8

      Some of the time we don't get into trouble when we assume our model is the whole reality. 9

      But often we do get into trouble; especially for things we can't actually point to, such as societies and economies and populations. 10

      So, I propose here a simplified model of humankind on Earth.  I will add different layers to the model as we go along. 11

      First imagine a vast network where each node in the net is a person alive on planet Earth. But, we won't first imagine them where they might be on the Earth's surface, but simply as a network where each person has different kinds of links with other persons. 12

      This network changes as people live their lives, connecting up with others, and learning about others. 13

      We can imagine many different types of links between person nodes. 14

      One kind of link would indicate that those persons are in direct synchronous contact, such as F2F or on telephone or in computer chat. 15

      We could change the color, texture, width, etc. of each link to represent different aspects of the synchronous contact. 16

      Another kind of link would indicate asynchronous contact, again with a variety of qualities of contact. 17

      A totally other kind of link would represent a person simply knowing of another person, never having met them personally. 18

      Some of these links could be of people observed, extensively, in the media. Others might be authors, etc. 19

      We don't need to go further into detail.  We could create our network as detailed as we like - in our imagination. 20

      There is a scientific study of these types of networks. 21

      A recent book, Connected:  The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives by  Nicholis Christakis & James Fowler. 22

                        Christakis on TED: http://www.ted.com/talks/nicholas_christakis_how_social_networks_predict_epidemics.html?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2010-09-21&utm_campaign=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email 23

                        Example of polarization in social networks of red and blue blogs in the USA.   24

      C:\Users\Owner\Searches\Pictures\My Scans\2010-10 (Oct)\WEB-RED-BLUE0001.jpg 25


        With special tools for analysis, these social networks could identify those living in families, working at a common place of employment or attending the same educational classes, or any other grouping or organization were persons come together.  All patterns of interpersonal communication could be identified. 26

      Remember, this is an imaginary model; although some rather large social networks are actually being studied.  To actually make such a model real one would need a powerful surveillance system with equally powerful data processing tools.  But, even if we can't actually manifest this model, we usually assume that such a changing network is a fundamental pattern of humankind. 27

      It must be stated that there are enormous gaps between (1) having the recorded data of every persons social network, (2) being able to process, present, and analyze this data, and (3) being able to attempt to somewhat influence and control individuals and social networks. 28

      Selective individuals and groups could be affected; but the image of a full control of the social network of most individuals is well beyond contemporary competencies, and may be theoretically impossible. 29



      Now let us stretch our minds a bit and examine in greater depth the nature of each node, each person. 31

      First, imagine that we had a complete record of everything each person did, including what they may have experienced (read, viewed, etc) and created or produced.  All data about that person would be on record somewhere. 32

      Some, but not all, of this data is what many are concerned about re "identity theft". 33

      This might include data from physiological measures of the person's body and brain. 34

      We will postpone consideration of how this data might be collected, stored, or accessed. 35

      However, none of this data is a component of a person, as a biological being. It is external. 36

      Second, imagine each person as an Autopoietic Entity, according to the views of Chilean biologists Maturana and Varela. What is of concern for us here, are the conscious experiences of Autopoietic Entities. 37

      We model each person as an open physical system, of extraordinary complexity. 38

      In terms of our first model of data records, we could model the detailed biological structure and processes from molecule to organ.  We could record the intake of air, water and food and excrements. We could know what external energies were impinging on the being's sensoria, and record the patterns of stimulation as they move through the neural networks, and record the associated behaviors and reports of conscious experience. 39

      Yet, ALL of this is within the first model of data (although some of this date could be part of sensoria stimulation, as feedback). 40

      An Autopoietic Entity is imagined to BE, to EXIST as itself, in itself.  It changes. For humans, we start as fertilized single cells (from the merging of two other cells - life does not begin at conception, it continues). Embryonic and fetal development occurs until birth, and then there is growth, maturity, eldering and eventually death. But, again, this is from the external point of view from the data.  For the Autopoietic Entity there is just being and change. 41

      Conscious experience is part of the Autopoietic Entity.  It cannot be observed as data; but behavior can lead to reports - which are quite different "things" than the experiences themselves. 42

      Physiological data can correlate with data from reports of experiences; but neither of these ARE the experiences. 43

      Third, the conscious experiences of Autopoietic Entities have pattern and content.  Reports of some of these experiences flow through the social networks and are physical stimuli leading to further experiences.  A powerful feature of Autopoietic Entities, called "cognition", organizes the information in these reports into "constructed/woven worlds". 44

      This is NOT done by the consciousness, nor directed by the experiencer. I shall call this fundamental process "Worldweaving". 45

      All our conscious experience is in the (unconscious) context of our inner constructed/woven worlds. 46

      We never experience our worlds; we experience only small figures in the gestalt of the contextual ground (which it itself but a small part of our whole world). 47

