Author: admin

Complexity of life

Life is clearly incredibly complex; however we choose to look at it. Rather than a simple existence, settled in one place, the future largely mapped before you – as it seemingly once was – we’re now faced with a strangely fast-moving, ever-shifting reality where actions have impacts on a scale previously unimaginable.

Maybe it’s always been the case that we “meet” the world through family, community, peers, culture and society; becoming a product of our time and place, shaped by all we find about us and how we learn to relate to it all (see Notes One). This infolding and outworking of ideas, attitudes and their consequences may be a philosophical view of life, but might also be quite practical (Notes Two).

Modern life certainly seems very different from what’s gone before though: the things that influence us, the ways we relate, the ideas behind both those realities. Where life used to be fairly tightly held in terms of beliefs and conventions, the complete opposite now seems the case. Yet all these things still shape us, changing how we view one another and what we consider to be important.

Given the global nature of our connections, maybe it’s also that we’re much more aware of this complexity. We can know how our choices serve to shape the lives of others in distant corners of the planet; all our actions effectively forming part of these vast chains, making up the systems and tendencies of the modern world.

It’s fascinating to contemplate how relatively simple ideas have spread so quickly, reshaping how things are through the real world impacts of information, technology, or economic behaviour (Notes Three). Also how, while we’ve maybe never been so powerful in many ways, the paths to take in life are far from clear. It seems easier to lose the sense of yourself.

And that, I suppose, is the point I’m trying to pin down here: that within all this complexity of pace, choice and information there’s still just the self that’s trying to make sense of things and hopefully build a meaningful life within it all.

We might have the power that comes from knowledge; the freedom that comes with breaking the restraints of physical limitations or cultural traditions and the like; but finding the point where we can bring all this to bear within our lives must, in a way, be more difficult than ever.

The systems that make up how we live, although familiar, must be more complex now; as is our awareness of all the wonderful divergence spanning the globe from the past, the present, and the countless differing views we might hold about life itself. Then there’s the strange knowingness of how we live, the self-assured confidence of our particular brand of understanding as we strike our own path through the opportunities offered.

Seeing through all this to what we’re actually doing, how we’re treating one another, what we’re creating now and for the future – finding our place within it all – surely isn’t easy.

Notes and References:

Note 1: Mirrors we offer one another
Note 1: Human nature and community life
Note 1: Learning to be human
Note 2: Thoughts on art & on life
Note 2: Nature tells a story, about the planet
Note 2: David Bohm, thoughts on life
Note 3: The web and the wider world
Note 3: Modern media and complex realities
Note 3: Economy & Humanity

Looking further at appearances and realities, there’s Patience with the pace of change.

Ways to share this:

The philosopher stance

Approaching life, in the general or the specific, we can stand back to think, dive into action, or some degree of the two. We might become paralysed by the complexity of trying to understand; or swept up by reality, carried along with its preconceived notions. Finding the right balance, the best way to honour our capacities for thought while actively participating in the life of society cannot be easy.

Life isn’t straightforward: this blend of ideas and actions; intentions, impacts and conclusions; relationships and patterns of behaviour. Then there’s chance or luck thrown into the mix. In a way, we’re born into situations that bear with them history, consequences, responsibility, guilt; social and personal circumstances we have to work through, make our peace with, or rework as we see fit (see Notes One).

Then, in terms of modern life, there’s the unique and almost overwhelming change brought about through technology and all the ways it’s altered how we live, relate, and understand the world around us (Notes Two). The volume of what can now be known and cared about is of a vastly different scale from what’s gone before, as is the means by which it’s communicated.

With all these things, it’s easier to question the value of taking time to think. Where are the boundaries to your thoughts; where do you draw the line between what concerns you and what you don’t have time for? And where does thought lead: can it change anything, does your understanding matter, or are you engaged in futile contemplation while others act to their advantage?

So often we’re told, “This is how it is”. This is society, the paths it’s taken, the values initially at its core (even if their application has drifted so far as to be almost unrecognisable, at times), and the things it has to offer. We might be largely shaped to fill the roles society has in mind for us through education, culture, advertising, and the like; and it may well be that philosophy or ethical concerns don’t sit easily with it all (Notes Three).

Of course, social systems must be based on a degree of certainty in what we’re doing. That’s their essence: the idea of being the right way to organise our lives, and the benefits that offers us all in the long run. That conversation happened a fair while back, when the great or influential minds of that time battled over their ideas and the power to execute them.

