Mind's Eye Re: thought experiments

Transition in male white thinking is usually free and therefore very
eco-friendly for the ruling management class, Neil. Technology is not
the driver, it is to be controlled to serve my ideology.

On 26 Nov., 05:31, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I suspect we need daring to admit we need the transition Lee.  The
> plan should be to provide decent livings for all through developing
> new ways of living that are eco-friendly.  I doubt there are any real
> arguments against this.  But in strategic management the mission and
> future scenario bits are easier than 'transition'.  We need the dream
> to establish, working back, what the milestones would be.  Somewhere
> in this we have to stop war, establish policing that isn't a police
> state and so on.  I suspect the driver will have to be technology, as
> argument does so little to displace ideology.
>
> On 15 Nov, 13:23, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > There Archy is my achilles heel.  Seeing the end yes I can envisage that,
> > but as I say better brains than mine will have to handle transition.
>
> > As to idealogy it is clear to me that this changes over time.  For example
> > as I was growing up the corner shop was the 'Paki' shop, now in this
> > country that sort of language, and hence any ideas that go along with it,
> > even from kids is simply not tolerated anymore.
>
> > On Wednesday, 31 October 2012 22:35:20 UTC, archytas wrote:
>
> > > The good dream side of this is what you say Lee.  But the thought
> > > experiment is a challenge to current ideology.  I've noticed over the
> > > years that the most passionate defenders of the protestant work ethic
> > > don't do jobs involving hard work for low pay.
>
> > > On Oct 26, 2:19 pm, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Ahhhh robot heaven is my ideal.
>
> > > > It gets rid of money as nobody would need to barter goods or services
> > > > to survive, it would mean that humans can spend more time growing and
> > > > learning, and can you imagine the various works of art, in all media?
>
> > > > Now of course the thing to consider is the transitional period, and I
> > > guess
> > > > this is Archy's main thrust.  Our history shows us that
> > > > such transitional periods are fraught with violence and upheaval, I
> > > suspect
> > > > a move to robotic heaven would be little different.
>
> > > > So we have robots a plenty and much work going on in robotics.  I
> > > suspect
> > > > the next thing we'll have to sort is robots that make and repair robots.
>
> > > > Should we concentrate then on food and water production and
> > > distribution?
> > > >  Why yes I think we should.
>
> > > > Get that done and then nobody has to pay for food or water, ahhh now we
> > > are
> > > > getting somewhere.  A world full of thinkers and artists!
>
> > > > Energy next?
>
> > > > On Wednesday, 19 September 2012 22:56:36 UTC+1, archytas wrote:
>
> > > > > Thought experiments are devices of the imagination used to investigate
> > > > > the nature of things. Thought experimenting often takes place when the
> > > > > method of variation is employed in entertaining imaginative
> > > > > suppositions. They are used for diverse reasons in a variety of areas,
> > > > > including economics, history, mathematics, philosophy, and physics.
> > > > > Most often thought experiments are communicated in narrative form,
> > > > > sometimes through media like a diagram. Thought experiments should be
> > > > > distinguished from thinking about experiments, from merely imagining
> > > > > any experiments to be conducted outside the imagination, and from
> > > > > psychological experiments with thoughts. They should also be
> > > > > distinguished from counterfactual reasoning in general, as they seem
> > > > > to require an experimental element.
> > > > >http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/thought-experiment/
>
> > > > > One I like is the notion of robot heaven.  It's easy enough to imagine
> > > > > a time when machines grow our food, build our shelter and do our
> > > > > work.  The interesting stuff comes in thinking what this would mean
> > > > > for wealth distribution and the nature of society.  What work would be
> > > > > left to do?  One can also wonder what place any of our work ethics
> > > > > would have in such a society.  There may be some deconstructive effect
> > > > > on just what current work ideologies are in place for.
>
> > > > > One of the great improvements technology brought to my life is more or
> > > > > less never having to go into a bank.  The only real innovations in
> > > > > banking are the ATM and electronic banking.  This kind of technology
> > > > > and similar in agriculture and industry fundamentally reduce the
> > > > > amount of human effort to grow and make what we need.  We are in
> > > > > partial state of robot heaven.
>
> > > > > Our ideologies are not up to speed.  Real unemployment is massive and
> > > > > education does little to provide job skills.  We are sold life-styles
> > > > > and products by insane advertising.  Job creation seems to be in
> > > > > perverse areas like financial services or bringing back attended gas-
> > > > > pumps.  With more efficient production we should be able to afford a
> > > > > bigger social sector and I can't for the life of me understand why we
> > > > > allow competition through crap wages and conditions.
>
> > > > > A great deal of what we pay for could be available more or less free.
> > > > > Educational content and utility banking are examples - these are areas
> > > > > that could be ratinalised like agriculture and manufacturing.
> > > > > Millions of jobs would go.  We should be asking why jobs are so
> > > > > central to out thinking on wealth distribution and how we might
> > > > > encourage work without the rat race.

--