Category: Society

It can quite easily be argued that life’s never been simpler than now. That prolonged peace, relative prosperity and general well-being make the modern Western human more sheltered, safe and well-equipped than at any time in history. Yet it doesn’t seem we really feel that way.

Maybe it’s true, though, by many measures. Even compared with a generation or so back, the expectations we now have of life are surely luxurious? The ease and convenience of a consumer lifestyle – full of choice and good legal protection – seems worlds apart from any real concept of difficulty, danger or deprivation.

Is it, then, that problems are relative? That we “forget” what life used to be; taking our own experiences as the new norm? It must be hard to keep even recent historical comparisons actively in mind when we’re faced with so many overwhelming distractions, choices and pressures (Notes One).

It must be fairly “natural” we focus on our own surroundings and challenges, rather than constantly reminding ourselves how unprecedented these comfort levels actually are. We live in our environment as it is now; navigating it is perhaps more urgent than appreciating it. Taking it as a given is, in a way, an understandable starting point for moving forwards.

But, of course, we can’t quite cut ourselves off from history (Notes Two). We are where we are because of all that’s gone before: the innovations, freedoms and values we now enjoy very much stand on the shoulders of past battles and sacrifices. It’s arguably impertinent to take the fruits without appreciating those journeys and the responsibilities being handed over to us.

Maybe it’s simply that freedom, choice and relative ease are their own kind of burden? Alongside the weighty expectations placed on us by culture and advertising: ideas of what our life should be and all we should have to be considered successful or, even, enough by our peers and society’s general estimations.

Taking the evolutionary perspective, then, our task “must” be to engage with our environment as it is? Clinging to comparisons with the past can’t be a developmental advantage. But grasping where we’ve come from, the opportunities we’ve been given and responsibility of using that position carefully must also be part and parcel of living well.

Life now carries with it this immense burden of being woven into inscrutable global systems we’re needing to navigate wisely. All that’s falling on each person’s shoulders – without the reassurance of tradition, faith or time to think – isn’t easy to manage (Notes Three). Where’s the balance to be found between understanding our past and dealing purposefully with the present?

All this seems overwhelming in its own unprecedented ways, as life’s simultaneously never been easier or more difficult. All the information, awareness, choice and – with it – responsibility is surely asking something different from us? Perhaps, just as much as has ever been asked of humans: to rise to the challenge, understand the risks, fight the right battles, and not take our eye off what really matters.

Notes and References:

Note 1: Overwhelm and resignation
Note 1: Do we know what we’re doing?
Note 1: Effect, if everything’s a drama
Note 2: Caught in these thoughts
Note 2: Entertaining ideas & the matter of truth
Note 2: Social starting points for modern ways
Note 2: Able to see what matters?
Note 3: What’s not essential
Note 3: Complication of being human
Note 3: Freedom, what to lean on & who to believe
Note 3: What it is to be human

Similar themes are also, in part, the focus of “Small is Beautiful”, “Ecological Intelligence” and “Brave New World Revisited”.

As a thought, it’s interesting how everything around us tells a story. Potentially, one of awareness, wisdom, consideration, value, kindness; but also, perhaps more often, the opposite. It’s this sense in which all we do paints a picture, our words and deeds effectively embodying our understanding of life, society, humanity, and the place we all have within that (Notes One).

Clearly that’s a potentially overwhelming view of life: reading meaning into it all; wondering at people’s thought processes, beliefs and motivations; extrapolating out to what such attitudes mean for society at large, all the ways they must be felt by countless individuals throughout the days, weeks and years of all our lives.

Attempting to imagine the cumulative effect of each person’s way of being can easily hurt the brain. Even trying to imagine the thoughts running through a single individuals mind based on the evidence of their actions seems a bit much some days. If “everything that happens” is telling a story about our general level of awareness, it’s perhaps not a book we’re inclined to read.

