The Age of Wisdom: Sparking A Political Revolution

What if we could revolutionize the way we make decisions? Envision a world where feelings, anecdotes, and oversimplified stories no longer steer our society. Instead, we operate on cost-benefit analysis, carefully assessing the potential outcomes of our decisions. This is not a distant utopia, but the aim of a political party I wish to start.

Welcome to a new age where Collective Intelligence is king, and our obsession with Artificial Intelligence takes a backseat. It's high time that the internet lives up to its promise of bringing wisdom and intelligence to the world.

In this new era, every argument has a score, similar to the stock market. Imagine a platform, like Group Intel or Idea Stock Exchange, that continually improves pro and con arguments for each belief. This platform doesn't merely direct you to other people's websites, but provides you with the cost and benefits of each choice you might make.

This can be our new religion, a religion that worships Athena, the goddess of wisdom. Our service to her is to continually refine our arguments, to seek the truth in all things.

Imagine a future where wisdom spreads, where people stop using Google in favor of a more comprehensive, objective source of information. A future where all arguments are tied together, where we discover one shared truth.

Weakening an argument in this system automatically weakens all conclusions built on that argument. We won't duplicate arguments; we'll link them. We'll credit the first person to express each idea, and we'll acknowledge those who said it best, or in the shortest way.

We'll draw connections between beliefs and cultural expressions, outlining all the books, songs, poems, photos, and political cartoons that agree or disagree with each conclusion. By doing this, we'll bring data and the arts together.

This is how we fix our problems, how we act wisely, and how we prepare to conquer the universe armed with reason. This is how we ensure our confidence comes from understanding all sides of an argument, from doing the work and showing our math.

Artificial intelligence will be forced to agree with us because we have fully explained our conclusions. We've shown how arguments, assumptions, and data are all linked together.

For the past 22 years, I've dedicated all my spare time to thinking about this, and I know what we should do. I believe people would appreciate a political party that uses cost/benefit analysis to make its decisions. The question now is: how do we get it started?

1. Logical Arguments:

   • The concept of collective intelligence has already been proven successful in other domains. Wikipedia, an open-source platform, is a prime example of collective intelligence that has yielded accurate and valuable information.
   • Cost-benefit analysis is a well-established decision-making tool in economics and business, known for its ability to provide clear and rational analysis. It stands to reason that this could also be applied to political decision-making.

2. Supporting Evidence (data, studies):

   • Collective Intelligence: Research conducted by MIT’s Center for Collective Intelligence has found that groups can effectively solve complex problems when certain conditions are met.
   • Cost-Benefit Analysis: The World Bank and other international institutions have numerous studies highlighting the success of cost-benefit analysis in policy and project implementation.

3. Supporting Books:

   • "The Wisdom of Crowds" by James Surowiecki
   • "The Cost-Benefit Revolution" by Cass R. Sunstein

4. Supporting Videos:

   • TED Talk: "James Surowiecki: The power and the danger of online crowds"
   • Coursera's course on "Cost-Benefit Analysis" provides numerous videos explaining the concept in detail.

5. Supporting Organizations and their Websites:

   • MIT’s Center for Collective Intelligence: https://cci.mit.edu/
   • The World Bank (for their work on cost-benefit analysis): https://www.worldbank.org/

6. Supporting Podcasts:

   • "The Indicator from Planet Money" has episodes discussing cost-benefit analysis.
   • "Freakonomics Radio" often explores themes related to collective decision-making and cost-benefit analysis.

7. Unbiased Experts:

   • James Surowiecki, author of "The Wisdom of Crowds"
   • Cass R. Sunstein, author of "The Cost-Benefit Revolution"

8. Benefits of Belief Acceptance (ranked by Maslow categories):

   • Physiological: Better policy-making can lead to improved public health and living conditions.
   • Safety: Enhanced decision-making processes can lead to safer communities and better resource allocation.
   • Love/Belonging: Encouraging collective decision-making can foster a sense of community and collaboration.
   • Esteem: Participation in the process can empower individuals, enhancing their self-esteem.
   • Self-Actualization: The pursuit of truth and wisdom through collective intelligence aligns with the goal of realizing one's full potential.

