A Thought Experiment: Build a better Society

[Jodie.Lynne]

Imagine that you are in the position to create a society, think of the "Sims" games, but in real life.

YOU get to set up the political and economic structure, YOU get to decide if the wealthy get to dictate Legislation; YOU get to decide if there are marginalized segments of this society. YOU get to decide if people can be classed as "second class", or discriminated on,  based on their skin colour, political afiliation, religion, ethnic background, gender, religion, gender identity, economic status, or where they live.

YOU get to decide if things like slavery, abortion, equal rights, discrimination, even the right to vote are viable.

But here is the catch... Once you've created this society, YOU have to live in it, AND, you have no idea where in that society you will land.

EXAMPLE: YOU set up a society where rich, white men make up the rules, and white men are a  privileged class, but you might not end being a white man in it... 

What kind of society would you create?

Edited June 9, 2020 by Jodie.Lynne

[bison]

An equalitarian, tolerant one, naturally. Not only would you ensure yourself a fair place in that society, but, overall, it would be a much pleasanter place in which to live!

[HandsomeGorilla]

Why not just treat everyone the same? 

That's always seemed to work well for me. 

[XenoFish]

I wonder how a society founded on stoicism would work???

https://dailystoic.com/stoicism-beyond-the-self/

Edited June 9, 2020 by XenoFish

[Piney]

52 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

I wonder how a society founded on stoicism would work???

Or just plain minimalism. 

[jmccr8]

3 hours ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Imagine that you are in the position to create a society, think of the "Sims" games, but in real life.

YOU get to set up the political and economic structure, YOU get to decide if the wealthy get to dictate Legislation; YOU get to decide if there are marginalized segments of this society. YOU get to decide if people can be classed as "second class", or discriminated on,  based on their skin colour, political afiliation, religion, ethnic background, gender, religion, gender identity, economic status, or where they live.

YOU get to decide if things like slavery, abortion, equal rights, discrimination, even the right to vote are viable.

But here is the catch... Once you've created this society, YOU have to live in it, AND, you have no idea where in that society you will land.

EXAMPLE: YOU set up a society where rich, white men make up the rules, and white men are a  privileged class, but you might not end being a white man in it... 

What kind of society would you create?

Hi Jodie

After thinking a bit going out having a smoke and thinking a little more I concluded that everyone is a member of a society no exclusion. I would likely get ride of the monetary system as it in my mind the greatest contributor to most social aspects and education would change to encourage the strongest creative abilities they posess. people would work at what they love and not for the greatset fiscal reward because there isn't one we all work to provide for the whole and are not burdened with the "cost" of life, car payments homes food is all given because you give you skills/talents as well.

Okay back to the real world I got to go pay bills.

jmccr8

[_Only]

5 hours ago, HandsomeGorilla said:

Why not just treat everyone the same? 

That's always seemed to work well for me. 

Because humans treat each other differently based on how they are feeling at the time,naturally, for an extremely wide variety of potential reasons. It's impossible to just tell everyone "treat each other as you want to be treated" and walk away wiping your hands at a job well done. Humans don't work like that. It's a completely unrealistic expectation, though a positive one to dream about.

Edited June 10, 2020 by _Only

[nephili]

I think it would be interesting to make a society more based on what you should do. Not another society based on what you shouldn't do. Some societies become formed by laws and regulations to prevent actions and govern but give little advice or guidance as to what to do to better the society itself. Pretty much a this is what you do, not just a this is what you don't do. Just a thought.

Oh, and no taxes. Very small government. Barter when possible. Local source when possible. Keep within sustainable means. Repurpose and recycle when possible.

[+joc]

12 hours ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

What kind of society would you create?

I would create a society where everyone would be considered equal and rich white men would make all the rules.

[+Desertrat56]

10 hours ago, nephili said:

I think it would be interesting to make a society more based on what you should do.

Who would determine what "you should do"?

[Jon the frog]

17 hours ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Imagine that you are in the position to create a society, think of the "Sims" games, but in real life.

YOU get to set up the political and economic structure, YOU get to decide if the wealthy get to dictate Legislation; YOU get to decide if there are marginalized segments of this society. YOU get to decide if people can be classed as "second class", or discriminated on,  based on their skin colour, political afiliation, religion, ethnic background, gender, religion, gender identity, economic status, or where they live.