But can we truly turn a blind eye? If the narrative of modern society is one of people looking out for themselves without demonstrable concern, attention or interest in others, it just doesn’t seem sustainable long-term. And, even if we don’t actively “read” all that’s spread out around us, do we not pick up on it anyway? Like having a TV on in the background; its messages seeping in regardless.

Some days the overall theme seems to be one of not really caring. About others, their existence, their peaceful enjoyment of space, their very presence in life. Often, it’s seeming that we see one another as obstacles, each living their own personal movie where all these other human beings simply don’t feature. Treating others as irritating inconveniences doesn’t seem very human though.

Society, after all, is a grouping of humans. It’s this picture of cooperation for mutual benefit, safety, enjoyment. It’s the sense in which working together is more efficient and productive than all going it alone. It’s ways we might harmoniously share resources and infrastructure so that, ultimately, the opportunity serves us all. And, hopefully, it’s the degree of individual and collective forethought that makes such a thing possible.

Why exactly social relationships might be fading is strange to consider (Notes Two). Where do we “get” the sense for society? Is this from history, convention, education, culture, example? Is it the structures of society itself? Those systems, interactions and choices that effectively define our lives. The attitudes with which we’re all carrying out our respective “roles” within the bigger picture of community?

Or maybe I’m reading things wrongly? Maybe the story’s written between the lines, in the quiet resolutions people make behind all the drama playing out. It just seems there’s so much simmering intolerance and carelessness; this drifting lack of awareness, understanding or bandwidth building to a place of almost everyone having a very short fuse. Something, surely, has to give?

Notes and References:

Note 1: The power of understanding
Note 1: Invisible ties
Note 1: Do we need meaning?
Note 1: The philosopher stance
Note 2: All that’s going on around us
Note 2: Ideas that tie things together
Note 2: If society’s straining apart, what do we do?
Note 2: One thing leads to another
Note 2: In the deep end…

Looking at all this from a slightly different perspective, there’s What it is to be human or Problems & the thought that created them.

What does it mean if we conceive of our social relationships in increasingly financial terms? Falling back on the relative “security” of commercial interactions and rights rather than their more loosely defined social counterparts.

It’s something I’ve circled around a few times here, wondering why we might prefer interacting with life as consumers rather than citizens (Notes One). Because it’s completely possible to reduce society down to mere numbers, to quantify and draw a line under it all: we contribute, “paying” for society’s upkeep, and then we’re free to do as we please.

Are we more comfortable and confident within commercial contracts than social ones? Knowing where we stand, we can assert our rights with the authority consumer relationships offer: we demand better service, knowing that money speaks and our voice counts within the online world of reputation. We have leverage there, in that equalising, universal trading space.

And the system backs us up. These are clearly defined contracts that can be enforced or, at least, wielded to push companies into behaving better through the pressure of public relations. Compared with the undeniably messy realities of policing, overwhelm, and the countless ways people attempt to get around things, the world of money’s fairly clean cut.

Maybe it comes down to commercial contracts being something we deliberately enter into as adults? We choose to sign up to them, having had the chance to read the conditions attached. Society, however, we’re born into and its terms are nowhere written down in their entirety; it’s this evolving, ongoing project we’re all automatically a part of (Notes Two).

The fact we’re placed within something that very much relies upon our active, consistent effort in upholding it through our behaviours, attitudes and belief in its ultimate value is really quite intriguing. Surely such a thing would be better done consciously? Would collective reality not work better based on fully informed understanding rather than implied or subconscious pressures and expectations?

Is it enough to delineate broad responsibilities and say, “Here’s the money, deliver what’s promised”? What if costs increase or needs can’t be met? What if the environment changes and problems multiply? What if, left to ourselves, we pursue courses of action that create a whole new set of problems? What if the social model “needs” our more deliberate involvement?

