In a spirit of re-evaluation, how about taking a fresh look at some fundamentals? Might there be some basic questions that haven't been asked adequately, especially by those who fervently cry out that their answer is the only answer to vexing human problems? Do we really want to find startling areas of common ground between folks who now see each other as implacable foes?
What follows is a questionnaire meant to illuminate why you feel as you do about modern issues... and why it seems so hard to comprehend those who disagree. The questions are provocative... any two or more people should find a lot to discuss, just by asking them of each other.
Moreover your answers may have implications that go deeper than you think! Some of the following ticklers approach familiar dilemmas from unusual angles, ripping across familiar boundaries, such as the hoary old left right political axis.
Many of you will already have read my nonfiction book, The Transparent Society, and my novel Earth. If so, you know I discuss several of these points therein. I also plan on writing an essay soon, following up on this questionnaire. Meanwhile, any of you are welcome to run it past your own groups/friends/co-conspirators, in order to see for yourself how people sort themselves in surprising ways.
The implications are especially crucial to some of the groups I mentioned above. Groups who have my sympathy... but who also provoke endless frustration as they keep relentlessly chewing over the same old fixations, even when the evidence around us shows that it's time to move on!
In any event, I hope you'll find the questions entertaining... and provocative.
-- David Brin
February 15, 1999
========================================================================
- You consider such tales mythological. Wisdom is cumulative and anything
resembling a human utopia can only be achieved in the future, through incremental
improvements in knowledge or merit. (The LookForward View.)
If pressed, could you provide convicing evidence to support this point of view?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) PROPAGANDA: Are members of our present culture subjected to propaganda? What kind? What are the principal messages? How effective has this propaganda been?
If you spent the time, do you think you could name 50 popular modern films in which this propaganda theme has been promoted as its central message? Can you explain why you have noticed it while others haven't?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXTRA CREDIT FOLLOWUP: Which of the following best describes how and why
you arrived at your present set of opinions and your political agenda?
- logical appraisal of the evidence.
- inherent qualities of your nature, character or intelligence.
- the effects of propaganda or upbringing.
- pursuit of this agenda may result in personal advantage.
* Now answer the same question about why your political opponents hold
the opinions/agendas they do.
* Do you think your opponents would agree with the way you answered just now?
How do you think they would respond, if asked the very same questions about
their own beliefs... and yours?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3) THE TOXICITY OF IDEAS: a followup on the previous question. Please
choose between the following:
- You think ideas are inherently dangerous or toxic. People are easily deceived.
An elite should guide or protect gullible masses toward correct thinking. (Memic
Frailty.)
- You believe children can be raised with a mixture of openness and skepticism to evaluate concepts on their own merits. Citizens can pluck useful bits wherever they may be found, even from bad images or ideologies. (Memic Maturity.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXTRA CREDIT FOLLOWUP:
If your answer to the preceding question was Memic Maturity, is it justifiable or hypocritical to hold "the masses" in contempt for not always agreeing with you?
If your answer to the preceding question was Memic Frailty, do you believe you should be one of the guardians or guides who help encourage right thinking? Can you be sure that belief is not, in itself, the result of conditioning by a toxic idea?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) BIRDS OF A FEATHER: With whom do you ally? Who do you listen to?
Person A agrees with your long-range dreams and goals, but disagrees profoundly
with your program for getting there.
Person B agrees with your near-term political agenda, despises the same opponents,
but has a very different image of what kind of society we should eventually
arrive at.
FOLLOWUP: How often have your political or other discussions actually focused
on the distant goal? Do you have a clear image of the future society all your
efforts are aimed at achieving? Have you ever verified that your "allies" have
the same destination in mind?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5) DYNAMIC SYSTEMS: What attributes do the following social innovations have in common?
(1) most participants know MORE than they presently do about each other and whatever is going on...
(2) most participants know LESS than they presently do about each other and whatever is going on...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXTRA CREDIT: Is your safety enhanced more by denying knowledge to your enemies or by increasing the amount that you know?
Which is easier to verify: (a) that your foes don't know something, or (b) that you do know something?
Given a choice between privacy/(secrecy) vs. accountability,
which would you choose for yourself? Which would you choose for the group you
consider freedom's worst enemy?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6) PROGRESSIVE WISDOM: Are we wise or knowledgeable enough to prescribe
ideologies for our descendants?
Should one focus all efforts on achieving total victory for one's particular political agenda? Or would it be enough to concentrate on achieving pragmatic solutions, raise a new generation that is appreciably wiser and more aware than ours, and then leave the rest of the details to them?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7) HUMAN NATURE: Do you believe in evolution? Are humans still at least somewhat part of the animal kingdom?
