I think you are drawing your own incorrect conclusions to what it is I personally believe. And you say I am unable to comprehend individual values, why because I am INFJ? You do know that MBTI is really a soft science right? That no one truly fits any type description? That type is more like "guidelines" then rules? Dont make the mistake of using MBTI as proof of anything outside of its system of discussion it rapidly breaks down when describing any individual, in fact WITHIN its realm of discussion it breaks down, especially when you consider that any action, comment or thought can be ascribed to any number of subjective analyzations regarding their origin of cognitive function.interesting, so you don't believe in individual expression, thought, or integrity. I could talk about how this makes my Fi flare up like wildfire after a drought, but that wouldn't convince you because you are unable to comprehend any kind of individual values.
wouldn't really call it logical.for this reason, I'm going to stick to logical points and deductive reasoning
I think you are missing the big picture view of what I am suggesting. In such a system, power becomes irrelevant. Just because humans of a technologically inferior stage did A, doesn't mean humans of a technologically superior age will do A. Especially once they have taken their evolution into their own hands.- the system you propose is impossible. people would find ways to elude those in power. there has never been a time in human history where an authority has been able to force 100% of a population into compliance
What vaccine? I am talking about grafting technology into the human body. Imagine if medical science could make you live for 300 years by giving you nano-medicinal viruses of a machine nature to peruse your body and repair flaws? The human lifespan that much longer would radically change our culture as we know it on its own. But by that same token now imagine if they could implant a chip into your body that allowed you to access a global wifi network thats a million times faster and richer then the internet as we know it now, and if we can all tap into that, then we can all tap into one and other, in other words we would become telepathic beings, speaking in thoughts and images to one and other instead of words and languages. Imagine if form that point you would retain your own mind/body but you would also be a part of everybody elses, maybe some "over-mind" would evolve out of this, out of all collective human desires. Because face it, at our core, humans are not nearly as diverse as we like to pretend, our differences are downright fucking petty at best. Ultimately we all want the same things, to survive, to advance, to learn. We stand a much better chance of that together then divided, so naturally that would make some form of logical sense. It doesnt mean who you are is wiped out, it just means who you are grows into something much more complex.- people will always defend their individuality and personal, individual freedoms. the world you speak of could not exist unless every single person was given this vaccine or whatever it is
Again, you are thinking too short sightedly. In a future where we are all intimately connected mentally, the drive to succeed is less individually based and more team based, humans would think in terms of the species, not in terms of how rich they can get which is a by-product of our recently evolving from apes and needing to be the alpha to produce the most mates with the females etc. In a super technologically advanced species where evolution is exponentiating along with technology, there is little need for competition, since we are all striving for the same ultimate goals. At that point in time our species would move into assimilating more life and intelligence, not wealth, our goal would be for mutual survival by spreading our cosmic eggs into more cosmic baskets, think about space exploration and colonization, not for profit margins but for human survival.- there are people you just can't beat. some people will do whatever it takes to achieve their ends. society has 2 ways to deal with such people. they can try to control them and force them to retaliate, or they can provide an environment where they can use their competitiveness, drive, industry and ambition to help society via setting up businesses and
Reply hazy, please ask again... but seriously, who knows? I assume the over mind would. The over mind of course being the shared goals of all humans who are a part of this system. This about Fi and Fe becoming one entity in all beings, if you need to see it in MBTI scale. We already basically share core principals as a species. People already do this on a low tech end, god bless google. I cant live without my iphone or ipad, I am connected 24/7 to a massive source of data, sure I am disconnected physically, but imagine if we didnt need laptops and tablets if our brains were all just tapped into one and other. It would be noisy for a while, but after as while it would calm down as we all began to find our old wants and desires to be less important and less interesting as we evolve past them.- who would enforce this?
Well you shouldn't look at it as a "system" a system politically is something that is controlled and requires authority and people of individualized natures to participate in. Evolution is something that ultimately cannot be controlled only hastened or slowed. Hastened by embracing technology, slowed by refusing it. Ingenuity is a part of the human psyche, you couldnt crush it if you tried. And while forcing everyone to comply TODAY in our current tread of history might slow innovation, in the time period I am thinking of, innovative ideas would be shared much faster, data and knowledge would spread much faster, reducing the need for innovation since innovation will be a staple, something we take for granted.- your proposed system would crush any kind of ingenuity, technological progress or societal advancement. without individual thought, innovation is impossible
This is all essentially irrelevant to the topic.the most selfish people are the ones who have the most potential to do good for other people if you let them.
- you have to think in terms of incentives. your system incentivizes people to elude the law and even to seek to destroy it. you would have better luck traveling to the middle east and trying to force 100% of the population to become Christian. people will have no choice but to retaliate, and retaliate more violently than all the rest of the wars in world history combined.
- those who did not take the pill/vaccine would overtake those who did, and who could blame them
No, right NOW we need leaders, because most people are cut off from incoming data and knowledge they have very limited sources to learn from. They rely on family, culture, religion, government. In the place I am speaking of, those things all become obsolete. Leaders become obsolete.- since you want us to be thinking like a species, a species needs a leader, a leader must think like an individual. your proposed plan creates a population of 100% followers who are thus unable to make decisions and will head for disaster.
I think you missed almost everything I was getting at... you keep looking only at how things are today, with our current technological setup, with our current rate of growth, with our current rate of progress, and current cultural norms... you are not considering how much technological advancement can and will change everything.- individual thought is the only reason we have society in the first place. without it, we'd still be hunter gatherers. honest businessmen produce more for society than any other profession. it is 100% impossible to be a successful businessman while being a slave to a group.
- without successful businessmen, your system would atrophy and die a slow, painful death by economic depression
....I could go on for hours.
Case in point, it was the advancement of technology in the capturing of fire and the advent of language that brought us society. Every step forward through history has been brought on by technological advancement. To deny this would be folly.