Can that be reduced to money? Is society the same as our commercial contracts, where terms can’t be changed without agreement and publicity creates enough pressure to enforce our wishes? There might be financial elements to society, but it’s also a different kind of relationship. Terms such as trust, interest, contribution, obligation, investment might apply in both worlds, but do they mean the same? (Notes Three)

Does society require something different of us? A more rounded sense of trust and responsibility within collective human activity, perhaps. A deeper sense for how we’re upholding valuable ideals. Greater awareness of situations our personal or commercial actions might be creating, alleviating or exacerbating elsewhere. Otherwise, what are we doing?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Invisible ties
Note 1: Trust within modern society
Note 1: Smart to play the system?
Note 1: Community as an answer
Note 2: Making adjustments
Note 2: Shopping around for a society
Note 2: Freedom, what to lean on & who to believe
Note 2: Questions around choice
Note 3: Right to look out for ourselves?
Note 3: Obligations and contributions
Note 3: Does anything exist in isolation?
Note 3: Interdependency

It’s intriguing to think how much society is based upon trust: the need for it, the presumption it’s there, the way it’s this extremely fundamental glue that’s effectively been holding things together. Yet, it’s perhaps never been more lacking or overlooked as an essential quality within our lives. What does that mean?

To backtrack, it’s presumably the very foundation of any society that’s attempting to structure itself around the principles of law? If we’re viewing society as a contract – however much we might be unaware of all its terms – then the idea of all parties being trustworthy seems the basic starting point.

Entering into contracts, both sides being viewed as understanding and committed to their part of the bargain, was surely a significant step forward historically? This sense in which we stepped out of inherited, community-based relationships and were able to freely enter into such arrangements based purely on an idea of agreement between independent parties (Notes One). It seems a big move in terms of freedom.

Honouring the terms we’ve agreed to, upholding our side of things, operating with respect for the value of what’s offered can all seem like these archaic notions of character, reputation, authority, and abiding by “the rules”, but where are we without them?

Often though, it doesn’t appear to be something taken all that seriously. Society seems to have stumbled somewhat blindly, innocently, into all that’s been offered by technology; forgetting, or taking for granted, how much trust underpins all we do. Handing over our identities, our information, our relationships, our infrastructure to technology companies surely presupposed they deserved such trust? (Notes Two)

It seems to be coming to the fore again now – unfortunately, due to breaches or abuses of that trust. Maybe we thought that if things were happening, they must be operating within the protective framework of law so we “could” trust them? Yet it seems many such things were running out ahead of regulation as our limited national systems struggled to find ways of reining them in. All of this was, perhaps, in a legal wilderness.

It also seems that the very idea of trust has become so abstract, so almost unspoken within this fast-moving modern world. We’ve conceivably agreed to countless terms of service almost without noticing, perhaps assuming it doesn’t matter as nobody truly reads them. Companies might’ve been operating safe in the knowledge they’ve placed much of the burden on us, despite the fact that few are fully aware of all we’ve agreed to.

The slippery slope of life within technology has surely taken us all on a strange journey? Instead of the meaningful constraint of physical locations and entities we now seem to be operating in this strangely careless, invisible universe (Notes Three). Where trust, honesty, kindness, consistency and other qualities like them once shaped our lives, guiding us toward respectful social relationships, the opposite now almost seems the case.

But, can a world built upon the kind of freedom contracts offer us ever exist without trust?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Invisible ties
Note 1: What holds it all together
Note 1: If society’s straining apart, what do we do?
Note 2: Who should we trust?
Note 2: What would life be if we could trust?
Note 3: Freedom, what to lean on & who to believe
Note 3: All that’s going on around us

What exactly are moral judgements? All the criticisms, labelling, condemnation, placement of blame or responsibility? It honestly amazes me how quick we are to make these pronouncements, how clear we seem to think some lines are, and how vehemently we seek to hold others to account within that.

It’s something I’ve grappled with a few times here, genuinely trying to figure out what it is we’re saying and where all these convictions are coming from (Notes One). And, of course, I don’t have the answers. Morality’s clearly a contentious issue, pretty much as old as human existence: this idea of a “right” way to live, plus all the systems that’ve attempted to regulate or guide us over the centuries.