      The conventional term "constructed" is problematic as it implies an intentional "making" or "producing". 48

      Although ancient persons were aware of this, most people believe in a "naive realism", where they misinterpret their experiences as of an external, objective, world.  With the best of our knowledge, we can only experience ourselves within our own constructed/woven worlds. 49

      When being's share the same space, and can point and gesture in agreement, it is usually safe to treat our experiences as of a shared external environment. 50

      Our brains probably evolved with this assumption hard wired.  It is only with the advent of advanced human cognition that the assumption of "naive realism" causes great difficulty. 51

      Now, there is ”circularity" in this model of a trinity of being: data/self/world. 52

      This trinity model is itself a product of looping between the three models. Data are essential ingredients for experience and for the construction/weaving of inner worlds. Worldweaving is not consciously initiated or performed; it is intrinsic to the reality of who we are. Yet, all what we do is totally dependent on being in context with our created/woven worlds. 53

      In the context of this model, we humans are but a stage (maybe even an early stage) in the development/evolution/emergence of COSMOS. 54

      COSMOS = the   {....whole..Holistic..WHOLE....} -- I can say no more of relevance. 55

      We should not be arrogant and assume that we can untangle this knot. 56

      But, by accepting what we are, to the best of our abilities, we can be part of the continued emergence of COSMOS. 57

      So, our initial model of a vast, changing social network as been mystified with this trinity model of each node, each person. 58

      Personally, I view myself as a trinity:  Larry/LJV/nuet. 59

      Larry = my physiological and mental being. 60

      LJV (Laurence Joseph Victor) is my personal data in media and cyberspace. 61

      "nuet"  is the name I give to my internal woven world. 62

      nu = an alternative to "new" (changes in the Here&Now referenced to what has been). "nu" refers to changes in the Here&Now referenced to what might be. 63

      et = extra-temporal (aka: extra-terrestrial), explorer-in-time, an alternative-human, emergence/transformation. 64



      It is discomforting to many to lose the security of a common external world. Fortunately we can regain that security when we accept that worlds are not composed only of material (matter and energy), but also of information.  Information is the foundation of what we exchange in our communications and what we use as components for constructing our inner worlds. 66

      Our ideas and theories about the material world are represented in information. 67

      In your experiential fields you encounter physical patterns created by others (and yourself): semiotic structures. 68

      OTHERS..... 69

      Although, autopoetically, all we experience is ourselves, there is ample evidence in our experience for the existence of others. 70

      But, we can never experience these others directly - at least through commonly accepted means. 71

      Some will claim, through telepathy or other mystical experience to directly experience others. 72

      But all we have is their data reports. 73

      To date, there are no means to confirm that the experiences reported were "direct". 74

      There appears to be an emotional drive for many for "direct experience". 75

      This may be "natural" until a person has learned to comprehend the more complex reality, and that "meaningful contact" with others remains possible even though it can never by "mythologically direct". 76

      One can explore the potential negative consequences of "direct experience" and conclude that it is "good" that we can't have it. 77

      Humberto Maturana (author of Autopoiesis) defines "love" as the unconditional respect for the existence of others. 78

      The exemplar of these semiotic structures are TEXTS, but they also include architecture, landscapes, paintings and other art forms, music and assemblages of all the above, which compose the texture of culture. 79

      I shall call all such physical structures, created by humans that when perceived by other humans generate "meaning", SEMIOTIC STRUCTURES. 80

      What is very special about semiotic structures is that they can be replicated and copied with assurance that the PATTERN is preserved and can be agreed to be the same by different observers of the semiotic structures. 81

      To my knowledge, these features of semiotic structures have not been yet acknowledged in "The Literature" (a collection of semiotic structures). 82

      A common aspect of material reality is that you can never enter a river at the same point. 83

      Each time you observe a physical object it is at a different time and may have changed. 84

      This is not the case for semiotic structures. 85

      Different persons may have radically different interpretations and meanings to a given, commonly observed semiotic structure; but they can always agree that the physical pattern of that structure is the same for all. 86

      Everyone can be trained to identify accurate copies from those with variations. 87

      Different persons may disagree as to whether small details in an observed semiotic structure are part of the defined pattern. 88

      But, they can agree as to what is to be considered the pattern for interpretation. 89

      I discovered this in an experiment where I asked math phobic persons to copy accurately very complex mathematical expressions (and text in languages using different scripts). I expected that many wouldn't see details (such as subscripts, and 2D spatial arrangement of symbols). I was surprised that everyone could accurately replicate even the most complex patterns. 90

      Initially some would ignore certain features, but when the criteria were full replication of all details, these ignored features were recognized. 91

      Naive realism has caused humankind its primary difficulties, as it clouded our ability to accurately assess reality. 92

      In the future we must abandon all attempts to discover an ultimate physical or social reality, as that is impossible. 93