YOU get to decide if things like slavery, abortion, equal rights, discrimination, even the right to vote are viable.

But here is the catch... Once you've created this society, YOU have to live in it, AND, you have no idea where in that society you will land.

EXAMPLE: YOU set up a society where rich, white men make up the rules, and white men are a  privileged class, but you might not end being a white man in it... 

What kind of society would you create?

We are animals you know ? Hierarchy is always present in nature... someone will get hurt and marginalized.

You can do a highly coercive system run by an artificial intelligence that put everyone on the same level, with the same access to education, job and all have the same salary whatever their capacity. You put in place a deep social value of pointing finger at anyone who betray the rule of equality so you can stop the establishment of a hierarchy. You need to put in place a system that will alleviate tension between community and groups by removing choice, so you have only a political party. Yep everyone will be equal and are slave of an authoritarian regime run by an artificial intelligence.

Nothing is perfect and never be. My chick just hatches and after two days the bigger one is already the boss... they had all the food, water and place they needed, without any possibility of discrimination, same batch, same breed, same day of hatch... but one was bigger. Hierarchy is just waiting at the next corner.

Edited June 10, 2020 by Jon the frog

[SHaYap]

Whatever it is, a lot of what makes today's "world" what it is needs to change. 

~

[Jodie.Lynne]

Just for clarity, I am not asking people to design a Utopia where there is perfect unity with no crime, and where people are penalized for their thoughts.

As @Jon the frog stated, there is a natural tendency for the stronger to dominate the weaker. However, we are supposed to be rational, thinking creatures, not acting completely on our instincts.

32 minutes ago, Jon the frog said:

You put in place a deep social value of pointing finger at anyone who betray the rule of equality so you can stop the establishment of a hierarchy. You need to put in place a system that will alleviate tension between community and groups by removing choice, so you have only a political party.

I disagree with this, for the fact that it exemplifies a hierarchal system in and of itself. Think Orwell's 'Animal Farm', or Communist Russia. It places "The System" as the leader of the society, who everyone must obey and conform to. But I appreciate your thoughts and your contribution.

( see what I did there? Under your model, my disagreement wouldn't be allowed )

[Horta]

18 hours ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Imagine that you are in the position to create a society, think of the "Sims" games, but in real life.

YOU get to set up the political and economic structure, YOU get to decide if the wealthy get to dictate Legislation; YOU get to decide if there are marginalized segments of this society. YOU get to decide if people can be classed as "second class", or discriminated on,  based on their skin colour, political afiliation, religion, ethnic background, gender, religion, gender identity, economic status, or where they live.

YOU get to decide if things like slavery, abortion, equal rights, discrimination, even the right to vote are viable.

But here is the catch... Once you've created this society, YOU have to live in it, AND, you have no idea where in that society you will land.

EXAMPLE: YOU set up a society where rich, white men make up the rules, and white men are a  privileged class, but you might not end being a white man in it... 

What kind of society would you create?

Great idea for a thread.

First I would encourage change from corporate capitalism by helping start more democratic forms of enterprise. Still based on the capitalist idea of competition in the marketplace, but with a different internal structure. One where every employee gets one share and one vote. An equal say in wages and conditions (including for executives), who the executive will be, where profits go etc. Let them run it and own it. In the hope that wealth distribution might eventually become less lopsided.

Religious institutions would have all loopholes closed and where possible be taxed at the full possible rate.

Some sort of bill of basic human rights that also covers economics, living standards, health care, education and so on. In the hope that gifted people can rise to the top without being burdened with debt if their parents aren't rich. That people aren't discriminated against economically simply by the misfortune of becoming ill. It would also be regardless of creed or colour or race. Also protect gay and transgender people.

I think I would also go ass about with politics and change it significantly. Try to make it a meritocracy. Significantly restrict the lobby system. Have some sort of an application system where people need relevant academic qualifications and stringent psych evaluations before they can apply. Sociologists working in welfare, environmental scientists in environment portfolios (instead of ex oil company executives lol), that sort of thing.

I would also open it up. For example Angela Merkel might apply for a position in the UK. Jacinda Adern might decide to apply for a high position in France (not sure if she speaks French though lol) or the USA. Just to give an idea. Plenty of details to be worked out regarding keeping such a system a functional democracy, but they could be ironed out lol. I'm over party systems, "isms" and duopolies. Our current western systems are broken and are now failures IMO.