But then do we just sit back and trust in how things are, accepting the outworking of their original understanding? Surely an intelligent society should seek our intelligent involvement, rather than our passivity. Maybe these systems are clunky, filled with inherited patterns of behaviour, seemingly difficult to shift from the trajectory on which they were set, but where does that lead?

In the face of life, the balance between action and contemplation in forming a useful, valuable and wise response seems so crucial for our shared realities.

Notes and References:

Note 1: The human spirit
Note 1: Responsibility in shaping this reality
Note 1: Ways of living & those who suffer
Note 2: The potential of technology
Note 2: Modern media and complex realities
Note 2: The web and the wider world
Note 3: Ideas around education & responsibility
Note 3: Culture selling us meaning
Note 3: How it is / Selling out

Somewhere between thought and action we find the release that is humour, as explored in We may as well laugh.

Ways to share this:

Language and values

Sometimes language contains deep truths, showing us things we mightn’t be quite aware of through the words we’ve chosen. The very act of talking can lead to revelation in that way, if we reflect upon the true meaning of what we may’ve said. In that, I’m thinking more on the personal level; but musings over language’s social meaning suggest the same logic might serve us there as well.

It’s an intriguing thought how so many terms have either an economic or a human meaning: trust; concern; bond; risk; security; responsibility; profit; contribution; return; provision; liability; worth. The human side often being very human, based around qualities of character and personal significance; the economic side more calculating in a different sense.

Obviously it’s just a thought, but it does seem to highlight ways society’s changed and how that echoes through our use of language. How we live our lives, what we prioritise and value, the criteria we use to guide our decisions – all this is reflected within the words we employ and what we mean by them. The relationship of language to reality, both in representing it and shaping it, is surely incredibly fascinating.

And it seems few would deny that economic concerns really do lead modern society with quite a strong hand (see Notes One), seeking to define our priorities in fields of life where we might have argued it has no place (Notes Two). All of which is interesting and more than a little troubling, although that’s not really my focus here.

If language reflects our understanding of life, then what does it mean if we’re shifting towards this economic perspective? Language is a human function: it’s how we represent the world, form our ideas, relate ourselves to it, and share in that with others. It can be seen as this web of meaning we create and partake in; making sense of life, society, and our roles and relationships within it all.

What does it mean then if our conversations and decisions are so largely defined by money, rather than humanity? Clearly there comes a point where finance and individuals meet, where it becomes a factor in our lives and we have to decide how to proceed (Notes Three). But, beyond that, how do we stand in relation to others?

Because my point is that we stand as people within society; society as this community organised for the collective benefit of its members. Within that, presumably, we have a shared understanding of human worth and the behaviours serving to strengthen rather than weaken this grouping of individuals. Culture and education may help with that, but more often it seems the economics of life are speaking more loudly.

To my mind, we talk about money or about people. Economy may be vital to meeting societal and individual needs, but when we equate that with human worth and make it a means for assessing value and assigning respect for another’s participation in society it seems something to be deeply concerned about.

Notes and References:

Note 1: Values and the economic
Note 1: Life and money, seamlessly interwoven
Note 1: Economy & Humanity
Note 2: Culture selling us meaning
Note 2: Why listen to media that exists to profit?
Note 2: Economics and the task of education
Note 3: I am not just a sum
Note 3: The business of spiritual ideas
Note 3: How it is / Selling out

These ideas are echoed in The worth of each life, looking there from a more personal standpoint.

Ways to share this:

Meaning in culture

The idea of what culture is and how it serves human communities seems both interesting and important, given how much of our lives can be seen to be under its influences and how greatly it must then shape society itself.

Even defining culture or summarising its activities and power is inevitably challenging: there’s popular culture; high culture; local traditions; national, international and global practices; evolving and interweaving subcultures; then the overlay of opinion or study that accompanies it all. Essentially it’s this ever-flowing conversation between different peoples, times and places, as we seek to understand our selves and our realities.

It seems culture generally acts to define or reflect what’s happening, what’s valuable, and what we’re trying to create with our lives. I’ve talked before of its roots in notions of tending and cultivation, of ways it represents life on both individual and collective levels, and of how powerful it can be in sustaining and enriching our lives (see Notes One). And, writing about it, my views have changed and will likely continue to do so.

