The website opening page presented the site theme – positive resocialization of a tall hierarchy.
Making choices is an intellectual activity of an individual brain, an effort philosophers call thinking (2) responding to a “call” (1) also originating in the subconscious mind. Our target is confined to the significant sociotechnical system problems we call Category three.
“Thinking” underwrites choice making by comparing the knowledge about candidate fixes to a prioritized value system also held within the individual’s brain (3). Choices made that turn out to be good attest that high-stakes thinking took place. 1 2 3
The theme is so central to our life’s trajectory it is expressly connected to this page:
- Scope of page subject matter
- The logical couplings between theme, the sociotechnical system, and this page
Scope: Knowledge to be acquired before setting off on the expedition. The law of optimality at work.
Connections: To set off on the expedition to Plan B there are competencies to acquire and knowledge to learn that, if you don’t have them, your expedition will fail. You can’t use the expedition itself as the learning environment because the price of setbacks soon brings the expedition to bankruptcy. Most of the precautions are common sense.
Since you are your choices, your choices should be consistent with who you want to be. If you don’t deliberately make that choice, you become whatever choices are made by your subconscious mind at the circumstances of the moment. Often those choices are made for you by people you don’t even know.
For the Homo sapiens species, its well-documented aversion to thinking is very strong. This propensity is a barrier to resiliency and keeping ahead of the fast-changing times. We can measure the aversion to thought by changing the emphasis on thinking on our website. Increasing the emphasis on the personal responsibility to think out choices reduces the number of visitors.
We speculate that the reluctance to think is tied to social status. The MitMs we work with, having no social status to lose, are objective and proactive about the operational reality. The contrast between the keystones and socialized people is too great to overlook. It’s a “call” to think.
Ignorance of the influence of natural law on social behavior prevents knowing which issues you can control and the functionalities of social agency you cannot. As daily experience attests, most people are in a mental cul de sac of trying to control that which only nature controls. You can tell because their failure to reach their goal is met by doubling down on their Nature-defying scheme that just failed. You cannot create alternative methods in goal-seek without thinking.
Precautions for success in reaching Plan B
As mentioned on the Preparation page, there are “flying monkey” precautions that should be accommodated in preparing for the A→B expedition:
- Learn Cat 3 prominent natural laws
- Learn your audience and their value systems
- Musts, must-nots
These are the unavoidable issues that sprout up along the A→B journey that you should recognize rather than be surprised when they appear. Forewarned is forearmed.
The various topics introduced in this page will be found in their A→B expedition context all over this website. Links to other pages are provided. The learning process for Cat 3 issues cannot be rushed. Remember, by the time you have prepared for liftoff, half of the technical challenge will have disappeared.
Appropriate ruling class adjectives:
The workforce of producers are the prime movers of the entire world. Whiting Williams 1921
Make it a personal goal to recognize the ruling class value system for what it is. POSIWID. The authorities intentionally want you to join a Hoi Poli baitball that is:
The patricians do not want you to acquire or possess:
- System think
Natural laws, mathematical physics, have been perfectly indifferent since they were formed 13.8 billion years ago at the Big Bang. Since they are deaf to persuasion, they operate exactly the same whether you align with Nature’s laws or attempt to defy them. Mother nature instantly recognizes your foolhardy attempt at defiance and punishes you, “Whack a Mole,” without remorse.
It is necessary to be acquainted with Her prominent laws in Cat 3 problem-solving. You don’t have to know their mathematical physics, but you should know enough to avoid attempts at defiance. Included are:
- Control theory
- The 2½ rule
- The 36% rule
- Gain – system stability
- System dynamics/entanglements
- Ecosystem entanglements
- The 2nd Law
- Entropy extraction
- GIGO, AQI
- Conservation laws
Class value systems
Value systems are managed by your subconscious mind. You were born with a comprehensive starter set suitable for Stone Age living. Your values are buffeted by experience with the consequences of the choices made. You likely have values with higher priority than your ownhealth. Choosing to not value your health paramount does not tell you what those higher values are.
When you appreciate the role that social value systems (Groupthink) play in making choices, it’s prudent to take it into account for customizing your social interactions. Wide disparity in value systems create wide social class distinctions, a highly regarded value to the supreme-commander class. Value systems in opposition, zero sum, with no common ground, exhibit the value cherished in one system that the opponent’s values should be denied. This is the fundamental principle of war.
Consider the value system consistent with appropriate selection. If you don’t know your value system, your subconscious mind creates who you are on autopilot. To be proactive on being who you want to be, you first have to choose. Whatever you choose releases a torrent of choices to make, each requiring risk-informed thinking. Value system application cascades choice making down to the choices you make in daily living.
The prominent value systems in social intelligence are those that characterize the privileged sinecure class and those of the producing class that fuels the fleet. The aristocratic class in society holds “divide and estrange” as essential.
Warfield’s Dictum governs prudency in approach: “Don’t ask them to do what they can’t.” Violating this dictum brings you nothing but trouble.
While the ruling class has the legal authority to make the producer class produce, the producer class can’t expect its “leaders” to meet the implied obligations of leadership in Cat 3 situations. There are many natural laws that prevent the rulers from making effective choices and there are no civil laws that prevent them from making incredibly bad choices. Human intentions have nothing to do with this verity.
First check point: Is there a value you have that has higher priority over the subject matter? If you choose to not follow up, you can infer there is. In practice, value-system conflicts causes great harm to the producers while it rattles the imposter syndrome of the rulers. Meanwhile, the Cat 3 issues don’t get solved. Lose lose.