That's a few ideas for starters.

[Jon the frog]

1 hour ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

( see what I did there? Under your model, my disagreement wouldn't be allowed )

Yep, and it's why we have war and discrimination, lol ! Joking apart, i like freedom a lot and stoicism like Xeno proposed is appealing but i'm far from believing it will work with our human greed and search of power and domination on others.

My model is far from humane but coercion have always been a tool to control. An AI will remove the human leading so hierarchy will be alleviated. But artificial intelligence can be a tool to build a new society, the problem is who will program it and what it will learn by itself...

 

Edited June 10, 2020 by Jon the frog

[Jodie.Lynne]

1 hour ago, Jon the frog said:

An AI will remove the human leading so hierarchy will be alleviated.

Extrapolating on this, wouldn't an AI start to develop a superiority complex? I'm thinking 'skynet', or the computer controlling the domed city in 'Logan's Run', wherein the 'program' becomes the ideal.

[kartikg]

Limit individual thoughts and actions on political subjects, limit the population. Limit sharing of political and religious ideas. People should be made to think about betterment of technology and life, only rational solution should be accepted, debates need to be curtailed. A society cannot function properly if it spends its free time on politics, artists, actors all try to influence people in subjects witch they have no expertise. Stop pundits from dragging the sport analysis on emotional lines. 

[Jodie.Lynne]

13 hours ago, nephili said:

Oh, and no taxes. Very small government.

Maybe a local government, with a loose overall Federal government?

I mean, every nation would require some kind of central point, in order to interact and confer with other nations, yes?

Otherwise, states would be able to act independently with other nations. EXAMPLE: NY could cut a trade deal with  India, while Texas might bestow "favoured nation" status with China.  We need a centralized government, in order to be a cohesive nation. And I agree that a smaller Federal government is needed

 

[+Desertrat56]

5 minutes ago, kartikg said:

Limit individual thoughts and actions on political subjects, limit the population. Limit sharing of political and religious ideas. People should be made to think about betterment of technology and life, only rational solution should be accepted, debates need to be curtailed. A society cannot function properly if it spends its free time on politics, artists, actors all try to influence people in subjects witch they have no expertise. Stop pundits from dragging the sport analysis on emotional lines. 

Didn't China and the Soviet Union already try that with no success?

[Jodie.Lynne]

6 minutes ago, kartikg said:

Limit individual thoughts and actions on political subjects, limit the population.

So, a society of drones, that obey without question?

And how, exactly, would you go about "limiting individual thoughts?"

 

And, in the context of my original post, would you desire to be in the position of deciding who gets to think what? What if... you were one of the plebs, unable to express your thoughts or opinions?

AND, who gets to decide what thoughts and actions are permissible?

Edited June 10, 2020 by Jodie.Lynne

[+Desertrat56]

Just now, Jodie.Lynne said:

So, a society of drones, that obey without question?

And how, exactly, would you go about "limiting individual thoughts?"

Probably he has the idea of implanting chips in the brains.  Or maybe all women would be robots like in The Stepford Wives.

[Jodie.Lynne]

2 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Or maybe all women would be robots like in The Stepford Wives.

oooh, yeah. Every man's fantasy, right?

[+Desertrat56]

2 minutes ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

oooh, yeah. Every man's fantasy, right?

Right until the revolt of the robots.    Then they will miss real women.

[Jodie.Lynne]

2 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Right until the revolt of the robots.    Then they will miss real women.

"But darling.... I love you to death! Stand still and let me hug you...." 

[XenoFish]

25 minutes ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Extrapolating on this, wouldn't an AI start to develop a superiority complex? I'm thinking 'skynet', or the computer controlling the domed city in 'Logan's Run', wherein the 'program' becomes the ideal.

Depending on how the AI is designed. Most people always focus on a worst case scenario. Basically to make an ideal civilization work you need to remove the human element. hat could be done in that case would be cyborgs, human brains within mechanical bodies. Without the human chassis and the robot body with the 3 laws of robotics, most if not all of our problems would vanish. At some later point, human brains can be grown and neuromapped with a default 'personality'. That brain like the ones before it could be placed within a mechanical body. Every experience would be added to the collective memory of the AI, increasing its 'experience' database, which would allow better and more refined decision making.