Timothy Wilken MD writes: Unanimous Rule Democracy is a much more powerful mechanism of decision making than the majority rule of present day democracy.

Synergy means working together—operating together as in Co-Operation—laboring together as in Co-Laboration—acting together as in Co-Action. The goal of synergic union is to accomplish a larger or more difficult task than can be accomplished by individuals working separately.

However true synergy, which gives us humans the opportunity to accomplish more together than we can accomplish separately, also requires more from us. It requires synergic consensus. For any group of humans, synergic consensus can provide a much more powerful mechanism of decision making than even the best majority rule democracy carefully following Roberts Rules of Order.

Synergic consensus occurs when a group of humans sit as equals and negotiate to reach a decision in which they all win and in which no one loses. In synergic science this is called heterarchy. That means all members of the deciding group sit on the same level as “equals”. All decisions within a truly synergic group are made within “decision heterarchy”. A decision heterarchy is made up of a group of humans with common purpose. The minimum number is 2 the maximum number is presently unknown. I believe the ideal size may be ~six or seven individuals. The group is organized horizontally with all individuals sharing equal authority and equal responsibility.

Most Western humans are familiar with the democratic committee system. It is very different from the decision heterarchy. While both are methods of organizing human individuals to make decisions for group action. Committees are filled with conflict and highly ineffective. In a committee no individual is held responsible for the actions taken by the group. And decision is made by majority ultimatum. A desenting minority member is forced to support the action he voted against or leave the committee. Heterarchy within a synergic group, in contrast organizes individuals to have equal authority to decide on joint action with equal responsibility for the resultant that is produced by that joint action.

Synergic consensus occurs when a group of humans sitting in heterarchy negotiate and reach a decision in which they all win and in which no one loses. In a synergic heterarchy, all members sit on the same level as “equals”. No one has more authority than anyone else. Every one has equal responsibility and equal authority within the heterarchy. The assignment for the heterarchy is to find a plan of action so that all members win. It is the collective responsibility of the entire heterarchy to find this “best” solution. Anyone can propose a plan to accomplish the needs of the group. All problems related to accomplishing the needs would be discussed at length in the heterarchy.

The proposed plan of action for solving a problem is examined by all members of the heterarchy. Anyone can suggest a modification, or even an alternative action to solve the problem. All members of the heterarchy serve as information sources for each other. The heterarchy continues in discussion until a plan of action is found that will work for everyone. When all are in agreement and only then can the plan be implemented. The plan insures that all members of the synergic heterarchy win. (09/09/08)
more…

James Howard Kunstler writes: Why do the big deals always happen over the weekends? So the big boyz in government and finance can take off their neckties when they bargain with each other? So the markets will be closed and unable to register a response one way or another? So the shrinking fraction of the US public that pays attention to anything besides Nascar and pornography won’t catch the news Saturday evening?

This weekend’s big deal was the US government taking over the “government sponsored enterprises” (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that guarantee trillions of dollars in mortgages. The “guarantee” is supposedly accomplished by converting bundles of mortgages from the banks and loan companies that originate them (that make the contracts with the buyers of houses) into bonds that can be sold downstream. Risk was theoretically dispersed among the holders of these bonds. This all seemed to work during the long stable period when our cheap oil economy was chugging along, and house prices maintained a consistent relationship with incomes, and people paid their mortgages dependably. The whole system ran like a reliable machine — like a Chrysler slant-six engine! …

Since then, the US economy and the financial part of it that became a nine hundred pound tail wagging a thirty-pound dog, has been held together with baling wire, duct tape, and band-aids. All the debt run up by all parties — home-owners, credit-card holders, business, banks, hedge funds, government — is not being paid back reliably, and all the leveraged arrangements that depend on it being paid back are coming apart. Thus, capital disappears. The wealth of a nation disappears. All that remains is the pretense that we are still a wealthy society.

Fannie and Freddie are near the center of this black hole of debt. So far, the black hole has been “papered over” by the old stage magician’s trick of diverting the audience’s attention. The systemic wound that Bear Stearns represented, was covered up with a band-aid applied by the Federal Reserve’s exchange of loans for worthless securities. In fact, the capital of Bear Stearns actually did disappear — a mere residue of it, a few cents on the dollar, was shifted to JP Morgan as payment for taking the wrapper off the band-aid. But, basically, the money is gone.

