Posted 10 years ago on Dec. 29, 2011, 2:04 p.m. EST by Listof40
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
We may want progress the Occupy movement by discussuing things, and this is actually a good strategy... However, there are some fundamental difficulties in making sure progress is effective when discussing things. The number one issue is that essentially individuals in society are not on the same page when considering what is reasonable. It is unfortunately very improbable that fundamental progress can occur without fundamental understanding and consensus regarding reason itself, between those involved in problem solving. This is the fundamental cause of difficulties in discussions and resolving problems in society. The problems of society, and what Occupy tries to address, are actually not that difficult to resolve in themselves, it is our reasoning process that obstructs and undermines this progress that is the real problem. This difficulty in reasoning has been going on for thousands of years. In actuality, why these problems continually resurface, is because fundamentally constructive reasoning has actually rarely ever occured. Period.
This is why movements like the 60s collapsed, internal common reasoning problems that are unlikely to be able to sustain constructive progress. It wasn't that their intentions were too weak or not admirable, or their resolve too weak, it is that there are common types of reasoning issues that are systemic that are rarely understood, and unfortunately will most likely cause extensive unnecessary difficulty.
Now this may seem somewhat vague or non-specific, but this post is actually engaging in dialog that is at a root level of discussion, that does not occur very often.
Problem #1: Since most people 'imply' that they are reasonable regardless of actual quality of that content, evaluating dialog becomes a sea of statements, and the criteria for evaluating or changing this is also across-the-board disagreed upon, therefore giving the fundamental constructivity score of modern dialog somewhere between 1-6% on a scale of 100. This is not sustainable for fundamental constructive progress. Period.
I am introducing this because it is of core relevance. How this can be changed is directly proportionate to how we engage these types of root discussions, because this is actually the core problem and reason success is rarely achieved in fundamental societal issues and concerns.
I hope we can engage issues at this level, in order to progress... I would be glad to address any questions regarding this perspective... Dave