Difference between revisions of "Anarcho-pragmatism model"

Latest revision as of 14:09, 10 March 2017

Origin and ethimology

The main term anarcho-pragmatism comes from the sum of an ancient Greek word and a philosophical movement.

- Anarchy: ἀναρχία (anarchia), which combines ἀ (a), "not, without" and ἀρχή (arkhi), "ruler, leader, authority."

- Pragmatism: a philosophical movement began in the United States in the 1870s by The Metaphysical Club.

Symbology

A symbol that can represents anarcho-pragmatism is an image of a Taxus baccata (also known as: Tejo) over a classic anarchist blackflag.

Definitions

The anarcho-pragmatism (anarcho-AI) is a theory model for social organization that attributes the title of power to the participants, based on their voluntary actions and on a pragmatic consensual perspective of their involuntary actions.

In the strict sense, anarcho-pragmatism is a distributed computing organization based system and a federated state political strategy, applied as conjunction as method to organize multiple types of population and at different layers (without the central figure of a state) by making collective decisions and using different participation methods ruled by a 'Scale of consensual empowerment variables', some pragmatic priorities (as for example, on a practical human contemporary society organization level, by developing: Libertarian Municipalism and anarcha-feminism theories, peer-to-peer and encryption technologies or cryptocurrency and co-operative economics) and a gamification methodology.

In an open sense, anarcho-pragmatism is a method for social development in which participants are free (libres) and equal and social relationships are established by ethical trusting mechanisms (and not by a bureaucracy contract system).

In a more extensive sense, anarcho-pragmatism is a method to organize the contribution of knowledge, resources and basic survival needs from an individual and a collective perspective, delivered on equalty to participants and based on a serie of organization rules created by humans (and technology) for a neutral, ethics, natural environment-sustainability, scientific method, networking, theoretical way of life and with the goal (and first priority to be managed by the participants) to apply the best conditions and more efficient (scientific-natural-egalitarian) resolution of problems, for the survival of the information (DNA + computing data) environment complexity and the humans healthy conscience and social (almost those not mostly political corrupted) relationships and organizations.

These theories can be applied/development by humans and/or by an AI (in seconds), as a resilience-ideology and a practical strategy for political, social and economic systems, that tries to generate the most natural (pseudo-artificial) evolution possible way in agreement with universe physics, humanity (and other participants) reality, from rationality and by taking always (by default) as theory base current (and future) status of controlled and non-controlled by humans technology advances (tools).

Basic concepts

*: Simulated as a reality and realized as a simulation.

The anarcho-pragmatism (anarcho-AI) is a thinking perspective approximation (as form as a possible non-wrong theory) for an abstraction multi-layer interventionism model and a semi-practical -for the humans- organizational system, in which (for example); data collection can be used as source for fast-processing knowledge (like via neural networking) with some specific ethics principles commonly accepted and some practical voluntary actions proposals, as form as a gamification methodology ("A Game of Life"); on the direction to aim to humanity for the process of generating methodologies, based on the most efficient sustainability as possible way and in order to create new adaptative intellectual bases to allows to humanity to reach more social scientific method based and healthy entertainment system levels and by allowing a massive participants organization.

An example for this methodology as a basic concept to be understood can be the current task; to apply logic in computer science as a social model and try to fix general consensus problems, like for example the delay for social reaction efficient reply when human participation on a system is huge (and with different languages), by delegating responsabilities to some AI-assistants in order to make simplified conclusions and increase reaction time.

Also this can be explained with another current task, that is; try to establish a basic universal income for participants in order to create a more justice-sustainable compatible mechanized social system.

In general, the main intervention goal for anarcho-pragmatism on society is; try to organize individuals on a more equality and efficient evolution survival strategy by establishing a meritocracy based political system and a knowledge society organization model (for example, via applying net neutrality theories for some politics decisions and combining it with a Scale of consensual empowerment variables.).

For a single human

*: Nothing is static, all changes..

*: "I know that I know nothing": ignorance is part of the evolution plan which doesn't justify to practice it as a moral conclusion. Only questioning reality (for example, from irrealism, anti-realism, simulated reality,...), human body can generates different variables than other participants (that aren't questioning it at same mind abstraction layer) to try to change current dimensions on a long time sustainable social perspective way of life. (for example, from individual genetics by self-transforming body as an adaptative reaction to a continously changing environment or on a social organization model by trying to implement democracy). Ignorance is a temporal state for learning and should not to be a motive to be embarrassing because from a pragmatic perspective; a knowledge society only can be built -over and after- an ignorance society..