      What we have access to are our semiotic structures. These can be preserved, copied and made available for all to see and study. 94

      If you think about it, all that you know about your world and universe you have gained from semiotic structures. 95

      Semiotic structures are part of our local observed environments. 96

      They provide the context for your constructed world where you find meaning in all your experiences - of wilderness, of sunsets, of fun gatherings of people. 97

      When semiotic structures lead to conflicting interpretations, there are information processing means to gather all relevant semiotic structures and compare them. 98

      Not necessarily to decide on one interpretation, but given a specific situation where a decision of action is needed, as set of actions best fitting the data at that time can be recommended 99

      SUMMING UPi 100

      In this circular complexity, everything we say is limited to the trinity of realities. 101

      All communication is an exchange of semiotic structures. Yet the actual experience of the semiotic structures is within our own woven world. We must interpret semiotic structures in the context of these worlds, which can continue to change, evolve and emerge, in part due to what we perceive. 102

      We continue to talk as if there is an external world, comprised of others.  Actually there is a COSMOS beyond our woven worlds; it is only that we cannot directly experience it. Yet, we know it is composed of others. 103

      We do have knowledge about others and some things beyond ourselves; but this knowledge comes from inference from our own woven worlds and not from direct experience. 104



      Imagine our social network showing the evolution of humankind, from tribal communities and hunting/gathering to the formation of early civilizations, the modern rise of globalism, and our contemporary Crisis-of-Crises.  Most of this detail will be left for later. 106

      The success of tribal communities and agriculture resulted in communities growing too large for tribal viability, communities dividing and organizing as networks of similar communities, and communities of diverse cultures being forced to interact in "relative peace" by tyrannical methods. 107

      The xenophobia of tribal communities was constrained from overt conflict, by default, by the force of authority. 108

      Societal evolution emerged without much deliberate intention, and without clear comprehension of what was happening. 109

      Very roughly: social networks of individuals form communities & networks of communities organize into societies. 110

      Constructed worlds rationalized what was being done, rather than providing any intelligent guidance. 111

      This is consistent with Leon Festinger's theory on the resolution of cognitive dissonance: dissonance is usually resolved by a movement of the perspective or worldview to match the behavior. 112

      Idealists' belief that once "awakened" to new ideas, most people can change their behavior is empirically false. 113

      Very special conditions are required for the resolution of cognitive dissonance to be made in favor of new ideas. 114

      Only today are we equipped to provide those special conditions. 115

      The default scenario was the rise of CIVILIZATIONS. 116

      “Default” meaning that lacking the knowledge and insight to act otherwise, humankind confronted with tribal success and tribal xenophobia, drifted towards the only stable societies had the characteristics of civilization. 117

      CIVILIZATION was/is a system of class distinction and power. A small elite, using a bureaucratic technology, coordinates the actions of the masses for the benefit of the elite (and those working in the bureaucracy), and suppress revolt of the masses. 118

      All civilizations eventually become unstable; but without viable alternatives, what emerges from the ashes of a civilization was another civilization. 119

      A paradox of civilization is that concentrated power successfully suppresses tribal rivalries, as demonstrated in Tito's Yugoslavia, Sadam's Iraq, the USSR and modern China. The disintegration of the USA in the 21st Century into polarized factions follows this pattern. 120

      Humankind has yet to learn how communities with radically diverse cultures can interact peacefully and organize as viable societies. 121

      Until this is learned, human evolution must cycle through the formation and collapse of civilizations. 122

      Civilizations survive/thrive by their ability to control the semiotic structures and the indoctrination of (almost) everyone (elite, bureaucracy and masses) to weave "consistent" worlds. 123

      Civilizations collapse when their technological infrastructure becomes unstable and is unable to sustain the overarching, indoctrinated and propagandized "culture". 124

      The rise of technology, first with energy and then with information processing, has greatly disrupted previous historical processes. 125

      The Internet and computers have both (1) provided the elite with almost unlimited power and (2) provides the human population with the means to move beyond civilization. 126

      The outcome is uncertain. 127



      The consequence of civilization is to severely suppress the actualization of a viable phenotype from the human genotype. 129

      GENOTYPE = the inherited (DNA) potential distributed in the human population. 130

      A few are born geniuses, and a few are born retarded. Given a healthy pregnancy, most newborns are healthy and viable. 131

      Most of the inheritances we are concerned with are for propensities, with a variation distributed in the population of newborns. 132

      There is no valid Nature/Nurture debate. Nature provides propensities, Nurture selects which traits are to manifest or not. 133

      That civilization manifests some very negative traits for the majority doesn't imply that many of these traits may not manifest with alternatives to civilization. 134

      PHENOTYPE = the development of traits of living humans, in their environment; a distribution of features of all living humans. 135