Political Parties: A Divisive Force in Democracy

In the United States, political parties have long been a staple of our democratic system. However, are they truly serving us, or are they more of a hindrance than a help? I invite you to embark on this exploration with me, and as we discuss these issues, I encourage you to dive deeper into the concepts of collective intelligence and a more beneficial decision-making approach at Group Intel and our Idea Stock Exchange on Github.

George Washington: A Man Apart

Our first president, George Washington, was wary of political parties. In fact, he was so opposed to the concept that a good portion of his farewell address was dedicated to warning against the evils of political "factions". Washington remains our first and only independent president, a beacon of unity in a sea of partisan division.

The Self-Interest of Political Parties

Rather than genuinely striving to solve problems, political parties seem primarily interested in amassing power. True problem-solving involves identifying issues, acknowledging the valid interests of all parties, brainstorming solutions, and utilizing cost-benefit analysis to chart the best path forward. Power grabbing, on the other hand, often involves oversimplifying complex issues, demonizing opponents, and pushing through legislation without adequate debate.

The Poisonous Effect on Our Political Process

This quest for power often leads to oversimplification and demonization of differing viewpoints. In fact, the more a party can incite hatred for the other side, the more power they seem to gain. This antagonistic approach prevents our representatives from uniting to address common problems, as their campaign funding often depends on maintaining this divisive rhetoric.

The Impact on the American People

This division doesn't just affect the political landscape; it has tangible effects on the American people as well. We find ourselves viewing those with differing political views as enemies. Our comedians, media, and even our social circles echo our own beliefs, often mocking and dehumanizing the other side. This creates dangerous echo chambers where we can no longer hear, let alone understand, each other's perspectives.

The Failings of Our Political Parties

Given the myriad advantages the United States has enjoyed, it's disheartening to see that we're not leading in many categories compared to other nations. Whether it's our ranking in homicide rates, the quality of our infrastructure, or the state of our education system, we are falling behind. Even in areas where we should excel, such as individual freedoms, we are seeing a decline. Our political leaders have failed to address these issues adequately.

The Need for Better Leadership

With challenges like North Korea's nuclear threat and the global attack on freedom of speech, religion, and the press, the world needs the United States to step up. We need to rise above partisan squabbles and lead with wisdom, unity, and strength. Yet, our political parties seem more focused on maintaining their power than addressing these pressing issues.

In conclusion, our political parties seem to be squandering our heritage and potential. The question remains: Can we find a better way to address our problems and lead our nation? I believe there is, and I invite you to join me in exploring this on Group Intel and our Idea Stock Exchange on Github.

Disparities in Our System

Given the many advantages bestowed upon us, it is both surprising and concerning to see that the United States is not performing as well as it should in various sectors. For instance, our nation is ranked 43rd in homicide rates while also having a higher incarceration rate than many other developed nations. It's worth noting that our high incarceration rate not only affects the individuals imprisoned but also has a significant societal impact. Political leaders have largely failed to develop effective strategies for crime prevention and rehabilitation, leading to this unfortunate situation.

Our infrastructure, which is a vital aspect of any developed nation, also falls short, ranking 14th in transportation systems and 33rd in download speeds. Moreover, our education system has not been spared, standing 24th in literacy and 23rd in science worldwide. This clearly demonstrates the failure of our political parties to invest adequately in these critical sectors.

Healthcare and Economic Prosperity

Health is another sector where our political parties have fallen short. The U.S. ranks 26th in life expectancy. The consequences of our healthcare policies have put a strain not just on the individuals but also on our potential to lead in the world.

In terms of economic prosperity, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and United Nations rank the U.S. 7th or 9th in GDP per capita. While these are respectable positions, we should expect more from a nation that has enjoyed the advantages we have.

Freedom and Corruption

Perhaps one of the most significant areas where we're failing is in upholding the freedoms that we've long touted as foundational to our nation's identity. Freedom of religion, speech, and the press, while difficult to quantify, are areas where we no longer lead the world. We have allowed unwarranted surveillance of our citizens more than any other Western country, betraying the principles of privacy and freedom from unreasonable searches.