Ultimately, I suppose morality defines the contours of our lives? Giving this sense of what’s acceptable alongside reasons “why” someone should limit their words, thoughts or actions in certain ways for their own good or that of others. This picture of individuals, their environments, and the accepted sense of what’s expected, admirable or unforgivable.

And maybe that’s the thing? The extent to which moral ideals are commonly held. Perhaps also, the extent to which we’re aware of where these viewpoints arise from?

Moral injunctions seem to be these things that get wielded very forcefully in youth, as people – sensibly – seek to impart a sense of how to keep safe, act wisely and respect others. All these “you mustn’t”, “you must”, “that’s wrong” statements delivered, perhaps, out of fear, insight or an attempt to control behaviour. Effectively, an almost endless string of moral boundary posts.

We must all have so many of these ideas firmly imprinted in our psyche from times before our conscious awareness. And it often seems they’re passed on before being reconsidered much in adulthood – as if “all this” were a clear cut, collectively agreed upon set of timeless rules for how we should be living.

Does common agreement exist though? Within a given community, especially one with strong traditions, maybe it does. But these days, especially when it comes to the internet, our conversations clearly cut across such lines. We might act like there’s a single set of standards, vocally casting judgement as if all the rules we feel to be true are absolute, but are they?

When you factor in globalisation and technology, we’re suddenly facing a world of vastly different perspectives all having this completely open conversation (Notes Two). The idea of communities and cultures having developed quite separately, with different social codes and experiences, now all sharing their thoughts and activities is incredibly beautiful, but far from a simple task (Notes Three).

Because, when we judge others, what are we really saying? When we shame people, perhaps justifying it as a form of social education, what are we doing? In any given situation, are we sure we’re taking the “right” stand? Sometimes it seems morality might be getting distorted as we stick with a crowd instead of seeing where important lines are truly being crossed.

Notes and References:

Note 1: Human nature and community life
Note 1: Empathy in a world that happily destroys
Note 1: What is acceptable?
Note 1: The way to be
Note 2: Can we manage all-inclusive honesty?
Note 2: Individual responsibility, collective standards
Note 2: Zimbardo & the problem of evil
Note 3: The dignity & power of a human life
Note 3: Is anything obvious to someone who doesn’t know?
Note 3: What makes a good life

How are we approaching society? Is it with a sense of, “What suits me? What kind of lifestyle do I want to lead?” As if society’s simply the “setting” for our lives and we’re free to seek out that balance in the configuration of values which we, personally, prefer? Choosing, then, the society that best fits our personality and aspirations so we’re able to create our dream life against its backdrop.

Presumably, that would lead to communities of people who are alike, sharing similar values and outlooks. Perhaps, also, to a more peaceful, harmonious life from each person’s perspective? Given they’d largely agree with what was going on around them, or at least be inclined to tolerate it for the overall balance of what that society’s offering.

I suppose we seek a peaceful life? To live with those who share our ideas and want to live a similar way. I’m not sure anyone really seeks out conflict. But is there truly “peace” in grouping together around personal affinities, or are we simply shifting conflict to the boundaries and dialling it up through the power of numbers? Might we not, in reality, be escalating conflict and intolerance by living this way?

It’s like the thinking behind nation states: this drawing of lines where more fluid identities previously existed. It’s perhaps a logical outcome? That we, in the past, sought to define units of operation that could then cooperate with one another. Legal definitions of identity then carving up the globe.

Definition gives power, I suppose? Common identity, unity, belief in an idea, feelings of belonging that inspire us toward any course of action. As with personal identity, it’s creating a narrative we’re inclined to defend and perpetuate: a “self” we see as better, the best, or perhaps just best for us. Ways we express identity within a world of differences are fascinating (Notes One).

But, back to the point, what does it mean to seek a society that suits you? To feel less at home in one place or more drawn toward the characteristics of another place? Drawn, perhaps, to the stereotypes of national identity: work/life balance, leisure pursuits, cuisine, culture, social attitudes, landscape, language, history.