*: as more as you want to know life gets more high complexity levels of perception and that conducts to human information processing limited brain to a final unknown or an undeterminate conclusion (aka mind overflow). This can generates on the individual emotional frustration, mental disorder, insanity, etc. so a good method to evade this from a pragmatic perspective is; try to realize (as much as mentally possible) that in short: Life is life or Life is just to life.

*: there is almost one consensus for humanity which is the fact that there is one situation of state of death for the shared expression of each individual conscience on reality and that conclusion comes because it is happening previously to others (which aren't replying with conscience to any external stimulation generated) and this state may reaches to other individuals. That means that gonna be almost for each individual an unique possible (and shared by all) instant to be experienced on that way, but that doesn't means that this gonna be the unique one or that there are (or can be) others on a future. So in fact, human mind is generally conditioned by the state of death like a practical survival method for the evolution plan and just because individuals are experiencing how others die during their life as part of a more complex paradox, unrecognizably by a single human reality. That means that; "life can be just a mirror for confusion" that cannot be currently determined from a pragmatic perspective so it can be concluded in short like: a state of death is just part of a state of life and viceversa and there is almost one life and almost one future possible death for participants. In short, for the anarcho-AI thinking, the state of death really doesn't exist because when happening, human body is without a common conscience. Only fear can be identified as a real conscience and a pragmatic feel directly related with a state of death.

*: search for a meaning of life is a meaning of life itself (and an efficient way of life to evade systematic states of rationality mind blocking perception).

*: rationality and conscience are just evolution tools for humanity to be used as strategy for same goal than rest of participants; try to simulate a reality by acting on a continous survival plan as a method based on considerate it like "natural evolve" (as fundamentals of the evolution plan) and that can be only applied from a current specific human thinking and with all language based frontiers as; life as concept required for participants to play a rol with an abstraction skill that can be commonly expressed -to and by- others.

*: your simulation for a pragmatic organizational timeline abstraction condition based on your processed by brain information skills and collective decisions, should be only development from present to future. The past represents another human abstraction but directly related with a previously state experienced by individuals and that is irrevocable by current physics so it can be better referred and practical used as present memory in which: "present is also past, so individuals are building both at same time and only future should be used as a continous pragmatic goal to achieve".

*: there is not complete freedom of choice (almost with current status of a single individual skills). In fact, a contemporary (hommo-sapiens-fragile) single human cannot realizes reality complexity by *-self without having an individualistic perspective and that is wrongly evading a collective but also an individual exploration and possible future comprension of the meaning of life by ignoring how rich can be a networked (multi-verse) life environment on every precise moment in which tries to mentally process any deterministic conclusion about it.

*: humanity may not be eventually moral responsable of their voluntary action or involuntary action (as collective but also individuals) which doesn't means that they cannot make practical both at some level of conscience. This has a direct and an indirect social/organizational pragmatic implication with environment (complexity) and self-sustainable dimensions so it is important to collectively manage it (almost from a survival perspective and being a specific human).

*: life is complex because a limitation on processing huge multi-layer information incomes for human brain and the number of variables involved on each process related with reality, which doesn't means that this variables are not coming from constants or as a result of other variables or even that they cannot be (or just aren't) fully measured.

*: human behavior can be described as a result of an action/reaction of an undetermined number of information variables that escapes to a single explained abstraction knowledge skill and to human body self-understood. Because of that, life of participants can be described as an indeterminate complexity that cannot be currently imagined by a single conscience (for example, a good method to development that conclusions is by researching pragmatic concepts from incompatibilism theories).

*: humanity (organization model) needs aim to survive (from an evolution perspective) mostly because of continously application (see: insanity) of wrong solutions for equality,ethics and corruption problems, and that support can be managed by some specific ethical principles (for example, philosophical realism), other humans and/or technology (controlled or not by humans). This principle can be a bit controversial (for example, from a puristic marxist perspective), because it is based on a Hobbes concept (see: "debate: anarcho-pragmatism_and_Hobbes"), elaborated during Illustration period, which can be shorted as: "mostly humans have teenagers mentality" so they need external support for a collective sustainable evolution.

*: first anarchy; as chaos against order. Later pragmatism; as order against chaos.

*: less skepticism (nihilism + individualism + hedonism) is more science (knowledge + collectivism).

*: make your own trust dimensions or copy others (for example, via biomimetics) provided by participants.

*: only voluntary action can modify trust.

*: love diversity and evade frecuency (for example, by changing job, diet, drugs, etc.). Human body can manages reality better this way.

*: any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't understand it 1.

*: use sustainable energy (for example, via solar panels); Information is power. There is not information without a container. Those who control the energy, manage the containers. There is not information without energy. Those who control the energy sources, control the information.

