C-212. Culture’s noisy double negative
In the absence of a Foundation Forward, to supply a principled response to the Nature of Thing’s incomplete instruction, historically we have attacked the behavioral problem, Pbeh, with Tries,* “debugs” (O:Ps), plus a pair of procedural technologies:
1. Don’t do that -- or else. See statutes. “Law and order” concept**; “crime and punishment.”
2. Do this – or else. See following orders. “Authority” concept.
Culturally speaking, things are getting more and more noisy. There’s not much positive about this double negative.
What’s this noise? The sound of a child being spanked. The cries of a young woman being stoned to death by family members. The cultural ratio of agree/understanding >1++ that is visited upon strangers to a community and those who – even in good humor – deviate from custom. We should listen for this noise, even if we sometimes do not hear it. Perhaps, in solving the O:S-P problem, we can do something about it.
The R-transform would reduce the B-ness noise. As the Fourier transform and FM have done for the noise of AM. And with the rest of R-sense procedural technology, develop Help (i.e., what is called for [WICF]) for greater functionality, relevance, “pragmicality”, utility and positivity … among other step strengths.
Meditation practices offer respite from the noise. However, something more positive should be considered in light of our unsolved problems. (See O: QL-point; behavioral, Pbeh, and situational, Psit, problems.)
***
Culture-bound? Cultures can be oppressive as well as noisy. Collective mind-binding (“conformity” as point TO?) adds another layer and weight to B-ness’ mind-binding (O:S-P). Tries, governed primarily by their results, become traditions and customs, gathered up and packaged in stories and histories.***
Trials, anyone? Principled efforts, as indicated and exemplified by KMmt. To bring R-sense procedural technology, especially that which is yet to be constructed, into play.
***
* i.e., practices which, as procedural technology, can be as primitive as they are honorific.
** “Laws plus orders” would be more to the point. Laws are not enough to govern, let alone manage, behavior. (See the behavioral problem, not just the situational problems.) “Laws plus principles (for Order: an R-word)” too? (See “survival of the fittingest.” And R-sense plus R-technologies.)
*** To our misfortune, the research on behavioral reinforcement shows that partial reinforcement (i.e., not all results have to be “good”) has tactical value. For some, even superstitions have value. But the strategy? And the metastrategy?
In light of the very useful Search feature now available in the home page, parenthetical back references are suspended for Comments as of C-184.
(c) 2020 R. F. Carter
1. Don’t do that -- or else. See statutes. “Law and order” concept**; “crime and punishment.”
2. Do this – or else. See following orders. “Authority” concept.
Culturally speaking, things are getting more and more noisy. There’s not much positive about this double negative.
What’s this noise? The sound of a child being spanked. The cries of a young woman being stoned to death by family members. The cultural ratio of agree/understanding >1++ that is visited upon strangers to a community and those who – even in good humor – deviate from custom. We should listen for this noise, even if we sometimes do not hear it. Perhaps, in solving the O:S-P problem, we can do something about it.
The R-transform would reduce the B-ness noise. As the Fourier transform and FM have done for the noise of AM. And with the rest of R-sense procedural technology, develop Help (i.e., what is called for [WICF]) for greater functionality, relevance, “pragmicality”, utility and positivity … among other step strengths.
Meditation practices offer respite from the noise. However, something more positive should be considered in light of our unsolved problems. (See O: QL-point; behavioral, Pbeh, and situational, Psit, problems.)
Culture-bound? Cultures can be oppressive as well as noisy. Collective mind-binding (“conformity” as point TO?) adds another layer and weight to B-ness’ mind-binding (O:S-P). Tries, governed primarily by their results, become traditions and customs, gathered up and packaged in stories and histories.***
Trials, anyone? Principled efforts, as indicated and exemplified by KMmt. To bring R-sense procedural technology, especially that which is yet to be constructed, into play.
* i.e., practices which, as procedural technology, can be as primitive as they are honorific.
** “Laws plus orders” would be more to the point. Laws are not enough to govern, let alone manage, behavior. (See the behavioral problem, not just the situational problems.) “Laws plus principles (for Order: an R-word)” too? (See “survival of the fittingest.” And R-sense plus R-technologies.)
*** To our misfortune, the research on behavioral reinforcement shows that partial reinforcement (i.e., not all results have to be “good”) has tactical value. For some, even superstitions have value. But the strategy? And the metastrategy?
In light of the very useful Search feature now available in the home page, parenthetical back references are suspended for Comments as of C-184.
(c) 2020 R. F. Carter
S