Quantum Sociocybernetic Map of the Aggregate Coaxial Exchange for the New Rules of the World

[Milo]

General theoretical framework:

All living systems go through six levels of interrelations (social contracts) of its subsystems:

A. Aggression: survive or die
B. Bureaucracy: follow the norms and rules
C. Competition: my gain is your loss
D. Decision: disclosing individual feelings, intentions
E. Empathy: cooperation in one unified interest
F. Free will: The ability for any species, regardless of type, race, sex, creed, belief, genetics, make, model, or sentience to govern their own existence and not be controlled. "To be free to choose how to live life without discrimination or interference."

Using A-F as the parameters of each character in a simulation, project a virtual Sociocybernetic Map that contains all the possibilities of each group of characters and sectors them off by the spectrum of their overall behaviors relative to each simulated characters point of view in relation to the subjectively defined behaviors of the group to allow calculated analytics to be generated to allow each character a logical set of options for obtaining results that are optimal for the group as a collective without compromising the individuals own agenda to allow the group to become wholesome in a unified arrangement of cooperation that allows a full and complete circulation of activity to create a harmonous existence between each other.

Using this simulation--correlate the personalities of real people into the optimal roles projected by the virtual simulation so they can join a society of the new era to become the next longest-standing empire of the world.

The process of joining this community may include a coaxial introduction into asserting each introduced person into the optimal nature of their own personality through a training program that rids them of all possibilities of alienation that may introduce uncalculated quirks and other issues into the aggregate behavior of the community.

 

[Black Rose]

I was told I need complete relaxation.

The ability to control ones internal reality is dependent on that.

If you can control the inside then everything else is thus contingent.

Because the simulation results in resonance of thought into action between us.

 

[Milo]

I was told I need complete relaxation.

Harmony

The ability to control ones internal reality is dependent on that.

Secret to the INFJ's ability to incast

If you can control the inside then everything else is thus contingent.

Cybernetics

Because the simulation results in resonance of thought into action between us.

Coaxial exchange


....Analyzing community placement....

....Projecting options....

....Introductory training....

....Reducing options....

....Placing new member: Animekitty....

...."WELCOME HOME ANIMEKITTY"....

 

[Auburn]

I'd be totally up for this, if only it was doable?

What metric would you use to identify, and thus proceed to arrange, these personalities? I'm assuming it wouldn't just be the A-F metric but a comprehensive psychological(neurological?) understanding of each individual?

Do you have any examples of some of the personality-optimized frameworks wherein humans (of complementary personalities) could indeed coexist harmoniously?

Are we talking pre or post brain uploading technology?

 

[Shieru]

this is a genius idea, Milo. it strikes me very much as a Ti castle in the sky - a beautiful framework which is coherent within the context of its theoretical parameters.

i think such an idea is worthy of experimentation, certainly. however, perfectly organized ideas such as this have a tendency to break down when applied to a real-world scenario. from what i've seen, it usually comes down to some degree of ignorance of all the variables involved - which is an especially likely matter when dealing with something as nuanced and variable as human psychological dynamics.

 

[Milo]

I'd be totally up for this, if only it was doable?

What metric would you use to identify, and thus proceed to arrange, these personalities? I'm assuming it wouldn't just be the A-F metric but a comprehensive psychological(neurological?) understanding of each individual?

Do you have any examples of some of the personality-optimized frameworks wherein humans (of complementary personalities) could indeed coexist harmoniously?

Are we talking pre or post brain uploading technology?

The metrics would only exist as the virtual community exists and they would be arbitrary algorithmic patterns that are multiplied into each other depending on what part of the community you are ven-diagramming to analyze the discrete form of the metrics. I say arbitrary, because looking at them from the outside in is not effective unless you have a very transdisiplinary mind to analyze it with--in which you might as well use a computer to help you single out each statisical correllation, but that is already implied in the algorithm of the simulator.