I say that because cultural ideas clearly have the power to change our minds, our thoughts on life, and how we choose to act. If we look broadly at culture as ‘the stories we tell’, then this can be seen as how we make sense of the past, the present, the future: representing our current point in time, the issues concerning society, and those attitudes deemed helpful for us as we move into what comes next.

But then, it’s pretty undeniable that modern cultural life is heavily influenced by many seeking to direct us for economic ends or hoping to guide us toward their understanding of social cohesion (Notes Two). The ways culture becomes a voice for such messages may be meant well, but I would’ve thought it undermines our ability to trust in what we hear and may not even have the intended effects (see Guardian article below).

Who’s to say how ideas influence us? How what we see and hear filters into beliefs we may or may not be aware of, subtly shifting our actions and attitudes in directions that may or may not be wise? Clearly psychology is powerful, otherwise industry wouldn’t invest so much in attempting to make use of its insights; but do we really know what we’re playing with?

Because, on a personal level, we’re presumably looking to belong, to make sense of existence and our place within it, to understand our value and how we’re seen by the community we form a part of (Notes Three). Industries such as beauty, entertainment, music, or fashion are essentially built around timeless human activities, using their compelling powers for modern ends (Notes Four).

What does all this mean for individuals, for our relationships with others and the world, and for the social realities we’re building together? What’s the impact of fostering collective feelings of despair, anger, resignation, or hope? Where will it all lead, and what are we creating here?

Notes and References:

Guardian article, drawing interesting conclusions on the power of ideas: Yale psychologist John Bargh: ‘Politicians want us to be fearful’

Note 1: Culture, art & human activity
Note 1: Revisiting the question of culture
Note 2: Why listen to media that exists to profit?
Note 2: Culture selling us meaning
Note 3: Relating to cultural benchmarks
Note 3: How many aren’t well represented?
Note 4: What do we see in beauty?
Note 4: Romance, love & the movies
Note 4: Music and its power to inspire
Note 4: Fashion, self & environment

Ways to share this:

Tone in public dialogue

If the actual words we use account for around 7% of our meaning, then clearly context’s important for grasping that fully: body language, tone of voice, and other factors all playing their part in interpersonal communication.

The idea of sharing thoughts so others can come to understand, relate themselves to us, and learn from our existence is fascinating. On a personal as much as a social level we are making things more commonly known, feeding into our community from the wealth of our experiences and reshaping society through that mutual journey of knowledge (see Notes One).

Evidently there are many modern challenges on this front, as we struggle in our response to the connections and insight technology affords us (Notes Two). And, given those statistics around the weight of words compared with their context, it seems tech might inevitably create an echo chamber of sorts where our psyche and the interface itself may influence things far more than we might realise.

How does this then affect collective conversation about things that matter? With all we can now become aware of, the enduring public nature of the internet, and how poorly intentions might carry through the veil of tech, where does this leave us in addressing our concerns?

Because surely tone matters, the nuance of social meaning wrapping our words as we seek to impart them to others? We communicate human to human – that’s the level we’re trying to reach common understanding – and, as humans, so much is carried through personal and social language. It’s not just our words; it’s what they mean to us and what we mean through them (Notes Three).

In practice then, misunderstanding seems likely, as perhaps does wilful ambiguity and plausible deniability: once context is stripped from our words, we’re in a grey area where meaning’s much more up for grabs. However, we do still need the ability to convey our intended meaning; making technology a slightly strange tool for communication.

So, if our important conversations happen via tech, how does that work out? Do we abandon the added meaning of tone and context, pouring everything into the words themselves (and, what would be lost if we did)? Do we turn ourselves over to endless conflicts over meaning, nestled as it may be in our psychological makeup and social reality? Do we hold people to absolute standards while offering no path to reach them?

Communication has surely never been that easy: human nature; differing opinions and experiences; the machinations of the mind; ways we seek to relate to others, and how that makes us feel within ourselves. Finding common ground and accepting another way of seeing things suddenly sounds almost indescribably difficult.

And the interpersonal context that stands slightly apart from our words must matter; it’s how we stand in relation to others and seek to communicate our message. It might be flawed, imperfect, and often in need of correction, but it’s also deeply human and presumably the essence of what we’re hopefully trying to achieve?

