One may look at synergy through governance, consider a group of judicators, they exist only as a framework, extending through a greater mass of guilds -these existing through all forms of social enterprise- guilds are made up of the crafters/merchants/producers/clients, formed around the skeletal neural network, government.
A new law is being discussed, it regards an additive to maintain meat, some chefs argue the flavor, some providers the longer peak quality -from four days to one week- others question the potential health issues, along with topics like ‘purity’ and cost.
Each group gains a say -in their part- electronic forums display questions (one client questions ‘how many days are for the merchant to sell, how many do we see in the purchase?) people may read these questions and upvote, enough upvotes brings the topic to the floor, creating representative discussion, also recognition of initiative and insight.
The judicators are present to moderate discussion, also to ensure a degree of neutrality, then overseeing the application of any ruling -also providing outside enforcement of future disputes - a neutral ground to talk -yet- the decision process is largely within the guild, each group having a total weight of a final vote.
In a partial example, the majority of clients -general citizens- vote for the additive -however- a major minority votes against (this 38% gives merchants an understanding, they create or maintain a second product, to cater to this clientele) with full statistics on ages/gender/general location, merchants/crafters and producers gain a large source of demographics, not having spent a cent, those with alternative solutions gain a podium.
Such a decision might be made at any level -effecting one thousand or one million- allowing for multiple demands, from more testing to a look at alternatives, allowing open ended solutions (dependent upon the people’s will, being active in any area) is a neural network the body -and taking the duties of the body- or is it connection spread through the body?
Is this a method of synergy -in which- the members act to develop the form, around the underlying networking of governance (in a tribe, the governance is immediate and intrinsic, that becomes despotism if it remains) the integrity not determining form absolutely -does the body cultivate the brain?- but can the body demand exercise?
As for the cells speaking, this is false (a brain interprets as speech -this is how it is designed to interpret- or kinesthetically, or visually) a cell simply gives off signals (but I do not see the environment, I see my interpretation of the object -within that subjective view- there is something objective unless completely breaking from reality) the entire environment gives off signals, can they be interpreted in accurate and useful ways -for- if they can be then there is utility, a utility that may be called psychic communication, empathetic communication.
It is an amusement, to read Mill after writing this (almost having neglected to as well -given the praise of Bentham- I began to read as a challenge and found a change of heart -the worth of a good woman?- as Mill revealed deep and significant conflicts with Bentham’s thought) though he does not break my ideas -as Kierkegaard and Nietzsche- as rather occurred with Thoreau, I found the renewed faith and conviction -of several streams- along with widening perspectives on others.
Though I found many of his criticisms hilarious, as they mirrored my own view of the modern (along with reminders, no longer so biting) it is disheartening to see his most shallow ideas, as they are faithfully applied, wholeheartedly!
What can one know -we knew this in 1950!- Mill repeats this, as Bacon did before him, Ptolemy even earlier and Socrates most famously of all -what do you know?-.
We learned this in 1950 -which is- the precise reason for repetitions necessity, the environment may not form the individual (even the original writing is a translation -of the writers experience- read old English and little is not, a translation of a translation) one must translate the experience of reading (never mind, one is told the truth, terrible shortcut to become a good parrot) translating a deep author, that is the first step.
Skepticism is nothing; criticism is everything -for- mature skepticism is merely the negative part of criticism.
Mill never moves beyond the idea, attacking opinion is worthwhile and necessary, problematic when moving to ideas of action and government, this is a problem that must be dealt with -but- Mill could not uncover the full development of mind, beyond its necessity -perhaps the greatest shame his wife died.-.
It is recognition and criticism, that act as tools to form a mind, without creating a demand on its liberty, these are not the veiled insults and sycophantic compliments, so predominant in the modern mind.
Even in the case of overt compliments, flattery is a means of conforming self to environment -building one’s self up- this is not recognition but maintaining weakness (careful of sycophants, they pull back when displeased!) one feels invigorated, only because the environment is positive -why do monks take ice cold showers?- one must understand the core of asceticism.
The use of recognition and criticism must arise early, only then does one understand -conformity is not the goal- development of self-definition is -only capable by the individual- recognized in mind, by direct experience of forging the self.