      The phenotype contains distributions of persons suffering, dying unnecessarily, starving, in deep poverty and stunted and retarded in cognitive development. 136

      Even the elite and the most privileged in civilization are deficient in many competencies within their potentials. 137

      The potential genotype of humans is awesome; the actual phenotype is a temporary tragedy. 138

      It is unlikely that a species can survive with such a suppressed phenotype. 139

      Civilization's most humanistic visions call for a simple rising of the masses to a level of passive subservience to civilization, everyone in peace, "educated" and "employed", but minimally aware of their real potentials. 140

      In civilization, only a very small elite are assisted in partially actualizing their genetic potentials. 141

      Democracy, in civilization, is relegated to periodic voting on issues and candidates controlled by the elite. 142

      Today, our Crisis-of-Crises - on honest analysis - requires the mobilization and training/education of a very large percent of the population, to both actively create what is needed and for others to not oppose these changes. 143

      UPLIFT is a process/scenario to quickly move the DISTRIBUTION of human competencies to a level required for multi-millennial survival/thrival of a new Humanity in harmony with GAIA. 144

      UPLIFT is a process/scenario whose objective is to make the manifested phenotype commensurate with the potentials of the genotype. 145

      UPLIFT directly challenges the premises of civilization: that special elites, aided by a bureaucratic technology, must rule the vast majority - who can never be lifted to requisite competency, because they are intrinsically inferior to the elite (according to the constructed worldview of the elite). 146

      In our trinity model, civilization severely suppresses the Worldweaving processes in everyone, but especially the vast majority, rendering them subservient to the rule of the elite.  But, the elite also are severely retarded. 147



      Again, reality is much more complex than models. So, in simplicity, most organizations or institutions in civilizations have the same basic format: elites/bureaucracies/workers-consumers. 149

      This pattern would be evidenced in an analysis of social networks and semiotic structures. 150

      But if we looked in greater detail we would discover a fine structure: small social networks {cogangs} within organizations that don't follow the normal organizational flowcharts and where membership in social networks often overlaps many different organizations. 151

      I call these "conspiratorial gangs" or "cogangs". 152

      Cogangs probably have many features of early tribal communities, with some obvious differences, as well. 153

      I have been motivated in my cogang model by the work of Peter Dale Scott on "Deep Politics". 154

      Cogangs view the whole of humankind as an environment for them to prey upon for mutual benefit. 155

      Youth gangs and drug cartels are versions of cogangs, as are those embedded in the highest levels of human society, e.g, bankers and CEOs. 156

      Cogangs are fluid in both membership and their coming into and going out of existence, in temporary collaboration with other cogangs, and often engaging in cogang competition and open warfare. 157

      The movement of personnel between governmental agencies and corporations occurs through cogangs. 158

      I use "conspiratorial" in a general sense that the members of a cogang are not normally open to others as to their intentions or strategies. 159

      Probably many of the false flag actions and assassinations often attributed to a "conspiracy" within an formal organization are done by cogangs operating within different organizations. 160

      Large gatherings, such as Bilderbergs, are not themselves conspiracies, but are venues where cogangs can mingle with their representatives. 161

      One joint conspiratorial action of all cogangs is to totally discredit all serious investigation of "conspiracy" and to brand "conspiratorial thinking" as the highest level of stupidity and foolishness. 162

      Although organizations are very real in one sense (e.g., the constitutional identity given to corporations) they are quite mythological in another sense. 163

      Many people treat social organizations, in the context of naive realism, as if they were objects with clear boundaries. 164

      A superficial model of reality is that these "organizational objects" interact with each other; and that to change society we must change how these organizations function and interact. 165

      However, many of the most significant acts by organizations are not instigated or executed within the formal system of the organizations (except in retrospect), but are manipulated by cogangs. 166

      Thus, so called formal means of people influencing organizations (both public and private) is often futile. 167

      Thus, the processes for change in conventional social reality, reform and transformation, are not really viable for significant change. 168

      Reform is a means by which the organizations of civilization change and adapt to each other. 169

      But, the high frequency of tyranny, imperialism, and war demonstrates that the cogangs are quite willing to sacrifice multitudes for their narrow, personal gains (although usually embedded in deeply believed ideologies). 170

      The upshot of all this is that humankind cannot transcend civilization by any action within civilization. 171

      And, it is a sacred tenet of Western Civilization that the ONLY SAFE means to change is from within. 172

      Thus, from the perspective of civilization, UPLIFT isn't possible and even the idea must be suppressed. 173



      Again, within our abstract model, we can imagine the social network of individuals change from loose and disorganized associations; changing until it reflects the characteristics of organizations characteristic of civilization. 175

      Throughout the rise and fall of civilizations we might observe the emergence of new movements and organizations, which eventually transform the pattern of organized organizations. 176

      The movement from a few followers of Jesus to a viable movement of "Christians" to eventually become a ruling bureaucracy in Europe is a story yet to be comprehended. 177