The U.S. ranks 45th for freedom of the press, according to Reporters Without Borders. As a nation that prides itself on the freedom of the press, this is disheartening. Furthermore, the CATO and Heritage Foundation rate the U.S. as 17th and 18th on the Human and Economic Freedom indexes, respectively.

Corruption is another issue that our political parties have failed to adequately address. According to Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, which measures perceived levels of public sector corruption, the U.S. is ranked 18th, trailing 17 other countries.

Immigration Policies

The U.S. has a rich history of being a nation of immigrants. However, our immigration policies have been a topic of intense debate and contention. The failure to enact comprehensive immigration reform has led to a system that often seems unfair, inefficient, and inhumane.

Political Polarization and the Threat to Democracy

Political polarization has reached extreme levels in the U.S., impacting not only our ability to govern effectively but also threatening the fabric of our democracy. The proliferation of misinformation and disinformation, attacks on our electoral system, and the erosion of trust in our democratic institutions are all symptoms of this growing problem.

The Call for Better Leadership

Given the challenges we face today, there is a pressing need for us to be at our best. Whether it's confronting nuclear threats or standing up for freedoms under attack, the world needs a strong and united United States. However, our current political climate, heavily influenced by party divisions, seems to be squandering our potential and failing to meet the moment.

We need leaders who can rise above party lines and work together for the common good of the nation and the world. We need a political system that encourages collaboration, values diverse viewpoints, and prioritizes problem-solving over power accumulation.

If you're as passionate about these issues as I am, I invite you to explore further and join the conversation at Group Intel and on our Idea Stock Exchange on Github.

Revolutionizing Democracy: Beyond Factions, Towards Common Counsel and Mutual Interests

Our political parties are tearing America apart. It's like watching a family feud that never ends - only this one affects millions of lives and the future of our nation.

These parties have become like prodigal children of historical mistakes, mistakes we should've rectified years ago.

You see, our Founding Father, George Washington, issued us a stern warning against “factions” in his farewell address. He cautioned us against mobbing together into special interest groups or political parties with tunnel-visioned plans. He realized that the desire for power could become a “fatal tendency” that masquerades debate as a facade while always seeking to dictate.

He posed an interesting question, one we should still ponder today: Should our presidents pledge loyalty to the country or to their party?

Washington criticised the groups that sought to win for their side. He believed that the only victory worth celebrating was one for the whole.

Washington was no stranger to strategic thinking, but he despised the game of unending war. He saw the futility in trying to out-organize, out-think, or work against the "other side." He warned against skillful special interest groups imposing their will on government policy. He understood that the path forward was to rule by steady “wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.”

So, here's the reality check: There is no right or left. There are only Americans trying to do the best we can.

But what's the way forward? We need to create new political parties that truly embrace Democracy. A Democratic Party doesn't need to win against another party. Instead, we need to use democratic means to allow “the people” to outline what they want, the cost and benefits of each policy in terms of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, and organize policies that best serve their interests.

And how do we create “wholesome plans digested by common counsels”? To counsel is to deliberate, discuss, or argue. The advent of digital technology has made this easier than ever before. On platforms like Group Intel, we can engage in transparent, constructive debates about the pros, cons, and costs of different political policies.

We can even create a political party that promises to use a democratic process and implement the policies that have the best support. Think of it as the Wikipedia of political parties, a transparent decision-making process. I'm currently developing a platform, the Idea Stock Exchange on Github, which aims to do just that. It's time we changed the game for the better, don't you think?

Kids like (and are are like) wild animals

Kids like (and are are like) wild animals 

Reasons to Agree: 2

1. Animals are cool.
2. Seeing wild animals connects people to millions of years of hunting: which has historically included risk and adrenalin. It seems almost natural to start chasing wild animals. 
3. Seeing wild animals connects kids to another world, and so it is eye-opening, which can be fun and interesting..