Criticism and recognition only become mature, when the delivering individual -in themselves- has become self-critical and self-aware, what is recognized must be the essence of a thing not the label around an event ‘you’re great!’ has nothing to do with the essence of the event.
Flattery strengthens the environment -but- ones focus must be upon the essence, always.
Let us look to education, several large classes exist (these are the focal points of a day or week, as mentor/pupil groups break off) secondary classes utilize these main classes, beyond this is no defined structure.
Ongoing courses arise every 1-3 hours (a shop like class moves to one of eight playgrounds -where- pupils build or deconstruct mechano like playgrounds -utilizing a range of tools- deciding layouts and equipment checked by staff) the choice of each student determines the community (a cafeteria has basic menus -they add specials through the day- extra work depends on extra staff -also on horticulture classes- deficiencies are only highlighted) a poutine with butter chicken replaces chicken and fries, while only enough work is done, maintaining two playgrounds (the choice is simply to study basic subjects further, or to engage the community, individual courses are chosen increasingly with age) each area contains elements of math/english/etcetera.
One pupil works to develop playgrounds (each maintained a month before teardown, all staff like chefs/ground keepers, become assistants to mentors and communicate with them) pupils face immediate effects, recognition and criticism in the community (certain layouts may cause clear issues, the pupil faces clear issues and feedback, professional and public) recognition of food/balsa kites/playgrounds arises, in lives personally defined/developed/expressed (a horticulture pupil maintains a stock of saplings -while selecting trees in a small conservation- pointing an art pupil to tree’s harvested) a goal of mentors is guiding, as much as teaching in rigidity.
Tasks move from cutting tomatoes and mixing sauce, into increasing complexity (you’re a senior cook now, so you’ll have to work with the chef -on a budget- selecting and costing the menu for one days special) not for the sake of specific job development, only to create immersive development of self-direction (each pupil develops in a community, whose currency is gpa -but- whose wealth is experience of immediate cause) they must define the picture to an increasing degree, rather than stand in line, pay attention to proper theory.
Though, I would argue, students learn poetry before proper paragraphs, philosophy and music before physics (of transformer and ninja turtle variety perhaps -but depth is depth- even if the wisdom of Optimus, just not the pathetic good of recent thought!) so one learns to think for themselves, to direct themselves, before they learn what is right.
To fully utilize such ideas, children need developed ability (not destroying childhood, but deepening it) requiring the use of mildly electronic pacifiers (stimulating neural networks, as a child listens to audio, reads or plays) toning bowls at certain pitches for pre-natal development (the frequency matters, as much as Mozart) along with other methods of building ability, in addition to inquisitiveness.
Character develops the environment, training kids to stand in line, parroting ideas of order -in math or literature- one trains servility, rather than ordering the mental environment.
All structure stems from integrity of character -great individuals are merely cultivated- the vitality of culture does not shape people, good people shape the culture, determining the cutting edge of the great -that is to say- the depth and weight, the best the cutting edge can show (if shallow and sparse, it is mere utopia and façade -rather than a vision of future time- rather than the pinnacle of present time) a people that understand this uphold liberty, by their will and not for a moral should.
A pupil must understand, they time their own schedule -but- also decide how to impact the community, they determine the environment, they are not shaped by it, unless they have failed to cultivate themselves.
Hidden knowledge is occult -because- no base has existed, demanding direct experience before simple acceptance, while guiding recognition of depth (to whatever degree pursued, only that it be basically diverse, whole) to read a philosopher is not to understand, to translate a philosopher, is to begin to understand.
The Stanley cup is a façade -when won- people may stand in a line and appreciate (no one knows the value of a good whore, even when they train, dropping to knees in an instant) I would prefer a cup, which has reason to be wiped clean (but congratulations to Schultz, just dessert, for incompetently laid hardships) should I save face, for being wrong?
I should nod to leadership -for- GM’s are quite understanding (recognizing when the pressure of competition, proves to be, too much!) the necessity of structure, became the necessity of eating crow -capped at 50%- the failure of integrity and foresight before competition -along with leveling equality- I should have recognized this and apologize.