Notes and References:

Note 1: “People Skills”
Note 1: Communicating divergent experiences
Note 1: Podcasts as models of transformation
Note 2: People wanting change
Note 2: Where’s the right place to talk?
Note 2: The web and the wider world
Note 3: Apparent difficulty in finding a voice
Note 3: We may as well laugh
Note 3: Anger as a voice

Ways to share this:

Need to suffer in order to change?

There’s often this idea that difficulty inspires us to make changes; the notion that to motivate self-development we might make our discomfort greater in order to spur us on. Which makes sense in a way: to strip away our avoidance and force ourselves to really experience certain things so we’re more likely to address them. But is it the only way?

It’s an interesting question, as there’s certainly a lot of suffering on both the individual and social scale (see Notes One). Is the thinking that psychological or socio-economic suffering will motivate people to change their ways to align more with a specific model? That’s a completely exploratory question, as I genuinely find the psychology of the modern world baffling!

Of course, beliefs around the value of suffering have been around a long time: moral, spiritual or religious reflections as to the ultimate meaning and worth of struggles within the frame of human life. Maybe it’s just that those conversations now happen most in the light of social policy, health care, and the regulation of global systems.

Suffering, I imagine, could be considered as inward or outward: inner battles with mental, psychological or physical realities that might make life challenging; then those more systemic limitations of social division, geography or opportunity that effectively serve to make life difficult and, in a certain sense, unequal.

And, given how external life must shape our understanding (Notes Two), I’d also imagine there’s a fair amount of crossover between inner difficulties and outer realities. That clearly has sweeping implications, encompassing a vast array of intensely lived and felt human experiences, and I’m often hesitant over how far to reach with my thinking from my inevitably limited perspective; but my overriding hope or intention here is to find ground where inclusive and powerful conversation can take place (Notes Three).

Returning closer to the topic, is it true we see suffering as justifiable? Is discomfort really a driver that motivates us to release ourselves from its grip and move toward something better? And, what is that ‘something’– what vision do we have on a social, personal or economic level that we feel will resolve all our woes? I’m not quite sure what the vision of the Western world is, beyond this idea of freedom from suffering.

This has once again become much vaster than anticipated, but maybe it’s worth it. Because surely an alternative would be to change based on the understanding and conviction of its necessity. Rather than tolerate suffering, sweep it away or lay blame elsewhere, could we come to see the full implications of how we’re living within the realm of thought then commit to change based on that level of insight?

I don’t know. Maybe we need to live it out, see the consequences and have them articulated with a human voice for us to hear. Unfortunately the conclusion seems likely to be that it was foreseeable and our reasoning questionable, but maybe harsh realities might serve us in the long run?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Does it matter if others suffer?
Note 1: Ways of living and those who suffer
Note 2: Mirrors we offer one another
Note 2: Mental health as a truth to be heard?
Note 2: Intrinsic worth over social identity
Note 3: Things we can’t talk about
Note 3: How do we find a collective vision?

For a more philosophical take on the challenges arising from thought, there’s David Bohm, thoughts on life and What is real?

Ways to share this:

Tell me why I should

Looking at the things we do in life, there are clearly various reasons we could offer; many we may or may not be quite aware of. But as adults, we presumably need to be able to look at the world and decide what it is we are going to do with our lives: those things we want to be a part of, which seem sensible and worthwhile. How do we approach such decisions?

With modern living, it seems one response is that we can do whatever we want unless a compelling argument stops us. A sort of ‘who can stop me’ approach to our freedom, where the onus is on someone, somehow justifying the limitation of whatever’s taken our fancy. Which is obviously one way of going about things, although where does it lead? (see Note One).

Then there’s what we might consider the more social or economic responses of ‘this is how it is’ or ‘everyone else is doing it’. That rather circular argument of how we need money to live in this world, and these are the options for making some (Note Two). In that light, life’s apparently not so much about the value of our participation in human society as it is a picture of money being justifiable as an end in itself.

Because would we choose these things now, if they weren’t deemed so generally acceptable? Our ideas on how best to live and the weight of consequences over opportunities clearly arose out of different times, where things happened on another scale and social realities were quite another story (Notes Three).

So, are the things we do inherited patterns of behaviour or conscious choices? Ideas that may have arisen in relative harmony, once shifted to the global scale, can surely begin to seem questionable if not unacceptable. Is it wise then to take our freedoms as a given, where we do as we please unless someone can convince us otherwise through reason or coercion?