Videos that agree:

James and Geese on the Payette Lake

Images that agree

Big Horn Sheep, Rocky Mountain National Park, 2014

Phil looking at an Elk in Estes Park, 2014

A bare we saw in Estes Park, 2014. Megan kept saying all the guys were trying to get closer, but the women were protecting the kids.

Big Horn Sheep, Rocky Mountain National Park, 2014

 
This is a photo of a mother "merganser" with its baby riding on its back. My kids and I watched it on the Payette Lake which is in Northern Idaho (2012).


A photo of a Stellar's jay, on the railing of my cousin's cabin in McCall Idaho (2012)


Do you have any cool wildlife photos? Maybe I should take it up as a hobby.

Osprey and James at the Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge, 2012

Osprey at the Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge, 2012

Osprey and James at the Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge, 2012

A Frog we caught at the local park

Webpages that agree:

1. Laub Life: The Robin Has Landed

I don't know what type of bird this is, 2014, Bear Lake, Rocky Mountain National Park

Not so wild animals

3.  A worker at the World Center for Birds of Prey in Boise Idaho: Peregrine Falcon, 2012

Grandma, Grandpa, and James Birds of Prey 2012


James, Ali, and Carlene with a wingspan at the Brookfield Zoo (2012)


James with a California Condor wingspan at the Idaho Birds of Prey (2012)

James, Teddy Roosivelt, and some bass at the Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge, 2012

Ali is a good artist

Ali did this awesome picture. I love the fish floating all around. It is a sketch within a sketch. She based it on my sketch of a sketch below. 

The lake that I worked at in the summer of 1995, sketched from my freshman dorm room that fall. 

Andre Breton is not the father of surrealism

Pretty good detail

I tried to do some combined art, but it needs some work...

Ali hard at work

. 

"The Plains" is a good Conservation Center +7

Background, Context, and Assumptions

Links:

1. https://www.facebook.com/plainscenter
2. http://www.plainscenter.org/
3. We need conservation centers
4. The state should pay for conservation centers.
5. The state should have conversations centers near major towns? Perhaps not. They keep rattle snakes, which is OK I guess. But deer are not endangered. In fact, sense we killed off wovles their are probably too many of them. I guess it is good for for people who live in cities to see them, but they also get hit by cars a lot. When you put conservation centers in places where cities are trying to grow, you are forcing people to drive further. Sure, you could develop more densely, but your not so your only options for a particular piece of land is subdivision nearer the city, or on the other side of the conservation center, and their is an argument to be said to move all the "conversations centers" further away from the cities... But, I guess people need parks and stuff, and public spaces...

___________________________________________________________________________
Best reasons to agree: +

1. They have Prairy Dogs
2. They have snakes
3. They have an old fashioned play ground, with a giant sand box.
4. They have over 5 miles of hiking trails.
5. They have a visitor center with live animal displays and interactive exhibits
6. They have a 1837 Cheyenne Indian camp
7. They have a replica 1887 sod homestead with soddies, one-room schoolhouse, workshop with blacksmith forge, and farm animals.

Best reasons to disagree: -

1. 
   

Score:

# of reasons to agree: +3

# of reasons to disagree: -3

# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: +0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0

Total Idea Score: +0

Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change.

For a full explanation of this project, please visit our  Google code website: https://code.google.com/p/ideastockexchange/

___________________________________________________________________________

Images that agree:

1.  
   
   
   
   

Images that disagree:

1. 
   

Blog Explanation
Besides just trying to come up with a list of reasons to agree or disagree, I am trying to promote an algorithm, that counts these reasons and gives each conclusion a score based on the number of reasons to agree compared to the number of reasons to disagree. However, because each reason (or argument) that supports a conclusion will not be just as valid as the other arguments, I think an algorithm should be made that also judges REASONS or arguments based on the number of REASONS that agree or disagree with them...

This blog is trying to use this format of outlining arguments and sub arguments.

Below is my score, so far, for the above belief. The score is based on arguments that I have come up with so far. But I need your help. I can't brainstorm all the reasons to agree or disagree with an argument by myself. And the number of arguments that agree or disagree with a conclusion will affect the overall score.