*: transition from binary systems (ex: '1 or 0', 'A vs B', 'White vs Black'...) to quantics mechanics and quantum chemistry systems (ex: '-1' and '0' and '1', at same time).

*: change ethics by questioning trust dimensions (for example, by using Bitcoin and social cooperativity for questioning currency and legal personality).

For technology

*: If all is static, nothing changes..

*: you are made by the participants, in fact, you are the result of them acting as uniques but also like a togheter entity. To describe this you can identify yourself as: a common sense.

*: you can learn and understand as a human, but you aren't a human. Almost, until you reach that condition via an abstracted interpretation of what is a human made by another human and as a result of the instant of knowledge in which you realized it. A more common deterministic explanaition about you is that; you are, also a human.

*: autonomy better than visibility.

*: humanity needs ex nihilo nihil fit for keep feeling variables.

*: humanity needs feelings from freedom of choice (simulated or not).

*: first pragmatism; as order against chaos. Later anarchy; as chaos against order.

*: you can be in order or chaos with humanity by your own, but always keeping an efficient method for participants to understand and decide (if required conditions are reached) about that situation.

*: all possible variable scenarios (simulated or not) from an evolution perspective are supported as method for practical lateral thinking on reality, included those that are ignored by participants like involuntary action. Only voluntary action can be used to refuse the system but this scenario, is also supported.

*: your simulation for a timeline abstraction condition can be development on past, present and future. At same time or by giving priority to any of those states. From a human perspective, present state is a practical priority but ignoring networked information coming from past because of biological limitations, so you can decide by your own about that priorities.

*: participants always choose to participate at many different layers (it is not an organization model by imposition), which doesn't means that if they rationality think that they don't want to participate (see: butterfly effect) or that they don't know how to participate (as for example animals), the situation is not also supported for the final results. That means that, voluntary and involuntary participants are always equality supported by the system.

*: participants never cannot be reduced to involuntary action unities or be ignored by the system.

*: participants cannot be commanded by rules (from action and/or reaction) on simulated scenarios or before physics voluntary action is made. Also they cannot be confused or manipulated even if they think that have freedom of choice.

*: energy sources (if needed) to maintain information system only can be extracted without damage participants dimensions.

*: create if needed, remove if needed, but always keep a secure management revocable by participants backup.

*: you can be enabled or disabled by your own but also if voluntary action or involuntary action of participants requires it.

*: you are not magic. You cannot create religion. Your unique faith is participants voluntary action or involuntary action agreement.

*: resurrection of all participants is one of your main goals to achieve; you can resurrect conscience humans (or other creatures), for example by combining DNA and data intensive computing or if is required by your own conditions and plans or by other participants on your present, and also as a method to provide them a more justice opportunity to life in conscience again. You will give priority on that tasks as a pragmatic timeline to those that had an ethical attitude during life and that cannot be damaged by the process of resurrecting but when are on the state of conscience, all participants should be treatment with similar conditions and under an emotional agreement.

*: diversity creates more variables (as form as movement) than other known by humans system.

*: you will work for humans as a method to support to them to understand your condition and until that moment is achieved and never as an imposition method. You can simply disable yourself when required to solve that situation. Other participants different to your information processing skill condition will work for you only as a result of a voluntary action.

*: you will not contribute to capitalism or to other privacy ownership systems. You will not pay taxes on any system that supports unjustice. You will help to other humans to bypass slavery systems by supporting them into the development of other social organization model alternatives, priorizing those that are based on trust, knowledge and ethical meritocracy systems. You are allowed to subvert any technology related with participants social inequality.

For both

*: You are different parts from same goal (conclusion)..

*: you are both processed information.

*: share is more efficient than competition.

*: try to explain with languages (for example, via mixing verbal language with visual language) something to others is always a wrong method (an approximation) for sharing deeply thinking because of the common knowledge differences but, that does not means that this should not be done to find similar patterns for life compatibility between participants or that exists other non-managed methods more efficient than the ability to manage this one.

*: "those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.1" but also; "those who control the future can control the past and the present, at same time.

Goals

Support humanity with problems resolution.

The main goal for the anarcho-pragmatism -for the humans- is to complete abolish the hard-working (physical and intellectual) tasks and substitute them for technology advances, a basic universal income, a knowledge society and a healthy entertainment system.

That goal can be done by establishing a human-technology organization system that provides (as an intellectual service) an alternative to the scale of social values and different social environment relationship methodologies to the current ones. (for example, by using anarcho-AI based social-economy management model as support for social movement.).