Societies sitting, as they do, somewhere on the sides of history, we’re perhaps choosing the expression of values we feel most affinity for personally, intellectually, socially, physically? Effectively, an expression of our interest in other ways of living, different ways of being human and solving the challenges thrown up by life, or ways the basic building blocks of “society” have been configured elsewhere.

Sometimes I’m unsure what thought my mind’s circling in on, and here I think it’s the idea of tolerance. Is society – and, the community it contains – to be a homogeneous reality or a place that embraces the diversity of human experience? If we all live through society differently, experiencing its different sides through faces it turns toward us, is this not all part of “one” conversation we should all be part of?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Having boundaries
Note 1: What inspires collective endeavours
Note 1: Different places, different ways
Note 1: Right to look out for ourselves?
Note 1: Finding flaws

From the outset, this writing project’s been about meaning – about what our lives might mean, the meaning behind all the things we do, where that leads, and whether it really matters. As beings capable of thought, I honestly struggle to look at life without an overlay of meaning; much as it might be difficult to pin down or articulate.

It’s this undercurrent of human existence: what it all means, what matters, which paths to take. This sense in which we’re “able” to make decisions about our lives, choose what to do or not do, have an idea in mind as to our personal, social or absolute value (Notes One). If nothing matters at the end of the day, it might seem we and our lives carry little meaning. There’s a circularity to it – thought, existence, action.

The very idea of thought seems to carry with it a sense of scrutiny, observation, evaluation, resolve: looking at the world, reading it rightly, understanding what’s before us, and charting our paths within it (Notes Two). As if the mind itself has this intrinsic belief about the value of thought in helping us navigate existence wisely.

And it certainly seems that way. Even as children, we look at life and interpret its meaning – drawing into ourselves the ideas, attitudes, stories, implications of all we encounter. We see what gestures or relationships say about us, our worth, our place or power in life, and the nature of the world we’re living in. The thoughts of others and of social systems wrap around us, in many ways (Notes Three).

Which is philosophical as much as practical: there’s the systemic side of all we do, then the more absolute sense of meaning woven through those realities. Surely both sides matter? From the human perspective, it’s our hopes in life and how we’d like to be received by the world. From the societal, there’s the evolving systems we’re all part of and how well principles are being brought to life there.

To my mind, life’s this interplay of ideals and realities – an ongoing conversation between us all through the systems, structures and relationships that’ve evolved within and between human societies. In that, there’s meaning: nested assumptions about the value of human life; established patterns of what’s considered acceptable; all these subtle messages beneath the lives we lead (Notes Four).

That, to me, is the importance of meaning: that everything carries within it some sort of evaluation, judgement or decision. Everything we do “says” something about the resources, people, or principles at hand. There surely “is” meaning within our lives? Our attitudes and actions towards others or the planet speak volumes about the value we’ve assigned them. Every interaction’s arguably an expression of meaning.

But then, it also seems we cast meaning aside quite often, claiming it’s not relevant or isn’t our responsibility. If that’s the case, who “is” responsible for meaning and judgement? Who are we trusting to understand on our behalves, and where might they lead us?

Notes and References:

Note 1: “Ecological Intelligence”
Note 1: Does anything exist in isolation?
Note 1: The philosopher stance
Note 2: Power in what we believe
Note 2: Working through mind & society
Note 2: Ideas that tie things together
Note 3: Meaning within it all
Note 3: Value and worth in our relationships
Note 3: What if it all means something?
Note 4: Some thoughts about ‘life’
Note 4: What really matters

Building further on ideas of deferring responsibility, there’s What would life be if we could trust?

In life there’s so much we could care about, all these causes people are rightfully crying out over and pushing forward onto local, national and global agendas. All the things people give voice to are important, they all matter, but how it all fits together and what the best overall response might be seem these almost impossible questions.