Can we learn politically relevant things from fields like mammalian ethology, psychopharmacology, anthropology, and the historical behavior of real human tribes? If discrepancies appear between these sciences and our idealization of human nature, should ideology be revised?
If there appears to be an intrinsic difference between basic human nature and the ideal way we "ought to be", what is your response?
(1) The so-called information about our basic nature must be wrong.
(2) Society must adapt and conform to information about our basic nature, letting
us be ourselves, since people are what they are.
(3) The more we learn about 'basic human nature', the more clearly we need vigorous guidance to encourage behavior more appropriate than we would 'naturally' engage in. This can be achieved by hewing to standards that have been known for generations.
(4) Information about our basic nature helps us understand the raw material from which a new/better humanity might emerge.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8) Historically, which prescription has best helped to maximize human achievement, minimized costly errors and ensured freedom/happiness etc.?
(1) Weak government
(2) Widespread and open criticism
(3) Strong leadership
(4) A cohesive shared value system
Can you think of historical examples to support your claim? Being honest, can you cite counter-examples?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9) PROBLEM-SOLVING METHODS: Consider the following two approaches that have been used for many generations by people and societies attempting to solve problems or change their world.
THE LEFT HANDED APPROACH: concerted action by tribal or national units, organized
by leaders who gather social resources (e.g. taxes or tithes) and apply them
to attain goals in an organized manner.
THE RIGHT-HANDED APPROACH: create loosely regulated markets wherein free individuals compete and/or cooperate, making the best deals they can for their own self interest.
In 10,000 years we've seen countless left-handed projects - pyramids, canals,
wars and universities... and countless market contributions - industry,
medicine, slavery and bookstores
Radical socialists have long demonized the right-handed approach as inherently
corrupt/exploitive, and prescribe its amputation. Radical libertarians and anarchists
call the left handed approach coercive and stifling, and prescribe its amputation.
If you prefer one class of human problem-solving methods, would you amputate
the other entirely? Severely limit it? Or try to discover which types of problem
each approach is best at performing? Does your preferred 'hand' create abiding
conditions for personal satisfaction or generation of wealth? How would it deal
with accute problems like natural disasters or Adolf Hitler?
Has democracy moderated many faults in the left-handed approach? If so, what
other reforms might help make it work better? Likewise, do some kinds of market
rules help the right-handed approach perform better for everyone?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10) STRATEGY: Over the long run, what are fundamental prerequisites for nurturing a growing state of freedom and wisdom for all human beings? (Please write a list.)
FOLLOWUP: Can these prerequisites you just listed be achieved by --
(1) persuading people to behave differently than they presently do? ... (Exhortation)
(2) ensuring that actions have consequences? ... (Accountability)
(3) creating environmental preconditions (e.g. heightened health &/or wealth &/or education &/or low fear levels) then trusting people to make correct decisions? ... (Changed Circumstance)
(4) some combination of (1) through (3)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXTRA CREDIT:
Which of the above (or lack thereof) are most responsible for our present state of civilization?
Which of the above (or lack thereof) are most responsible for YOUR present
beliefs?
How does your answer to this question corelate with your earlier answers regarding
Propaganda, the Time Flow of Wisdom and Toxicity of Ideas?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11) TACTICS: In the short term, which of the following describes how
you feel you are more likely to achieve immediate political goals:
(1) Consolidate your core supporters, demonize your opponents, and dismiss compromise as a form of ideological betrayal.
(2) Negotiate the best near-term deal you can through whatever political process works best, even if it means your opponents get part of their agenda accomplished, too.
(3) Learn as much as possible about the opposition, then offer the other side's moderate wing enough to split them off from their fanatics, destroying their coalition and building your own.
(4) Ignore your opponents because (a) they represent obsolete or decrepit worldviews doomed to inevitably fail anyway, or (b) because they are mere stalking horses or fronts for the real opposition -- power groups who operate inimically behind the scenes.
(5) Concentrate on perfecting your own position/behavior/or soul, since that is all an individual can ever really be responsible for.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12) MEANS TO AN END: DO ENDS JUSTIFY MEANS? Can one justifiably squelch
speech by repugnant parties/individuals if it serves a higher cause?
Meanwhile, let's open up our minds. The satisfactions of self-righteousness are very druglike, but in the long run human problems will not be solved by junkies. They will be negotiated by earnest and wise human beings.
DB