      A major factor in social change is technological innovation. 178

      E.g., as described in the Toffler's book, POWER SHIFT. 179

      We would see organizations emerge and form and link into the networks of pre-existing organizations. 180

      A few of these new organizations would have major transformative power over the organization of organizations. 181

      We must, in this analysis, remain alerted to the influence of conspiratorial gangs (cogangs) throughout history. 182

      It is through cogangs that unique persons at unique moments can wield awesome power. 183

      Tolstoy's query as to the competitive role of individuals and collective processes is resolved: that both are important.  At special moments, special individuals can have great impact.  However, their momentary (quantum) impact is usually quickly dampened by more traditional processes - even though their action did change the course of history. And, their special powers are augmented by the special circumstances of the moment that they are able to use. 184

      Some convergence and seeming organization may be observed in the data which never coalesced into traditional organizations. 185

      Usually these convergent social network patterns plateaued and never impacted significantly the progress of civilization. 186

      Actually these periodic "infections" of mainstream are explicitly attended to, and after each "infection" is suppressed. 187

      THE SYSTEM learns and prepares to better confront future "infections". 188

      In analogy, this is an exemplar of improper use of antibiotics leading to bacteria developing resistance to antibiotics. 189

      Unfortunately, the limited comprehension of activists (over history) to their real effect on systems, has actually led to increasing the power of establishments. 190

      This has accelerated in modern times amplified by the use of computer systems. 191

      The changes in social networks representative of UPLIFT will be qualitatively different from what has occurred throughout the history of civilization. 192

      Explicitly, UPLIFT will NOT attempt to reform or transform existing systems, for significant change. 193

      UPLIFT may occasionally attempt minor actions against establishment actions so as to better facilitate UPLIFT actions; but these are never with the intention to significantly reform Establishmenst. 194

      The goal of UPLIFT is to Support, Enable, Augment, and Facilitate (SEAF) a totally new emergent pattern of organization in new, emergent social networks to a new global system that REPLACES the Old Order with a well crafted, whole-people-supported, new imaginative and scientifically viable alternative to civilization. 195



      Although the viability of civilization has been critiqued by a few throughout history, it is only in the past few decades that distributed human knowledge has reached a level to permit humankind to transcend civilization. 197

      This distributed knowledge is not yet organized in useful formats, being locked into the competitive ideologies of professional disciplines. 198

      Our ancestors should not be blamed for not transcending civilization. 199

      In analogy with individual human development, humankind is more like an infant than an adolescent.  Humankind had/has no parent.  Our evolution/emergence, by necessity, has been experimental, WITH OURSELVES A CAPTAINS OF THE EXPERIMENT. 200

      We can compose scenarios where the very ugly happenings for human persons during the multi-millennial era of rising and collapsing civilizations can be viewed as necessary "growing pains". 201

      This is little consolation for those billions who experience the suffering; but we must reflect that in our own embryonic development, from first fertilized cell to newborn, many of our own cells intentionally die (apoptosis) as our whole grows and develops. 202

      We start imagining the social network, globally today.  Without going into detail, the patterns are disturbing; although many will disagree. 203

      Almost all semiotic structures projecting future changes call for reform, or transFORMation. 204

      As Daniel Quinn as pointed out, Western Civilization has been reified, a sacred and absolute mode of reality, permitting NO alternatives. 205

      Historically, efforts of reform usually are adopted and civilization continues; reforms never have the intention of altering the basic ideology of civilization. 206

      Today the corporations control the media and educational systems sufficiently to effectively suppress any movement of ideas critical of civilization from small minority fringes to majority populations. 207

      So far, in discussing this model, we have focused on the changing patterns in the data about social networks. To better comprehend UPLIFT, we need to add the changing patterns found in recorded semiotic structures: what humans have reported what they believed about reality and themselves. 208

      What we find most striking is how civilization very significantly retards the learning and cognitive development of almost everyone. 209

      Even the small minority, who are most advanced, on examination, are also highly restrained by the milieu. 210

      Most persons adapt, adjust, and plateau early to their environment. Even when the environments may suddenly shift, as for refuges, there is usually a quick adjustment to the new situation. 211

      Some may take advantage of their environments while others may simply accept what they can find. Yet, both quickly settle down to a stasis. 212

      Even those who become aggressive predators adjust to that pattern. 213

      Many persons are open to learning what will enhance their lives within their adjusted pattern; but make little effort to significantly change their environment. 214

      Major exceptions are revolutionary movements, where an ideology of oppression leads to organizing in opposition to their rulers. 215

      However, on deeper analysis, revolutionary ideology is highly constrained by opposition to the ruling ideology and seldom gives sufficient attention to constructing a viable alternative. 216

      Revolutions have always leaded to but another variant of civilization, as the default mode. 217