The A-F is more a reference for the programmer of the simulator to create a template for all of the possible personality traits that cover all of the functions tied to interrational dynamics and most likely correspond the functions of each community member to associate most predominantly with those whose social contracts compliment the nature of their own. This could include elements that are not limited to analysis of the prioritization of their values, their stress thresholds, their preferences and tastes, and their motivational styles--all calculated by the simulator with virtual mixtures of people and most likely matched to a similar social setting using psychological tests and surveys, that, over a small period of time can be verified as accurate for each individual via the community training and introduction program.

The examples would all be derived from fundamental traits recognized by the most modern understandings of human psychology. Here is an example of technology already made using thinking of this scale as sufficient evidence for the possibility of this and as a pardon for me not having any specific examples to give you: https://www.facebook.com/finders.course/videos/857712790998688/

I believe brain uploading technology was popularized in the era of propagandic art already. Using methods of suggestion through an emulator generated by ideas that connect the depths of your mind to the information being relayed to you, this technology is one in the same as the power of influence. I see no need for implants or anything of that nature.

 

[Milo]

this is a genius idea, Milo. it strikes me very much as a Ti castle in the sky - a beautiful framework which is coherent within the context of its theoretical parameters.

i think such an idea is worthy of experimentation, certainly. however, perfectly organized ideas such as this have a tendency to break down when applied to a real-world scenario. from what i've seen, it usually comes down to some degree of ignorance of all the variables involved - which is an especially likely matter when dealing with something as nuanced and variable as human psychological dynamics.

As perfect harmony is ideal, productivity is also a value placed on the personality of the community as a whole. Most likely, there will be a stress load that a community will be allowed to have without it causing any disruption and desire for any member to seek a better way of life that could risk the integrity of the people's belief that this community is optimal for their physical and psychological needs. The simulator would project all of the possible community patterns until it understands each through its full cycle of behavior. Each cycle of behavior would be given stats to help define the aggregate communal value along with the subjective value for each individual member via his/her experience throughout all of the social contracts made within each cycle which would calculate into their personality's traits as definable levels of each emotion experienced by them which can be analyzed and cycled to allow each person the highest amount of cycled emotional energy for a happy and productive lifestyle.

 

[Milo]

Thank you all for your comments. It gives me the chance to elaborate the idea further which is invaluable to my life's work.

 

[Milo]

The implications of this chemistry book of communities created by the simulator could allow the timeline of the human race's psychological evolution to be geared in any direction. The only limits of this shepherding are what can be fathomed by the societal orchestrator(s)--the one(s) in charge of administering these communities.

 

[Black Rose]

https://youtu.be/xfCbQ8azaQs

https://youtu.be/a7zPnoZ9b_k

 

[Milo]

@Animekitty

I think this video you posted in your "Rectifying All Perspectives into an Uber Model" thread could be one of the introductory videos for introducting/advertising the program to investors

https://youtu.be/w6V_YKn8i9k

 

[Black Rose]

http://www.kurzweilai.net/forums/topic/self-referenced-brain-loop

 

[QuickTwist]

There seems to be some overlap in the premise of characteristics. Is that intentional?

 

[Milo]

There seems to be some overlap in the premise of characteristics. Is that intentional?

That could just be the way I've integrated a form of triangulation into my communication to point out distinct specifics that may otherwise leave ambiguities in my explanations.

 

[QuickTwist]

That could just be the way I've integrated a form of triangulation into my communication to point out distinct specifics that may otherwise leave ambiguities in my explanations.

Was thinking of aggression and competition. What's the core difference?

 

[Milo]

If there is an example of seceding to compete because of a life or death situation, then this example necessitates those variables to be distinct in the program in order separate the coding of the personalities so that the personality can decide which one it values over the other.

Example 1: If it is a life or death situation and the person values winning and is going to die unless he/she gives up--his/her version of winning could be maintaining his/her honor to fight until death because perhaps his/her decision is based on a team's morale.