The paramount value of the sinecure class is social status by authority, an opinion, intangible and opaque. It is an endless rut competing for high office. The ruling class can only hold on to their authority by persuading others to be supplicants, typically by sharing the proceeds of corruption. They have no direct control of their social standing. Their status depends on others, and it can be fleeting for the silliest of reasons. Most efforts in this class go to defending their sinecures, a class corrupt by definition.
The paramount social value of the producer class is status by socially-positive performance, a measurable tangible. The producers have direct control of their social status by their instincts of workmanship (Veblen). It does not depend on the opinion of others. It can’t be taken away, even by denials of tangible reality by the privileged class. The MitM achievement of Plan B stands on its own feet, transparent. Those who refuse to visit an implementation for examination and evaluation have no effect on our social status. Sinecures go catatonic at the thought of interviewing a Plan B veteran. For one example, Vladimir Lenin was an aristocrat claiming to support the proletariat who never mingled with the masses himself.
Value system components consistent with appropriate selection
- No losers. Positive contributions to society at large
- Platinum rule, Rogerian triad
- Performance-based social status
- Continuous improvement of thinking skills, resilience
- Cross discipline perspectives
- Actionable quality information
- Subconscious mind gatekeeping
- The Front End ensemble
- Prevention of corruption
The Black Hole theme of humanity
The psychological “Black Hole” of species Homo sapiens, around which we all revolve, is simple and, at some level understood and acknowledged by everyone. That property means that anyone can go through the same rationale with anyone else and arrive at the same Black Hole viewing station.
You can examine the effect of theme awareness on yourself. It takes less than a second to personally experience the Black Hole reaction. Your subconscious mind will do all the processing work and ring your chimes when its choice-making program has completed.
The apex intellectual functionality of our species is making good choices, appropriate selection, born out as good by results. The statement “You are your choices” is immediately accepted as true by everyone. Your subconscious mind is well aware of the endless parade of choices it has to make 24/7 to keep you intact and viable. It even knows it will have to choose a response to your statement from its reflex response repertoire.
The means by which your choices are made is by thinking. The cognitive process that responds to the call to act and moves the choice from its “take action” trigger to “choice made” is powered by intellectual effort. As a parallel to GIGO, if the thinking process is inappropriate or defective, the choice it produces will be counterproductive. Sin in haste; repent at your leisure.
For three thousand years, every philosopher, scientist, and concerned citizen involved with this matter of thinking for good choices, choices that pan out well, has concluded that “nobody thinks.” Since no one has produced evidence to the contrary, including us, we accept the statement as conditionally true. Doing so has explained everything we have learned about organizational dysfunction (OD).
What are we left with? The demonstrable fact that our species is acutely aware of the paramount importance of choice making, is aware that making good choices is reliant on appropriate selection, and, by choice, doesn’t “think.” You are viewing the Black Hole of our species up close.
The question then arises, why does our species refuse to advance its thinking competency to keep up with the challenges of the times, making choices that are healthy for itself?
Looking around the globe today, it’s impossible to find a national Establishment that consistently makes good choices for the benefit its people. We have no ready explanation as to why the population chooses progressive degeneration over prosperity. You can watch the unfolding of this choice on your smartphone. What else is on the news but the desperation of fear mongering?
Now that we know the thinking process it takes to make good choices on high-stakes problems, Plan B exists, we see first hand that the self-destruction of modern society is unnecessary. It is not ordained by Nature or by divinity. Add that fact into the mix and it sends the willful choice to avoid the labor of thinking beyond just irrational to self-defeating.
The Black Hole theme that imperils humanity sets our current prime directive. You have to first understand the mechanisms of action of the self-destructive social system and its refusal to think before you can formulate a fix. All we know for sure at present is that it will have to be generic to work.
You will find connecting aspects of this Black Hole menace on most pages of this website.
Commentary on AI
The Establishment anxiety about burgeoning AI progress is unwarranted. The fate of the push to replace human thought with a machine is entirely predictable. AI is perpetually constrained by two barriers that assure society that human-think will never be surpassed by AI-think.
- The information fed into the AI problem-solving software must be reality centered and validated as such. If AI is equipped with a faulty reference standard, what “done” looks like, it cannot provide reality-compatible outputs. Human society in the large cannot produce actionable-quality information. Charles Babbage, about two centuries ago, said: “On two occasions I have been asked, by MPs, ‘Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?’ I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.” Nothing can change that barrier. It fathered GIGO.
- Whatever AI produces with its impersonal mathematical physics that doesn’t match the expectations of the Establishment, conflicting with the intentions it had at the start of the AI process, will be suppressed and erased. All AI works by the process of elimination. If there was a precedented effective fix, there would be no reason for AI.
There are many examples of this scenario in history. The Establishment praises AI when it confirms its choices. When AI shows those choices to be counterproductive to their stated goal, the reaction is reality denial. The Establishment executes its original choices intact. The best source is the AI work of Jay W. Forrester. His AI approach was so effective that the Establishment bought him off.
Musts and must nots
There are task action guideposts for the journey that should be observed. It is important to not engage practices known to fail and it is important to attend to all the necessaries in necessary sequence. Some of these factors can be fatal to the Cat 3 effort all by themselves. The law of optimality specifies the sequence of tasks to be performed.
People who live a life of purpose have core beliefs and values that influence their decisions, shape their day-to-day actions, and determine their short and long-term priorities. Frank Sonnenberg
- Identify the likely perils and identify the design basis events
- Perform The Front End
- Proving ground for the candidates
- Win win, no losers or class distinctions
- System view, cross discipline
- Personalize revenue crew, Rogerian triad, trust
- Responsibility taken by legitimate producer for positive outcomes
- Attempt to defy a natural law
- Zero sum, “Whack a Mole”
- Violate Warfield’s Dictum
Any functionary that tries to improve the operating system will be hammered back in place by his peers. The Nash equilibrium.