      Revolutionaries are always so busy and preoccupied by their struggle that all attempts to improve the knowledge and competencies of their people quickly revert to propaganda. 218

      In UPLIFT we will observe parallel and interactive changes in both the social networks and the semiotic structures of those participating in UPLIFT. 219

      UPLIFT involves much more than a "raising of consciousness" or "awakening". Both of these are very superficial changes in perspectives, and by themselves seldom lead to significant growth or progress. 220

      UPLIFT may be viewed as a sequence of awakenings, each facilitated by new technologies of social networking that have embraced a bootstrap strategy for both future changes in persons and collective uplift of the whole human population. 221


        A MODEL FOR UPLIFT 222

      Here we will speculate what future humans (or alien observers) might discover in changing patterns of social networks and semiotic structures (in cyberspace and other media) as evidence of the emergence of an UPLIFT process. 223

      This model will not discuss factors that might make such a process both possible and potentially viable today. 224

      The ideology of civilization will claim that UPLIFT is both impossible or highly unlikely, and ultimately undesirable. 225



      The social network for UPLIFT would initiate with a small number of persons, who prior to the initiation of UPLIFT would exhibit some unique patterns representing design and preparation for the formal initiation of UPLIFT. 227

      These preliminary behaviors in preparation for UPLIFT will be discussed elsewhere. 228

      These ARE very important, and may be the primary challenge for UPLIFT.  For, once UPLIFT is initiated it may be emerging in harmony with "natural", "spiritual", and "cosmic" processes.  The design and initial implementation of UPLIFT SCAFFOLDINGS will probably occur within resistive environments. 229

      The emergent social network for UPLIFT would exhibit a much greater density of links than in conventional social networks; but there would also be a unique fine structure to the UPLIFT social network. 230

      New members to the UPLIFT social network would be actively recruited and supported by an individual member, who is seafed (supported, enabled, augmented, and facilitated) by a small social network (that had emerged by similar processes). 231

      There will be no mass media promotion of UPLIFT. 232

      One would not observe a sudden increase in membership without extensive linkages of members. 233

      There would not appear a large increase in a membership list.  With an exception that persons may learn of UPLIFT and request that they be recruited; but being on the recruitment list does not imply the person is, yet, a member of the UPLIFT process. 234

      This is much, much more than asking someone to be your "friend" in Facebook. 235

      Learning materials and special networking tools will be available for the "recruiter".  And these will improve over time, and become a general resource for the whole emerging UPLIFT social network. 236

      A very early task for a new member is to initiate recruitment of a few potentially new members.  This early responsibility will be actively seafed by the person and social supportive network that recruited that new member. They will not be expected to perform this early recruitment by themselves. 237

      A fine detailed pattern would be observed, which I call the CHAIN GROWTH RECRUITMENT PROCESS, or CGRP. 238

      In one version, CGRP entails each new member actively participating in the recruitment of at least 14 new members. 239

      For example, the new member (A) would quickly recruit B and C as new members, and be active in supporting them in their learning about UPLIFT and themselves beginning to each recruit two new members. B would recruit and support D and E; and C would recruit F and G.  A would be working with B and C in their recruitment of D, E, F and G and A would be interacting with them. 240

      CGRP carries this process one more level.  D, E, F, and G would each begin to recruit two new members. They would be assisted and supported in this by A, B and C. 241

      Once these eight new recruits are recruiting, A may retire from the formal CGRP process, having been active in the recruitment of 2+4+8=14 new members. 242

      This intensive follow-up and support of the recruitment process should insure that it continues, so long as a population of potential recruits exists. 243

      In this process all 14 recruits and the initial member A are all interacting with each other. These 15 members for a core web in the UPLIFT social network. Actually, it can include the 14 members who were part of the core web that recruited member A. 244

      These numbers are but examples. Sometimes a member may recruit more than two, and occasionally be limited to but one. What is to be avoided in CGRP is attempts at mass recruitment. 245

      The concept that a "hive mind" might spontaneously emerge from a large but unorganized social network needs careful analysis. 246

      If a truly viable web emerges in a "hive", it will most likely be via a process similar to CGRP within the "hive". 247

      Otherwise, mass organization within a "hive" would most likely be typical of civilization organizations with elites, bureaucracies and masses of sheep. 248

      Over time many of the connections in a core web would weaken and be abandoned. Yet, a unique strength for these initial relationships may be quite strong and persist. 249

      A striking pattern to be revealed in UPLIFT emergence would be an exponential growth of a densely linked social network. Such an exponential growth is essential if UPLIFT is to succeed. 250

      Exponential growth should be a primary criterion for all social movements. 251


        More fine structure for an emerging UPLIFT social network. 252

      SEAFING. The work of existing members in assisting a new member, in their early recruitment of other new members, is an example of the seafing process. The emergence of a seafing network and seafing as a new economic domain (within the UPLIFT process) is critical for the success of UPLIFT. 253