Example 2: If it is a life or death situation and the person fears death over winning, he/she will surely think outside of the box of the "game" he/she is playing in order to save themselves

These are two distinct behavioral patterns which thus necessitates the distinction between the two fundamental categories associated with social contracts.

 

[QuickTwist]

If there is an example of seceding to compete because of a life or death situation, then this example necessitates those variables to be distinct in the program in order separate the coding of the personalities so that the personality can decide which one it values over the other.

Example 1: If it is a life or death situation and the person values winning and is going to die unless he/she gives up--his/her version of winning could be maintaining his/her honor to fight until death because perhaps his/her decision is based on a team's morale.

Example 2: If it is a life or death situation and the person fears death over winning, he/she will surely think outside of the box of the "game" he/she is playing in order to save themselves

These are two distinct behavioral patterns which thus necessitates the distinction between the two fundamental categories associated with social contracts.

I fail to see how aggression ie. kill or be killed is in line with zero sum games.

 

[Milo]

I fail to see how aggression ie. kill or be killed is in line with zero sum games.

It's not in line, but because it is an aspect of a personality's distinctive behavior, the program is made to make it align as a defined behavioral pattern which is then associated with all the possible sets of other personalities in order to make calculations as a basis for the judgment of sound societal structures that allow for the highest standards of living to align the theoretical with the actual.

And a zero-sum game is a bit more complicated in this context because each personality desires its own set of things, whereas another personality might value another set of things more highly. This difference in people is what makes this program practical because its maxims are generated on a deeper level of understanding the uniqueness of every human using the algorithms generated by the simulator's reduction of the 6 fundamental categories that affect interrelational behaviors instead of measuring things like the amounts of money each person gets or what they get for their personalities contributiom to society. It's based on people's values and their emotional needs to keep each unique individual at an approved level of happiness.

 

[QuickTwist]

Its not in line, but because it is an aspect of a personalities distinctive behavior, the program is made to make it align as a defined behavioral pattern which is then associated with all the possible sets of other personalities in order to make calculations as a basis for the judgment of sound societal structures that allow for the highest standards of living to align the theoretical with the actual.

And a zero-sum game is a bit more complicated in this context because each personality desires its own set of things whereas another personality might value another set of things more highly. This difference in people is what makes this program practical because its maxims are generated on a deeper level of understanding the uniqueness of every human instead of measuring things like amounts of money each person gets or what they get for their performance. Its based on peoples values and the emotional energy needed to keep each unique individual at an approved level of happiness.

Don't know.. I just view competition the same way I view aggression. They are both essentially I win you lose.

They both feed on the same exact primal desires, which at its core is rage.

Competition in my eyes is just a watered down more sophisticated version of aggression.

 

[Black Rose]

Competition is not necessarily survive or die.
I won't necessarily die because I lose the baseball game.
A person only concerned with survival will not cooperate with other people to win a game.
In competition where your team may die is called war, we are not constantly in a state of war.

 

[Milo]

Don't know.. I just view competition the same way I view aggression. They are both essentially I win you lose.

They both feed on the same exact primal desires, which at its core is rage.

Competition in my eyes is just a watered down more sophisticated version of aggression.

Then those are the aspects of the programming that we would use to place you into a theoretically proven place in society where those aspects are used beneficially to help your society which allows for a maximal margin of benefit to return back to you from that society's economic gain that is measured in relation to the values of each of its localized community members and their personal and emotional preferences that are the mappings of the behavioral loops and cycles that the program's places each member in to keep their emotional health at optimal levels and to keep the economics of the sustaining community at low risk for degradation. The community make up will also be valued based on the resources that its economy produces, imports, and exports--that aspect will allow the program to calculate accurate consideration for neighboring communities between the properties of the economy and the individuals available to form the optimal neighboring community.

