by James | Feb 21, 2012 | Exploration I
Who is responsible for resolving disputes between members of the community? Disputes fall under a number of categories, physical disputes where members are involved in actual physical aggression should be stopped by all members present or a call could be made to security or failing that the local authorities. In such cases civil law will take over if the parties wish to place charges.
In social disputes they will take the form of a public dialogue which should occur with each of the members (or groups of members) debating and discussing their viewpoint and a selection of their peers voting to decide upon the acceptable or correct viewpoint.
Finally in the case of scientific disputes one should follow the facts as far as one can and the criticism should be followed in public peer review journals.
by James | Feb 20, 2012 | Exploration I
Who is responsible for the safety well being and health of the members of the community?
There is a large difference between ‘safety’ and ‘health’ but we can take from this a number of different perspectives. Firstly, workplace safety should adhere to the strictest levels possible irrelevant of the health and safety standards of the host country, Members of in England should receive the same safety regulations as those working in India, safety of the individual is paramount.
Outside of a work environment there should be some understanding of self-accountability and responsibility, if you trip on the stairs and hurt yourself or place yourself in a position that results in an act of carelessness leading to harm it is not the fault of the community for not telling you to watch your feet. Thus, while some procedures (such as lab work e.t.c) must drawn up carefully in case of complaint it should assume that every member is a functioning, reasoning human being and not incapable of observing the obvious.
As for health there is a huge number of definitions for what being ‘healthy’ is and likewise there are a number of different people involved; cooks and chefs are responsible for nutritional and dietary health, insuring that nobody with an allergy is adversely affected, while physical trainers or sensei are concerned with the muscle, cardio and must also be aware of their students abilities and medical conditions. Waivers and insurance in the case of martial arts are likely to be mandatory as they are in many industrialised nations. Being physically active as possible is a cornerstone of motivation, preparedness, regular sleep patterns, mental stability, cognitive enhancement and health just as much as diet is. The community mandates these things for the benefit of the individual certainly not for the ease of organisation or administration.
Finally there is the case of safety and well-being, if you want to feel safe it should be due to a community wide mentality of behaving correctly, not a select number of enforcers. Every member is autonomous unit with martial training and taught responsibility and accountability. If you see a fight between members and don’t act then you are responsible for acting to stop it. Maybe via calling for aid, or if confident getting involved but you have a responsibility to act as strong as the instigators responsibility for throwing the first punch.
In short every member is responsible for their health, safety and well-being and they should also feel that they are just as responsible to every other human being as well.
by James | Feb 15, 2012 | Exploration I
Who decides the initial ‘rules’ of the community? The rules in this context can be considered the regulations, procedures and systems that are put in place to allow the smooth running of the community. It is implicit that these rules should not run counter to the legal framework of the country the community resides in, or international law. However, it is possible the community may break with cultural or religious traditions and ideologies of its host country, but once again only if it remains within the civil laws of the country.
Rules should not be made for every misdemeanour if you have a lot of rules it is because the individual is corrupt, inept or utterly unable to be autonomous. The more laws we have the more it shows the lack of discipline, empathy, character and common decency of the individual, which is exactly what we are trying to develop in the citizens of this community.
As mentioned in such entries as 9, 17, 21, 25 (and others) there are two forms of regulation Internal (moral) and External (enforced) we should always attempts to build on the former so that the latter becomes more unnecessary.
Obviously as the scientific method shows us, and some glaring examples of modern nations, laws can become stagnant and redundant in the light of new evidence and changes in the understanding of our world. In this viewpoint new technologies and changing understanding of the mind can effect ethical issues and processes that were once thought to be fundamentally necessary.
Ultimately then the ‘rules’ that are written must be subject to change irrelevant of who wrote them initially, as humans are fallible and inherently prone to error. Initially, there should be a regular weekly discussion of the rules and processes by the founding members that should take place in the form of a dialogue whereby two independent groups tackle the same rules system (on the same subject). After a set of rules has been decided on by the two independent groups they come together and discuss and defend their solutions. Once the discussion is complete there will be a vote requiring a 2/3 majority for the ‘rules’ or ‘process’ to be accepted.
After all the various moral laws and enforced regulations and guidelines are decided on they should be recorded and followed for a significant period of time (upward of a year at the very least). At which point the process begins again from scratch.
Rule generating committees should be created at random with lots with any full-time member of the community viable to be chosen. This avoids stacked communities and avoids more complicated electoral processes. A group of officials should also be selected to become intimately familiar with the rules to help with regulatory decisions or disputes (see later) of misconduct. This committee will also be selected at random and have the same lifespan as the rules.
The officials who are intimately familiar with the rules should be present and participate in the debates forming the new set of rules once the older regulations reach the end of their allotted tenure. This is due to the fact that they will be considered experts; however, while they may debate the merits or flaws of rules used in the prior period they have no voting power on the new set of rules, they are in effect present purely for experienced input and insight.
It should be obvious from the above but even the rules, procedures and regulations outlined in this document are also subject to dismissal and change. They are simply explorations and thoughts into the way such a community could work.
by James | Feb 15, 2012 | Exploration I
There are no doubt more archetypes of potential candidates however these will be included as and when they are thought of.
by James | Feb 13, 2012 | Exploration I
The Student; While in the entries so far the community has been seen as a replacement for the work life space it is an equally viable environment for higher education. Now while this might not be immediately viable, eventually the community could open its doors to students. But rather than a typical academic approach to education, relying on theory primarily and standardized testing, it would be a vocational and practical approach, giving instructions in lab techniques, programming open source systems, teaching, research aid, data analysis e.t.c. The aim is to to provide practical beneficial skills with tangible applications first and teach the theory alongside this experience where applicable.
The reasons for joining the community under these circumstances are clear to anyone leaving education with savings rather than debt, with practical work experience and qualifications, a good physical condition, general public and debating skills and a great improvement in personal development, finances e.t.c. This would surely be both a benefit to both the student and any future employer.