      Seafing will be a new emergent social technology. 254

      In the complexity of our reality, individuals and teams are usually unable to utilize the many resources available to them. 255

      If they are very active in learning and organizing for their own causes they will find little time or energy to attempt to utilize was is often not in a form conducive for use. 256

      Thus, potential synergy is effectively blocked. 257

      There have been many attempts to assist organization improve, but these seem always to take on characteristics of civilization, making a profit, and attempting only reform. And these helper organizations are themselves blocked from their own improvement. 258

      The work of Seymour Sarason has contributed to my comprehension of this process; and also the works of Donald Michael. 259

      The technology of CGRP will start off rather crude, but as more and more participate AND that it will be intentional in the design and management of CGRP, that they will learn and improve their process. 260

      Specifically, the process will intentionally attend to the personal and individual differences (and similarities) for each person in the social network. 261

      There will not be a convergence to a few simple formats for recruitment; rather an expansion to utilize the vast and viable diversity of humans. 262

      A seafing “sysnet” may be observed in the data from the UPLIFT social networks and associated semiotic structures. 263

      We may be able to distinguish social systems of individuals working on a specific project and another social system of individuals supporting, enabling, augmenting, and facilitating (seafing) them. 264

      I was initially motivated to develop the seafing concept after reading THE SUPPORT ECONOMY by Shoshana Zuboff and James Maxim (2002). 265

      Consistent with THE SUPPORT ECONOMY, some teams of a seafing network would work closely with those they are seafing, becoming mentors for them and assisting them in linking with others.  To support this, others in the seafing network will organize information about the global resource network, maintain and improve it, and respond to requests by the mentor seafing teams. 266

      Zuboff and Maxim forecast that such support systems would become a wholly new level of economic activity. I agree, but I cannot foresee it occurring within the ideology of civilization, where competitiveness and greed are dominant. 267

      One would observe a rapidly increasing competency and viability to the seafing network, which would be observed to rapidly accelerate the growth and viability of UPLIFT itself. 268

      In metaphor, seafing may be viewed as an enzymatic process; greatly accelerating processes that without seafing would be too slow to become viable. 269

      In biological cells, large molecules slowly interact. But, when another molecule, of similar components and closely related form, engages both interacting molecules, the interaction can be greatly speeded up. 270

      Life could not exist with its current viability without these enzyme molecules. 271

      Seafers and the seafing network are social analogs of molecular enzymes. 272

      The UPLIFT process will begin in only a few "locations" or existing social networks.  But, after a few iterations of revisions of scaffolding versions, many seed sites for UPLIFT will appear globally.  Each tuned to the specifics of the culture and receptive population. 273

      It will be very important that the interaction between different spreading UPLIFT social networks be intentionally seafed. 274

      One population for a second generation UPLIFT would be in the rings of urban slums around major cities in the world. 275

      The potentials of this population are discussed by Steward Brand in WHOLE EARTH DISCIPLINE. 276

      UPLIFT webs will also emerge as cogangs in establishment organizations. 277

      But, they will not be dedicated to significant reform of those organizations or to self gain; but they will be "in place" for the eventual replacement of the established orders by the emergent and well organized and highly competent UPLIFT population. 278

      One challenge of UPLIFT globally will be to transcend the competitive ideologies of the developed and developing worlds. UPLIFT seeks no approval from existing institutions. 279

      The content of the semiotic structures representing interaction between members of UPLIFT will also be unique, and results from the design of UPLIFT SCAFFOLDING. 280

      The full complexity of UPLIFT cannot be adequately comprehended by most new members; nor will it be attempted. Long-term (unique) educational processes will seaf the learning and development of all members, personalized to their unique cognitive profiles. 281

      Yet, a variety of Introductions to UPLIFT will be designed and empirically tested. 282

      The primary focus of initial UPLIFT recruitment will be INTERPERSONAL LEARNING. 283

      This taps into a deep intrinsic need of most (normal) humans. 284

      Alienation within civilization is an important tool for suppression. 285

      But, it will attempt to avoid traditional topics of potential controversy. 286

      Humans, when appropriately approached, have a great interest in human differences. 287

      Scaffolding (as evidenced in semiotic structures) would reveal protocols to assist persons exploring their differences in cognitive potentials and competencies. 288

      This would be in formats to collect personal data, to assist the UPLIFT seafing system in personalizing and indivualizing processes. 289

      Fun questionnaires and facilitated interview protocols will make these sessions interesting and useful. 290

      Measures would be taken to protect the "privacy" of each person, but the "transparency" necessary for a viable society must be stressed. 291

      David Brin's THE TRANSPARENT SOCIETY presents well these issues. 292

      Based on competency profiles, all other areas of learning and organizing will be seafed. 293