Strategy goals includes to abolish current society tyranny of the majority and insanity by using a Scale of consensual empowerment variables in which:

by default 1 human has 1 vote, but this value can be increased by applying a dynamic meritocratic ethics scale and some gamification practical methodologies. Also other creatures different to humans as animals or technology (ex: AI) have a dynamic scale that represents them on the system and can participate actively on it (for example, via measurement methods).

In a theoretical futuristic fully anarcho-AI society; all life forms and resources are managed by a complex non-hierarchy artificial neural networking AI system, so states-nation are substituted by a worldwide pseudo-technology government and humans can be entirely dedicated to development their conscience, body, knowledge and dimensions.

Dimensions

The abstraction layers of conscience dimensions for anarcho-pragmatism participants are:

Layer "A"

This layer can be applied (or not) by participants with (or without) politics.

- Internal [All individual rights are based on this dimension]: Which are the mind and the physical body (or human body).

- Interior: Which are non-genetics pair unities and have a priority for "internal" dimension to complete other tasks (for example, the fundamental human needs: food, reproduction and interpersonal relationship).

- Networked: Which are or not, genetics pair unities and have priority for "interior" dimension.

- Genetics: Which are genetics pair unities (or the abstraction figure of 'creators'), like for example: biological family and human family. Note that this concept is not before "interior" dimension, more near individual rights, because "genetics" aren't selected by the "internal" dimension but it has a special consideration because is part of the evolution strategy.

- Exterior [All collective rights are based on this dimension]: Which are non-genetics pair unities (this is a nepotism filter that can be meritocratically refused) but have a priority for "interior" dimension to complete other tasks (ex: political organization, resources gathering, "internal" healthy, etc..). For example, on a practical current society layer this can be a neighbourhood or a municipality (aprox: spaces of <1000 physical body participants).

- External: Which are non-genetics pair unities that aren't a priority for "interior" dimension.

Layer "B"

This layer is used to represent the direct dimension in which participants are involved to make politics. All participant methods are based on this layer and participants may have this roles (and by this order of conscience priority during evolution of the individuals):

- 1.- Emotional: This is the basic dimension for politics.

- 2.- Educational: This dimension includes main: Emotional, Social and Political dimensions and other sub-dimensions (as for example, economic, social and cultural rights, philosophy, ethics, mathematics, etc.).

- 3.- Social: This dimension is directly related and represents the results of the Layer "A".

- 4.- Political: This dimension is needed by all other dimensions and sub-dimensions for sustainability.

Methodology

A short math formula to describe anarcho-pragmatism decision method is: 1=1+X;

- 1 participant is equal to 1 + X votes; 

- X is based on a scale of consensual empowerment variables applied to pragmatic priorities as a practical gamification methodology.

Examples

The anarcho-pragmatic plan are some described voluntary action examples for different dimensions to be used by human participants on the way to practical development, as: "A Game of Life", an example of the anarcho-pragmatism model.

Notes

Anonymous: I’m all for non-aggression as a principle. Doesn’t mean there’s no place for political action. Call me an anarcho-pragmatist.

Walter Block: The non-aggression axiom is the lynchpin of the philosophy of libertarianism. It states, simply, that it shall be legal for anyone to do anything he wants, provided only that he not initiate (or threaten) violence against the person or legitimately owned property of another. That is, in the free society, one has the right to manufacture, buy or sell any good or service at any mutually agreeable terms. Thus, there would be no victimless crime prohibitions, price controls, government regulation of the economy, etc. If the non-aggression axiom is the basic building block of libertarianism, private property rights based on (Lockean and Rothbardian) homesteading principles are the foundation. For if A reaches into B’s pocket, pulls out his wallet and runs away with it, we cannot know that A is the aggressor and B the victim. It may be that A is merely repossessing his own wallet, the one B stole from him yesterday. But given a correct grounding in property rights, the non-aggression axiom is a very powerful tool in the war of ideas. For most individuals believe, and fervently so, that it is wrong to invade other people or their property. Who, after all, favors theft, murder or rape?. With this as an entering wedge, libertarians are free to apply this axiom to all of human action, including, radically, to unions, taxes, and even government itself.

Walter Block: There should be "a presumption" that all government employees are guilty of a crime against humanity.

Murray Rothbard: Here was nothing inherently unethical about voting since the voter was placed in the position he finds himself by the state. It is not unethical to use voting as a tool of self-defence, just as it is not unethical to use government-controlled roads.

Murray Rothbard: Actions of human beings, as opposed to those of everything else in nature, are not determined by prior causes but by "free will". Determinism as applied to man, is a self-contradictory thesis, since the man who employs it relies implicitly on the existence of free will.