Perhaps it’s a case of needing the bigger picture? Being able to hold all those concerns within a larger, more comprehensive understanding of what’s going on (see Notes One). All the words, opinions and solutions constantly unfolding within our giant, worldwide conversation seem to be grappling with exactly that: trying to make sense of it all, to find the right perspective from which to chart manageable, inclusive ways forward.

But then, when everything matters it can also seem as if nothing does: how can we do anything about it? All these disparate, competing, and sometimes contradictory problems almost create this stalemate of paralysis and conflict. It’s disheartening to feel powerless and overwhelmed. It’s stressful to think everything’s an argument and human interactions must be ‘won’. It’s exhausting being so aware of things.

The awareness brought by the internet is absolutely astounding: knowledge and connection are at our fingertips; timeless ways of being can be altered by well-thought-out ‘solutions’. And, of course, the ease of that could lead to us undervaluing those very functions. Living a life of constant updates or emotive personal insights into distant realities could quite easily desensitise and distract us from the stuff of everyday existence (Notes Two).

All these things matter. Our attitudes toward others and the relationships we have with them hold great meaning about the significance and value of human life. The choices we make shape the world around us, informing economic, social, environmental, and political realities. All the aspects of our lives are rippling out into this shared environment, impacting all they find there.

We’re really sharing this one space; especially now tech is bringing everything so closely into our own personal spaces. There’s this strange contradiction of things seeming so personal yet also being so remote: events are announced directly to us without much social mediation, echoing within our psyche as we process them, alone, disconnected. The paradoxes of technology are fascinating, if mildly terrifying, to consider.

Holding our own within it all, keeping a firm sense of what matters and how much, is daunting. Everything about life is seemingly being tested by this relatively new global perspective and all the ways we’re trying to master it on the personal level (Notes Three). And, of course, I’m not entirely sure what the answers are here either.

Ultimately though, it does matter – anything impacting human life and all that sustains it matters, both individually and systemically. In every area, our lives intersect with the interests of others; how we negotiate all those competing priorities seems a powerful opportunity. If we influence the world through all we do, then power, almost undeniably, rests in our hands.

Notes and References:

Note 1: Ideas that tie things together
Note 1: Who should we trust?
Note 1: Can we manage all-inclusive honesty?
Note 2: All that’s going on around us
Note 2: Desensitised to all we’re told?
Note 2: How important is real life?
Note 3: Values on which we stand firm?
Note 3: Making adjustments
Note 3: In the deep end…

At times I’ve compared modern life to a tornado or a merging of waters, wondering how long it’ll take us to find our feet and recover our edge in that disrupted world (Notes One). It’s this sense in which our way of living has been dialled up, many of the restrictions and forces of containment removed, leaving us at the helm of this strangely undefined yet powerful freedom.

It’s obviously a comment about technology, although that’s not something I want to revisit here. We all know tech is changing how we live, affecting us all personally within our lives and relationships as much as through the impacts it’s having socially and globally. This is undeniably a hugely potent force that’s reshaping what it means to be human, with consequences being felt across the planet.

As I’ve said in many of those posts though, perhaps the more important thing to engage with is understanding where we stand as humans? If we know what we’re doing, using more powerful tools needn’t be a problem (Notes Two). It’s so easy to blame the tool and, in many ways, they are causing problems; but any tool’s essentially an inanimate object. The onus is surely on us to use them wisely?

With that, then, we’re talking about society rather than technology. We’re facing up to how well we understand the realities we’ve been born into, and how well we’re serving to uphold or improve them. We’re asking difficult questions about the nature of the systems we have in place and how they might evolve further (Notes Three).

Ideally, I suppose, we’d live in a world where education and the media fostered a deep understanding and working knowledge of our shared systems? A realistic appreciation of what they’re offering and the value our contributions have throughout the fabric of society. A firm grasp of the roles we and others play, how that fits together, and the importance of everyone’s participation.