      Personal survival needs during collapse will be of primary interest to everyone, and cannot be avoided. However, all effort should be made that the UPLIFT process not be captured by this need. 294

      The slow growth and improvement of Relocalization projects and Transition Cities can be attributed to their primitive means for learning and organization, usually imitating the systems of civilization. 295

      The UPLIFT process should greatly improve how persons learn and organize for community and survival. But a narrow focus on local action and community, as essential as that focus should be as part of the whole, to be narrow and exclusive on local action and community (as if often the tendency) breeds longer term disaster. 296

      However, a vital component of early UPLIFT will be to access knowledge and needs and a to create a seafing system assisting persons moving towards meeting those needs, as best possible and consistent with "realities". 297

      An examination of the content of semiotic structures related to UPLIFT would see a minimum of discussion and effort to reform existing systems. 298

      Indeed, to avoid such efforts would likely reduce efforts of establishments to hinder or counter UPLIFT processes. 299

      At some point in the UPLIFT process there will be an organized effort to replace the old order with a new order; but this process must not be premature, and when initiated, its success should be only a formality. 300

      This is not to exclude special targeted actions by parts of the UPLIFT movement to block especially negative actions by establishments. 301

      But, if the likelihood of such counter efforts is expected to be unsuccessful, they should not be taken if they are likely to bring down power against UPLIFT. 302

      Actually, UPLIFT may actually reduce some stress on establishments and make some UPLIFT activities appear useful. 303

      However, UPLIFT should never be dependent on establishments for their success. 304

      Even temporary and short term support from some establishments should be resisted, as dependence is likely to occur. 305



      UPLIFT scenarios are very sensitive to many factors. 307

      Primary is whether the UPLIFT concepts can rapidly mobilize and organize an initial cadre of those with essential competencies to design the initial UPLIFT SCAFFOLDING and keep its growth and improvement ahead of the growth of UPLIFT membership. 308

      The success of UPLIFT is dependent on the ability of a few to tap into the distribution of relevant knowledge and create the scaffolding that will seaf the UPLIFT process. 309

      UPLIFT is not a process that will spontaneously arise from the "hive mind", or from the "grassroots". 310

      UPLIFT is dependent on the intrinsic potentials of humans, not on suppressed contemporary competencies. 311

      UPLIFT must involve INTELLIGENT DESIGN, by the human species.  The potential is there. 312

      UPLIFT is an intelligent, creative process - a "Miraculous Happening" as yet unique to "nature", but not excluded by "nature". 313


        UPLIFT scenarios are also very sensitive to the nature and speed of global societal collapse and Black Swans. 314

      If and when UPLIFT succeeds, how the new global order emergent through the UPLIFT process will encounter and replace established old orders is difficult to imagine in any detail. 315

      However, negative scenarios, based on the ideology of civilization, should be examined but not believed. 316

      The power of the UPLIFT movement may well be so superior to the disarray of established orders that the transition will be much easier than we can now imagine. 317


      Not included in this model are many factors about humankind, reality, and change for which the success of UPLIFT is dependent. 319

      One cluster of factors relate to the hidden potentials of a new UPLIFT educational/organizational process, based on new knowledge distributed among many disciplines. 320

      Another cluster of factors relate to new views of contemporary societal reality, facing the great power of corporations using high technology (as well as some deep weaknesses).  Will the collapse be too rapid and the oppression during collapse too severe to permit UPLIFT? 321

      Another factor will be whether the UPLIFT movement can shift fundamental protocols early enough so that a comparison of semiotic structures can become the primary means of Dialog/Deliberation/Decision to replace the competition for claims of absolute truth. 322

      It is a matter of "faith" that a large population having its distribution of cognitive competencies significantly uplifted will be able to collectively design and implement new participatory "democratic" processes and equitable and fair economic and financial systems; all in the face of global economic collapse, accelerating Earth Changes, including many major catastrophes. 323

      UPLIFT will not immediately reduce human suffering. Civilization and empire continue to be the primary cause of human suffering, and will continue so long as civilization and empire continue. 324

      The objective of UPLIFT is to get at the root causes of human suffering; but not in the old mode within civilization to simply make the suffering tolerable (or no longer conscious). 325

      In a strange way, this deep focus on the reduction of suffering has blinded humankind from seeking a way to eliminate (or significantly reduce) the causes of human suffering. 326

      Both the religions that preach survival after death, and "quality eternity" and those practices that aim at enabling a person to live in a situation of suffering and yet not consciously suffer, have blocked humankind's efforts to move BEYOND SUFFERING. 327

      Thus, it is imperative that the UPLIFT movement not be diverted to efforts to reduce human suffering - among those NOT PART OF THE UPLIFT MOVEMENT. 328

      However, a highly positive and early objective/consequence of being a member of the UPLIFT movement would be an immediate reduction of suffering. 329