After all, asking ‘why should I do that?’ is an equally valid application of logic, it just takes a different starting point. Whether we interpret our freedom as something that has to be limited or something we continually exercise with caution and respect seems a valuable question. Rather than this default position of demanding a reason to stop, could we view these as decisions we need to freely and intelligently make now?

It’s interesting to consider, and touches into perennial questions of free will and accountability for our actions: would we actively decide to do what we might be fairly passively going along with? Is there freedom from responsibility if we merely go along with others and don’t take the decision to change course ourselves?

Obviously we’re social creatures and often very busy ones, but our actions inevitably add up (Notes Four). And given how these issues underpin education as much as they do the regulation of society, being sure of ourselves in this way is seeming more important now than ever.

Notes and References:

Note 1: Laws and lawlessness
Note 2: Life and money, seamlessly interwoven
Note 3: Community – what it was, what we lost
Note 3: Writings on Education
Note 4: People, rules & social cohesion
Note 4: Individual responsibility, collective standards
Note 4: Need to stand alone & think for ourselves

Ways to share this:

Apparent difficulty in finding voice

When it comes to how we talk about things, these days that often veers between anger, despair, indignation, attack, frivolity, or many other challenging responses. While that might be incredibly difficult to navigate, it’s presumably also a sign we’re trying to engage with complexity and find ways forward.

At times it seems this adds fuel to the fire, an overlay of possibly unhelpful reactions that create further problems and may often detract from what genuinely needs to be addressed (see Notes One). Everything can then begin to seem so contentious that we don’t risk saying anything at all, fearful of setting a foot wrong despite all our best intentions and however much we may try to foresee every conceivable side of things.

Language and conversation start to feel dangerous. We might choose to come out fighting, decide not to care, or retreat from it altogether. Because surely as soon as we speak we adopt a perspective, the words we choose and their underlying assumptions revealing more than we may be aware. And if our lives shape us, forming our ideas, then our understanding must necessarily tend to be limited and incomplete (Note Two).

The open communication we’re now able to have with the assistance of technology seems to be bringing with it the full weight of our histories and a considerable challenge to our ability to communicate (Notes Three). After all, there are no definitive rules in that realm. We might have our own sense of what we mean and how we intend it to be received, but does that carry? Our words may be taken in quite a different light.

The nuance of language; what we mean, say or imply; the unspoken context and nature of our personalities; how clear or indirect we may be; where our personal priorities lie; and ways we might inadvertently use communication to provoke responses – all this has a life of its own through the veil of tech, where so much is taken out of our hands and our immediate environment.

With the internet, conversations essentially become permanent and subject to interpretation. The relative safety of talking with friends, or at least those who care about you on some level, shifted to a vastly different forum. How best to communicate in that space is a fascinating and daunting reality.

In the post referenced on Mirrors, I spoke of how we seem to find meaning and understanding through our place in the world and our interactions with others. If we view communication as a way of ‘testing’ ideas, articulating our best attempt at grasping something, then a social process of feedback or adjustment can serve us well: opening our perspectives through this interpersonal journey of language.

The internet, being a public record and a very influential one, may not be the place for that kind of exploratory conversation. But if we cannot talk, express ourselves and change our views if we see we’re mistaken, then it seems we might be losing an essential human function.

Notes and References:

Note 1: Anger as a voice
Note 1: We may as well laugh
Note 2: Mirrors we offer one another
Note 3: Modern media and complex realities
Note 3: The web and the wider world
Note 3: Empathy in a world that happily destroys
Note 3: Things we can’t talk about

Ways to share this:

What is EbbSpark?

Having worked my way through the first year’s planning for this blog, at times I still find myself wondering what EbbSpark actually is. I mean, seeing as I came up with the idea and clearly felt it worthwhile pursuing, there must be some sense of what this is about and why it might be of value for individuals or society. And there is in a way, although it may not always be entirely clear.

That first year mainly served, in my eyes, to stake out some ground for a conversation to take place. Working with the Themes I developed initially, my posts have attempted to look deeply at some issues that seem important while also looking for connections or common principles between those more specific interests or concerns.

Some of the ideas that came up towards the close of the year began pulling that together more clearly for me: those posts that sought a more comprehensive view of society, community, and our place within the world (see Notes One); and, very much building on that, those posts that looked more to our role or responsibility in understanding and contributing to that world we all share (Notes Two).

