And this is just the beginning.

[MacG]

MacG said, "How come? Why is it necessary for humans to excert power over other humans? Including killing other humans who dont obey? Those who dont obey dont hurt anyone, but they have to be killed anyhow because they dont obey. Why? How come?"

To have a society or civilisation, you have to have some people with more power than others, otherwise nothing would get organised, managed, rules put in place that most people wanted to live by etc.

I feel skeptic makes a lot of good points. Unfortunately we are not all nice, decent, honest people. Some of us (minority) are quite nasty, horrible, dishonest and evil people who if we did not exert control over would make life unbearable for many people.

Just the way homo sapiens are really - animals at the end of the day - most of us nice and cuddly, but a fair minority are not!

This is the "government memeplex" at work big time! Actually I think most of these statements are completely wrong. We are very social to our roots.

[snow hope]

Maybe you can elaborate on which statements are wrong then?

[beev]

Tasks can also be achieved by a networking and cooperating to achieve a goal. For that to work it is necessary that most (not all) of the members are focused on the goal. People will then organise themselves and achieve the goal without the need of someone with power over them and this sort of behaviour happens all the time. One example is the way people form groups of friends. There has been quite a bit of research into this sort of thing, mainly in AI and manufacturing but also in sociology.

In terms of getting serious things done in the real world, this is fantasy stuff. It is, however, possible (likely, even) that such stuff will become the norm in the distant future. If it is to become the norm, it will almost certainly be due to our continuing technological advancement.

In reality (and I have much experiance of this), people will only self-organise to get done things that they want to get done (forming groups of friends is a reasonable example). When there are jobs that need doing but people don't want to do them, you get into all sorts of conflict. It's not pretty but it's real, and no amount of fantasizing makes it go away.

If, however, people do not have to do anything they don't want to because there is a robot or AI to do it for them, they will self-organise much more efficiently. Could this be what technocracy is all about?

[isenhand]

In reality (and I have much experiance of this), people will only self-organise to get done things that they want to get done (forming groups of friends is a reasonable example). When there are jobs that need doing but people don't want to do them, you get into all sorts of conflict. It's not pretty but it's real, and no amount of fantasizing makes it go away.

Yes, spot on. To get the self organizing behaviour you really need the people to be focused on a goal. If they don?t want that goal they won?t self organise.

If, however, people do not have to do anything they don't want to because there is a robot or AI to do it for them, they will self-organise much more efficiently. Could this be what technocracy is all about?

Yes, part of it. The ideal situation to aim for is the unwanted jobs would be automated as much as possible in the technocracy. That will mean that the work to be done will be work that people want to do.

[fishertrop]

In reality (and I have much experiance of this), people will only self-organise to get done things that they want to get done (forming groups of friends is a reasonable example). When there are jobs that need doing but people don't want to do them, you get into all sorts of conflict.

Whilst it is true that some people/groups will have a natural tendancy to avoid nasty jobs, your statement implies that this will always be the case, which I would have to disagree with.

Further, I would suggest that those groups that recognise the need to complete certain unpleasent tasks as a means to a greater end are those most likely to prosper.

In an environment where everyone shares the nesseccary tasks, appreciates the need for them to be done - the goal - and no one is exempt, it's my view that comunnities can readily accept the need for such without conflict.

Personally I remain to be convinced that significant mechanisation or automation is required to deliver a decent std of living or communites that are productive and handle mundane tasks effectively, but perhaps that just down to definitions.....