 

[QuickTwist]

Then those are the aspects of the programming that we would use to place you into a theoretically proven place in society where those aspects are used beneficially to help your society which allows for a maximal margin of benefit to return back to you from that society's economic gain that is measured in relation to the values of each of its localized community members and their personal and emotional preferences that are the mappings of the behavioral loops and cycles that the program's places each member in to keep their emotional health at optimal levels and to keep the economics of the sustaining community at low risk for degradation. The community make up will also be valued based on the resources that its economy produces, imports, and exports--that aspect will allow the program to calculate accurate consideration for neighboring communities between the properties of the economy and the individuals available to form the optimal neighboring community.

I am mostly a pacifist and mostly a non competitive person.

I am still lost on the core differences between the two. :/

Competition says "Its either you or me" and aggression says pretty much the same thing. :/

 

[Milo]

I am mostly a pacifist and mostly a non competitive person.

I am still lost on the core differences between the two. :/

Competition says "Its either you or me" and aggression says pretty much the same thing. :/

Are you interested in creating the program? If you're not competitive, then you probably don't have the strength of will in the direction of technological advancement in any of the dominant partitions of your mind to necessitate your instincts to desire the comprehension of this type of information--a psychological block that is disallowing your understanding of what is being said.

 

[Auburn]

@QuickTwist - I think you're missing the point a little bit. As milo said earlier "A-F is more a reference for the programmer of the simulator to create a template for all of the possible personality traits" - so I don't think it's the whole story, but a rough outline of what would be a more complex protocol.

But I also just noticed the A-F scale seem to match the first letter of the titles to its corresponding designation (A=Aggression, B=Bureaucracy, etc) - so maybe this took some semantic acrobatics. Going with that aesthetic could have skewed the terms used (out of a limitation in matching terms) and prompted the selection of less idea shorthands, which caused some of the confusion?

If I had to reinterpret this scale a little, name restrictions notwithstanding, I'd probably estimate something like:

A. Survival: survive or die [straightforward self-preservation]
C. Rivalry: my gain is your loss [more intelligent competition for resources/power]
B. Bureaucracy: follow the norms and rules [negotiation, reciprocity, trade, market]
E. Cooperation: in one unified interest [if you win; we all win - mentality]
D. Empathy: disclosing individual feelings, intentions [i'd actually call this one Empathy not Decison]
F. Free will: The ability for any species, regardless of type, race, sex, creed, belief, genetics, make, model, or sentience to govern their own existence and not be controlled. "To be free to choose how to live life without discrimination or interference." [this one's pretty understandable]

I think I moved around B&C, and also D&E.

If we're speaking about a progression/evolution of strategies that humans are involved in when they structure themselves socially, competition comes before bureaucracy--- first tribes fight one another, for land, for territory and resources --- then they eventually team up, make contracts, trades, etc.

Likewise, what comes first is an understanding of "we have a unified goal in mind, lets cooperate" before both parties truly understand or disclose their own feelings. So for example, the tribes may team up against a larger tribe, even though they don't really understand one-another's Gods or rituals.

"disclosing individual feelings, intentions" and the comprehension of that experience of another being, is to me closer to "Empathy" (not "Decision") and this is when the tribes really come to see eye-to-eye with where the other is coming from. This is not necessary for initial cooperation, but this approaches Harmony better. So I'd rank this second to last here, for sure.

The last one "Free will" seems to talk about a civilization of individuals who do not need to exist in a societal/hierarchical structure because they are self-sufficient entities? But also individuals who honor the way-of-being of all other people. This only works if the other people are also of a similar accord in general.

Because then what does it mean to honor the individual desires and creeds of someone whose views are closer to the Aggression spectrum? Would it mean to allow them to do as they desire/wish, even if that creed/belief is one that infringes on the liberties of others?

And if it is not to be allowed, then there is indeed a degree of "control" that must be exercised, even if only the control of all those who would wish to sap control and liberty from the rest of us.

Hence, the Free Will point is only ultimately tolerant and completely hands-off with those of its own kind; those who don't need regulating because their flow of life is not interfering with anyone else's flow. This creates a bit of a paradox doesn't it -- making it hard to call it "free"?