Which, thinking about it, may be what this writing most easily boils down to: the sense of trying to understand both the complex nature of reality and the importance of our position and participation within that. “That” being all those settings, all those choices we face and decisions we make in how to act and relate to one another and all we find around us.

And that also tends at times to dip into musings around thought, reality, consciousness, and other more philosophical concerns I personally find quite intriguing and motivating (Notes Three). That undertone of trying to map things out in the realm of thought is, I suppose, another fairly central part of this project.

Then, in terms of why I might consider all that worthwhile, there’s simply the fact that I believe all of this matters. Understanding the society and the world we live within, seeking to comprehend others’ experiences of that, trying to craft constructive ways forward from where we might find ourselves, and believing in the importance of every human life.

For me, as intelligent beings we are able to understand and find reasonable responses to what we see; and as compassionate ones we are also hopefully able to reach mutual understanding and cooperation. However difficult those paths might be I simply don’t believe one life is worth more than any other, but that we need to work our way onwards together.

What that might mean on a personal or social level is far from straightforward, as modern life often seems as complex as it does precarious, but I’m not convinced there’s another way to address things. As explored in “Ecological Intelligence”, “yes and no are the two most powerful words in the vocabulary of a species that has become capable of deciding what to do about its future.”

Notes and References:

Note 1: Human nature and community life
Note 1: Economy & Humanity
Note 1: Nature speaks in many ways, do we listen?
Note 2: The web and the wider world
Note 2: Ideas around education & responsibility
Note 2: Whether there is hope for change
Note 2: Responsibility in shaping this reality
Note 3: David Bohm, thoughts on life
Note 3: What is real?

Ways to share this:

Responsibility in shaping this reality

This idea of responsibility is something so powerful, yet it’s also an easy word to throw around (as is any). What does it mean to be responsible, and where does responsibility ultimately lie? It may be relatively easy to craft a convincing or impressive answer to that, but how easy is it really to get to the bottom of?

To start, it can be approached in various ways: the idea of being called upon to answer, being able to respond; the notion of duty or of blame, of those things we are deemed responsible for; or the fact of our capacity itself, of being in the position to respond well. That may not be exhaustive as far as interpretations go, but it’s a solid starting point.

In each of those cases, what would it really mean? Being clear within ourselves about what we’re responsible for as citizens, consumers and humans may be part of it. But then do we limit ourselves to legal parameters and social norms, or hold ourselves accountable to higher moral or ethical standards we might decide to adhere to? Where we draw the line seems to be a personal concern.

Beyond that rather open question of what we’re responsible for, there’s also the sense of our ability to do so: being sure of our understanding, our knowledge, and then our freedom to answer as we see fit. Surely in order to respond we must grasp what’s at stake, how it fits in the bigger picture, and ways our individual response may serve to affect change within things, for better or worse.

It’s something I’ve toyed with at various times in writing here (see Notes One), as it’s central to life in so many ways. It may be hard to address or get a full sense of, especially with the pace of modern life and all its communication challenges, but it also seems essential that we somehow find the space and rise to the occasion (Notes Two).

Because, with all the freedoms of Western society and its marketplaces, it really seems a great deal of responsibility is falling to us as individuals (Notes Three). How we act online, as consumers, socially, in terms of diet, within our culture – in countless areas it’s coming down to us to regulate our behaviour and our choices; otherwise we presumably risk having that freedom curtailed ‘for our own safety’.

Society is almost incredibly complicated, as is human nature: do we truly understand how all this works and the importance of our participation in keeping everything operating smoothly? At times it appears we’re simply ploughing ahead, trusting it’ll all work out and someone knows what we’re doing (Notes Four).

Of course, we could look on this as a daunting task or a creative one. That so much responsibility, so much freedom rests in our hands can be seen as a wonderful thing, a cause for constructive optimism. For me then, the core is in believing that we matter and acting as such.

Notes and References:

Note 1: What inspires all of this
Note 1: Need to stand alone & think for ourselves
Note 1: What is real?
Note 2: Things we can’t talk about
Note 2: How do we find a collective vision?
Note 3: “The Spirit of Community”
Note 3: “Brave New World Revisited”
Note 3: “The Tipping Point”
Note 4: Economy & Humanity
Note 4: Can we overcome purely economic thinking?
Note 4: Ideas around education & responsibility
Note 4: Modern media and complex realities

Ways to share this: