exploit the confusion it creates

for - critique - extreme wealth inequality cannot be avoided for the greater improvement of society - The Gospel of Wealth - Andrew Carnegie - stats - Mondragon corporation - comparison of pay difference between highest paid and lowest paid - adjacency - Gandhi quote - Andrew Carnegie beliefs in The Gospel of Wealth

critique - extreme wealth inequality cannot be avoided for the greater improvement of society - The Gospel of Wealth - Andrew Carnegie - It's a matter of degree - Wealth differences within US corporations of 344 to 1 are obscene and not necessary, as proven by - Wealth difference of 6 to 1 in Mondragon federation of cooperatives - To quote - Gandhi, there is enough to meet everyone's needs but not enough to meet everyone's greed - The great problem with such large wealth disparity is that those who know how to game the system can earn obscene amounts of money - and since the concept of luxury goods is made desirable and proportional to monetary wealth, it creates a positive feedback loop of insatiability - The combination of engaging in ever greater luxury lifestyle and power is intoxicating and addictive

to - stats - Mondragon corporation - comparison of pay difference between highest paid and lowest paid - https://hyp.is/QAxx-o14Ee-_HvN5y8aMiQ/www.csmonitor.com/Business/2024/0513/income-inequality-capitalism-mondragon-corporation

Interesting to see this tennis analogy in writing in 1905 from a top-notch player who will win a silver metal in the 1908 Olympics...

for - more meaningful lives from connecting to the greater whole of the human species - n other words - experience the sacred

for - medical deception - communicating relative risk instead of absolute risk is misleading and gives the appearance of a greater effect

for - cup half full

• If your culture says life is fulfilled only with
  • children,
  • travel
  • adventure, or
  • building something worthwhile,
• and you haven’t done any of those things…
  • maybe there isn’t anything wrong with you,
  • maybe your culture just doesn’t value the things that you do (and maybe, just maybe, the expectations are as unrealistic as they are arbitrary).

insight - smaller self vs greater self - or this could be thought in a cup-half-full perspective, - that ALL lives are sacred from the outset - The small self may forget, but the absence of any memories is perhaps the mark of the greater self

12:00 Seljuks securing Khorasan after Battle of Dondanaqan in 1040

Seljuks win against Ghaznavids and end their domination in Greater Khorasan

The data of the past is congruent with the current psychological trends that face the education system of today. Developmentalists have charted how children construct and revise intuitive theories. In turn, a variety of theories have developed because of the greater use of statistical information that supports probabilistic contingencies that help to better inform us of causal models and their distinctive cognitive functions. These studies investigate the physical, psychological, and social domains. In the case of intuitive psychology, or "theory of mind," developmentalism has traced a progression from an early understanding of emotion and action to an understanding of intentions and simple aspects of perception, to an understanding of knowledge vs. ignorance, and finally to a representational and then an interpretive theory of mind.

The mechanisms by which life evolved—from chemical beginnings to cognizing human beings—are central to understanding the psychological basis of learning. We are the product of an evolutionary process and it is the mechanisms inherent in this process that offer the most probable explanations to how we think and learn.

Bada, & Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism Learning Theory : A Paradigm for Teaching and Learning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory

If the "whole is greater than the sum of its parts" who benefits from the excess value and how is that economically broken up in a fair manner?

Google translation:

The sheer quantity exceeds the possibilities of book publication, the complex, multidimensional structure of a networked information base cannot be reproduced in print, and finally the dynamic of a constantly growing and constantly correcting material does not fit into the rigid rhythm of book production, in which each expanded and corrected new edition is associated with an incalculable amount of effort. A book publication could only offer a snapshot of such a database, reduced to a specific perspective. This too can be very useful from time to time, but it does not solve the problem of publishing the entire material.

While the writing criticism of "dumping out one's zettelkasten" into a paper, journal article, chapter, book, etc. has been reasonably frequent in the 20th century, often as a means of attempting to create a linear book-bound context in a local neighborhood of ideas, are there other more complex networks of ideas which we're not communicating because they don't neatly fit into linear narrative forms? Is it possible that there is a non-linear form(s) based on network theory in which more complex ideas ought to better be embedded for understanding?

Some of Niklas Luhmann's writing may show some of this complexity and local or even regional circularity, but perhaps it's a necessary means of communication to get these ideas across as they can't be placed into linear forms.

One can analogize this to Lie groups and algebras in which our reading and thinking experiences are limited only to local regions which appear on smaller scales to be Euclidean, when, in fact, looking at larger portions of the region become dramatically non-Euclidean. How are we to appropriately relate these more complex ideas?

What are the second and third order effects of this phenomenon?

An example of this sort of non-linear examination can be seen in attempting to translate the complexity inherent in the Wb (Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache) into a simple, linear dictionary of the Egyptian language. While the simplicity can be handy on one level, the complexity of transforming the entirety of the complexity of the network of potential meanings is tremendously difficult.

google translate:

And yet he never found what he was actually looking for, but something new and surprising.

While you'll only find in your zettelkasten exactly what you placed there, you may be surprised to find more than you expected.

As is common in the tradition of the zettelkasten, Goutor advises "that each note-card should contain only one item of information, whether a quotation, a summary, or anything else". (p28) He ascribes this requirement to his earlier need for clarity. (cross reference: https://hypothes.is/a/SfWFwENIEe2KfGMbR5n7Qg)

He indicates that while it may seem wasteful to have only one item on each card that the savings in time, efficiency in handling, classification, and retrieval will more than compensate for the small waste.

This sort of small local waste being compensated for by a larger global savings and efficiency can be seen in the design of the shipping container industry as discussed in Mark Levinson's The Box (Princeton University Press, 2008). Was this the exact sort of efficiency mentioned by Ahrens'? (Compare at https://hypothes.is/a/t4i32IXoEeyF2n9jQxu6BA)

In this scene, Brutus is introduced to his fellow conspirators for the first time. Cassius suggests in this scene for the conspirators to all swear oath to kill Caesar, but Brutus rejects it, convinced that their murder of Caesar was honourable and just, and that an oath would lessen their standing and decorum. In truth, Brutus was the only conspirator who acted for the greater good of the Roman Republic, yet in his naivety, believed that all the conspirators did so to “stand up against the spirit of Caesar”.

Brutus maintained that since they were doing the right thing, that meant that “there was no blood” on the conspirators’ hands. This raises a question that Shakespeare clearly intended for the audience to consider; One that was relevant during the Roman times, one that was relevant during the Elizabethan era, and one that is still relevant today:

Is it ever okay to pre-emptively murder someone?

This question has had many forms and variations throughout the eras, with the most well known being: Would you go back in time to kill Hitler?

Would it ever be appropriate to murder someone? In this case, Caesar had the potential to be dictator, but was that enough for the conspirators to murder him? Under what circumstances would pre-emptive murder be okay, if ever?

Living The Way of Knowledge

What is Knowledge?

What is The Greater Community Way of Knowledge?

Living The Way of Knowledge

What is Knowledge?

What is The Greater Community Way of Knowledge?

Regarding Goodness and Utility: All things being in proportion to greater and lesser Good or Evil.