Government - #101 - #08 – “What are the “main values” of our “new” society are supposed to be !”

"I'm at a loss to see certain values!"

I. First of all “whose society” are we talking about? The “rich” society, the “poor” society, the “successful” society, the “unsuccessful” society? How about the “religious”, the non-religious, the “Catholic”, the “Jewish”, the “Moslem”, etc.? And how about the “formally educated”, the “drop out”, the “homeless”, the “criminal”, the “victim” ,etc.? Get the picture? …. “Whose society?”
II. Then…Who is to decide “the main values”? …. Who elected him/her/it?
III. Then…The “values” of what? … Who is to decide?

What in heavens name are we talking about??

Not only are we talking about this, but, we’re actually arguing about “it”! … Whatever “it” is!
Wouldn’t it be more useful to “define” the questions first?
Wouldn’t it be more useful to know that you couldn’t get a “mutual definition”, before you wasted your energy? …. (After all, you could be taking a nice warm bath!!!)

(This is such an important question that you shouldn’t leave it unanswered!!! … even in disgust!!)

Here are some suggestions:

1. Decide which “society” you want to include. There may be some societies that may be irrelevant to you and your discussion. Similarly, any response, critical or in support of, from these so-called (by you) “irrelevant portions of society” are to be disregarded from the continuing discussion. Anyone not having the intellect or motivation to abide by this decision should “go home and take a nice warm bath!” If you don’t abide by this decision, you are just going to aggravate yourself and your discussion group in a meaningless waste of time!

2. Decide a priority list of a few values you wish to include in the discussion. Here too, if you are unable to mutually agree to limit the discussion to a list of a few values that are mutually important to the group, you should “go home and take a nice warm bath!” Again…If you don’t abide by this decision, you are just going to aggravate yourself and your discussion group in a meaningless waste of time!

Perhaps I could suggest a restricted, personal “beginning”………

I. The society I would chose in the “beginning” would include:

a. People who had some exposure to formal educational instruction.
b. People, who could express themselves in a defined, rational, non- aggressive manner.
c. People who were self-disciplined, motivated, and constructive in their desire to communicate.
d. People, whom I thought, had something constructive to offer, to “share” (i.e. “A successful alternative”.)
II.My “society” would NOT include:

1. People who merely “mouth” the words and thoughts of others, without personal understanding of what they themselves are “mouthing”.
2. People with an agenda who are not participating to “share or contribute”, but either to criticize, or keep repeating, or promote their agenda.
3. People who do not think but merely exist (i.e. – The human, two legged animals that merely eat, drink and procreate; but do not contribute to improvement.)
4. People who are not rational or logical. People with “closed minds”, where the chances of anything new or changed are prevented from entering their minds.

II. The “ values” I would select in the “beginning” are:

a. How to achieve the following:
b. The “value” of words and definitions
c. The “value” of reason and logic
d. The “value” of mutual understanding and mutual communication
e. The “value” of the concern for others and the process of “sharing”
f. The principles of Privacy and Private property
g. Motivation and the necessity of work
h. What to do if these values are violated? …(the subjects of discipline and punishment)
i. Then, and only then, could I select a wide variety of “subjects”……….(Religion, dogma, politics, have vs. have-nots, etc., etc.)


P.S.:
I always seem to end with a description of the elements of “mutually defined and understood communications”. Perhaps that’s the beginning of everything!