Now, the same thing has happened with Fannie and Freddie, except that the scale is an order of magnitude greater. This time, the US Treasury Department is assuming worthless paper and paying out much larger loans to enterprises that are functionally bankrupt. The exact nature of the government’s chartered “sponsorship” has always been ambiguous. Professional opinion has generally held that government backing was implied rather than explicit — but that’s a ridiculous internal contradiction that went unchallenged for decades as Fannie and Freddie’s Ponzi-style operation lumbered on (and their executives made off with obscene payouts). Now the government’s role has suddenly been made explicit. It will probably only make things worse, since the enterprises are too big and over-scaled to work under any circumstances, let alone insolvency.

One thing this points to is a truth that is uniformly overlooked by kibitzers: that what we developed over the past decade in America was not an “information economy” or a “consumer economy” but a suburban sprawl building economy, meaning an economy dedicated to building a living arrangement with no future. The climax of the sprawl building economy occurred in absolute lockstep with the climax of peak oil. You can date it virtually to the month — May, 2005. After that, the future asserted itself and all the financial expectations bound up with sprawl-building went up in a vapor — including the value of mortgages on suburban houses. Everything that followed has been an attempt to cover up this basic reality: that the way we live in America can’t continue. (09/09/08)
more…

BBC Science — The most brilliant minds should be directed to solving Earth’s greatest challenges, such as climate change, says Sir David King. The former UK chief scientist used his presidential address at the BA Science Festival to call for a gear-change among innovative thinkers.

He suggested that less time and money be spent on endeavours such as space exploration and particle physics. He said population growth and poverty in Africa also demanded attention. “The challenges of the 21st Century are qualitatively different from anything that we’ve had to face up to before,” he told reporters before the opening of the festival, which is being held this year in Liverpool. “This requires a re-think of priorities in science and technology and a redrawing of our society’s inner attitudes towards science and technology.”

Sir David’s remarks are controversial because they are being made just as the UK is about to celebrate its participation in the Large Hadron Collider, the world’s biggest physics experiment.

Chief among these challenges for Sir David is the issue of climate change. When he was the government’s top scientist, he made the famous remark that the threat from climate change was bigger than the threat posed by terrorism.

He said alternatives to fossil fuels were desperately needed to power a civilisation that would number some nine billion people by mid-century - nine billion people who would all expect a high standard of living. “We will have to re-gear our thinking because our entire civilisation depends on energy production, and we have been producing that energy very largely through fossil fuels; and we will have to remove our dependence from fossil fuels virtually completely, or we will have to learn how to capture carbon dioxide from fossil fuel usage,” he said.

Finding and exploiting clean energy sources was now imperative, he said; and Sir David questioned whether the spending on particle physics research in the shape of Cern’s Large Hadron Collider was the best route to that goal. He even doubted whether Cern’s greatest invention was an outcome that could only have come from an institution that pursued so-called “blue skies research”.  (09/09/08)
more…

BBC Science – If you have just had a big falling out with a colleague, there is nothing better than the comforting and consoling arm of a good friend.

Chimps, it seems, feel the same way, according to a study at Chester Zoo. The research is said to provide the first evidence that consolation in primates, such as hugging and stroking, can reduce stress levels after a fight.

The behaviour could indicate some level of empathy, Dr Orlaith Fraser told the British Association Science Festival. “We can’t actually say what’s going on in a chimpanzee’s mind; we can only deduce from their behaviour what’s going on,” the Liverpool John Moores University researcher said. Because this behaviour is actually reducing stress levels and it’s being offered by a valuable partner, it seems likely that this is an expression of empathy.”

Dr Fraser and colleagues spent 18 months observing 22 adult chimps at Chester Zoo. They watched closely what happened immediately after the animals had a scrap - perhaps a fight over food, a mate or simply where to sit. In about 50% of cases, the victim in the fight would be consoled by another member of the group. The soothing was always done by a valuable - or best - friend, a chimp with whom the victim would routinely play or share food. The consolation usually took the form of a kiss or embrace, a grooming session or even play.

The scientists could see that this activity had the effect of reducing stress levels, indicated by the return to the animals’ normal activities of self-scratching and self-grooming. (09/09/08)
more…