Because if it truly was free, it would be like a beautiful lush garden with no fence around it. It would be eaten by bugs and animals and cease to be what it is, very quickly. Enforcement allows for beauty and harmony to exist, but only within the regulated space.

 

[Milo]

@Auburn, I admire your explanation to QuickTwist, and you are a little more on track, but it is yet an even bigger picture than that because, yes of coarse this is a form of control, but it's control is to steer each member of the society towards a position they would be most fulfilled by anyways. Your attempt to put these categories into a hierarchy would bias the value of each plausible member when the goal is to put the member into a society accordingly to enhance their societal value by allowing them to have more mutually beneficial social contracts that are reinforced by the incentives of the communities structure to keep that member guided to the theoretically successful societal form.

Also, I got the fundamental framework from the Wikipedia article on sociocybernetics because it is only a means to helping explain the greater overall idea of it.

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

 

[Auburn]

Oh I see, I misunderstood the A-F progression of letters as being a progression in scale or hierarchy.

The wikipedia article seems very limited in detail, but abundant in beautiful concepts. I love the premise, but as with many other attempts to rectify problems in our socio-economic and cultural world --- the devil's in the details. And so far as I know, we just don't have the knowledge of psychology we would need, at this point in our human history, to measure psychological experience adequately, personality, levels of happiness, or many other related factors that such a simulation would need to know in order to calibrate itself. But I certainly could see this being a future possibility.

Conceptual edifices like this can crumble to pieces when they meet with the complex interplay of human psychology (and our unconscious/latent drives, unknown impulses) with ecology, history, philosophy, culture, genetics and just sheer ignorance.

But I don't think it means we shouldn't try. And it seems that, if we make our best effort to design a better successor to whatever broken system we currently have, even if it's not perfect it can be closer to the solution.

The success of a project like this would necessitate a vast multi-disciplinary effort, with studies spanning decades to discover the efficacy of certain frameworks, as piloted perhaps in smaller ecosystems. I would estimate that certain ecosystems, due to their very nature, can only achieve a certain degree of Harmony. Is this an acceptable consideration? ...or do you envision a result wherein harmony is achieved even within those who (as with aggression) may not want it?

Lastly, is there any more information on this? The wiki's rather sparse, and entirely coming from 2 authors, which isn't all that satisfying.

Thank you for sharing your ideas with us.

 

[Milo]

Did you see this link?

https://www.facebook.com/finders.cou...7712790998688/

When you already understand the details in full yourself, then the goal is to seek discovery from seeing bigger pictures. Explaining extreme details at that point is basically just to teach people more math skills to realize that they have been missing out on just as many details that exist on a higher conceptual scale. Of course the devil is in the details, but I'm in the business of rising above on a platform of solid ground that I form with the alchemy of my accruing knowledge. I refuse to limit my potential because I have to wait for everyone to catch up. Especially when the solid ground I am standing on is already a pathway of knowledge open to their realization at any time they learn to heighten their focuses to the molecules of reality, rather than looking at atoms all day.

 

[Pizzabeak]

Excuse my ignorance but this is just a device used to propagate a utopia and replace the current political ideologies that cause much harm and suffering, given a fancy name to lure people into its grip, for what it's worth. I suppose any new system will be strange at first. Whatever it takes to not have Donald Trump as president, as they say.
I think Judaism predicted this as well, or started out with some notions. All students of the torah had to study it, and the sciences to round off their education so as to be knowledgeable of the kabbalistic ways of life and also to live according to the Bible. The Rebbes separated all students into respective houses based on their personality and what they would excel at, be it music or mathematics. This sounds similar but taken a little further, for operational purposes. This could go either one of two ways. And outside of force I wonder how many would be willing to comply with the new system. People don't want their freedoms taken away. Without enough money there's a slim chance this'll work. And Big Brother could easily use it for their own gain, like in 1984. I suppose it being mediated by complex computers and algorithms should prevent that by creating objectively good individuals in the first place but again I think the worries of giving up too much control linger even if promised to end in an optimal free will.