In a perfect world, I’d imagine everyone would feel valued and respected? In a well-structured society that balances freedom with responsibility, surely people could all flourish and give the best of themselves, knowing their efforts harmonised with the whole and would be appreciated by their community. If we knew what we stood within, its value, and that our active engagement was valued, would we ever jeopardise that?

Of course, I tend to think modern society doesn’t quite value things rightly (Notes Four). It seems we treat people poorly yet expect them to remain invested in the social realities we share. I’m not sure how we plan to be so careless yet arrive at life-affirming outcomes.

All this then circles in on the sense of what we’re all part of and the need to understand and act responsibly within it. Appreciating the ideas underpinning society, prioritising essentials over the non-essential, working those values more fully into the lives we share, not being distracted or thrown off course by the choppiness of modern life? These are huge challenges.

Notes and References:

Note 1: Ideas that tie things together
Note 1: Thoughts on art & on life
Note 2: How important is real life?
Note 2: Tools
Note 2: Cutting corners
Note 2: Making adjustments
Note 3: What holds it all together
Note 3: If society’s straining apart, what do we do?
Note 3: Passivity, or responsibility
Note 4: Interdependency
Note 4: Worthless, or priceless?

Plucking at a similar metaphor around how we navigate modern life, was Who should we trust?

If we see society as those values and patterns of behaviour that sustain our shared way of life, then what does it mean that modern society seems to be straining apart? Is it that we don’t believe in the values themselves, or in their application? That we don’t trust the system’s acting in our best interest, so we pull back against it? Or maybe we don’t believe in society at all and prefer to act on our own?

And I’m not sure how you get in such a predicament: whether it’s a failing of the processes of educating society in youth or adulthood; whether it results from market forces pulling at social and cultural realities; or if individualism is simply leading to disinterest in collective agreement (see Notes One). Understanding ‘why’ might be useful, but are there too many variables to reach comprehensive, actionable conclusions?

In one light, society’s this interlocking set of systems that evolved around the outworking of certain values: principles or starting points that rose to the surface through the twentieth century and worked themselves into the structures of the West. And whether that’s held together through the incentive of reward, threat of punishment, or conscious intention of understanding might make all the difference (Notes Two).

Alternatively, we might view society as a contract we’re born into, a fundamental part of our identity and a set of commitments we must work ourselves around. Of course, being born into something you could argue we did little to deserve or ask for it: inherited advantages, obligations, struggles being, in a way, ‘unfair’ as they alter a playing field we might hope were equal.

How well society reflects our ideals is a powerful question. As children, we often seek fairness, justice, inclusivity, recognition, acceptance; these basic sentiments around our worth and the place we’re offered within our community. That idealism might be crushed out of people far before adulthood, but conceivably we might be better off if it weren’t: if values found their place.

Really though, perhaps we ‘need’ to understand systems we’re living within? It might be expedient to coerce people with promises or threats, but I’m unsure how stable things are when they’re not based on true understanding (Notes Three). I mean, you can motivate in many ways; but if we don’t appreciate what we’re doing, how it fits, and the value it’s bringing will we care to sustain it?

Practically speaking, it’s our actions that serve to maintain social realities. Our awareness, intention, and consistency create the lives we lead individually and collectively; modelling and upholding those things we know to be important for building healthy, sustainable lives that integrate well with others and with the natural environment. That seems ‘the picture’ of existing consciously of our surroundings.

Maybe we’d be better off if fostering such awareness were woven throughout society? If we had a comprehensive sense of meaning that allowed us to correct areas not fully embodying the values we wish to build our lives around.

Notes and References:

Note 1: What we know to pass on
Note 1: Responsibility in shaping this reality
Note 1: Value in being informed
Note 2: Testing times
Note 2: What holds it all together
Note 2: Working through mind & society
Note 3: Tell me why I should
Note 3: Fear or coercion as motivators
Note 3: Freedom, what to lean on & who to believe
Note 3: Smart to play the system?

Striking a different note in how we might respond to the challenges we’re facing, there was We may as well laugh & Anger as a voice.