 

[Milo]

Excuse my ignorance but this is just a device used to propagate a utopia and replace the current political ideologies that cause much harm and suffering, given a fancy name to lure people into its grip, for what it's worth. I suppose any new system will be strange at first. Whatever it takes to not have Donald Trump as president, as they say.
I think Judaism predicted this as well, or started out with some notions. All students of the torah had to study it, and the sciences to round off their education so as to be knowledgeable of the kabbalistic ways of life and also to live according to the Bible. The Rebbes separated all students into respective houses based on their personality and what they would excel at, be it music or mathematics. This sounds similar but taken a little further, for operational purposes. This could go either one of two ways. And outside of force I wonder how many would be willing to comply with the new system. People don't want their freedoms taken away. Without enough money there's a slim chance this'll work. And Big Brother could easily use it for their own gain, like in 1984.

In this case, the Big Brother would be the program designed to make people happy in s sustainable society. Emphasis on making them happy. Lol

This would be a model supported by both Democratic and Republican sides as well as many of the smaller parties.

 

[QuickTwist]

Reminds me of this honestly:

http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Qun

 

[Milo]

Reminds me of this honestly:

http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Qun

It's not like that. lol. But that is an interesting concept.

 

[Black Rose]

https://youtu.be/zdFdUZn0aog

 

[Black Rose]

https://youtu.be/xgIRLk3ACTc

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

There's another developmental theory I was going to post as relevant, but I'll just namedrop:

The 8 Circuits of Consciousness

Yours mirrors the first 4 levels, with Level F representing the shift to the higher 4 levels.

 

[Milo]

https://youtu.be/zdFdUZn0aog

BINGO!

The more connected you are to the explosion, the more momentum you will gain at the start of the new economy's boom. And when you have affiliations close to the blast, then you'll have that second and third rocket to increase the speed of your outer space travel as you look down on the unenlightened who are now just leftovers from the previous era who will be lost to their own fate that is not the focus of this future. Those are the targets for missionary work to keep adding to the sociological network of billions of ideas multiplying off of each other like in the video you posted.

And thanks for posting that video again (anyone else reading, the finders course video was in my original referral to the plausibility of the idea in this thread).

 

[Milo]

There's another developmental theory I was going to post as relevant, but I'll just namedrop:

The 8 Circuits of Consciousness

Yours mirrors the first 4 levels, with Level F representing the shift to the higher 4 levels.

Nice! Yeah, that idea would be one of the core elements that the programmer would consider for the simulation generator and would be a part of each citizens introduction to the community.

 

[Milo]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent-based_model

Here is another almost exact concept of the element used in the program as the internal engine of the virtual society's derivative identifier, cross-reference sequence, self-integrated reference map of all the projected elements and several points for triangulating the possible property modulations used as a reference for generating a template for all possible societal forms to back analyze the path for a society that fulfills the desired quota for everyone's standard of living to be self-sustaining via the proven societal placement of people in respect to each person's characterization which would be identified using sound logic on our understanding of consciousness with reference points from the measured values of sufficient factors that are plugged into the training programs analysis of the proper way to identify and place you as a member in the most highly corresponding plausible community that takes the peak values for society's ability to self-sustain the continuous growth in the standard of living and each members benefits of being in that society as it corresponds to their own personal self-interests. I wouldn't be surprised if Wolfram-Alpha uses an algorithm that you could take from the template of this to give you the answers to any question you type into it. The general concept here is a self-relational machine for identifying any plausible implication any concept can make in relation to all other concepts. It could be used to mass produce any type of content wanted. It's product is generated by all the limits you put on it--which in this case we are limiting it to be a utilitarian ideal for a future of flourishing societies.

So to sum this concept up extremely well, this could be called "The Utilitarian's Dues Ex Machina".

 

[Black Rose]

https://illuminaticatblog.wordpress.com/2017/03/03/maximum-theoretical-iq/