Survival and cultural diversity:
Talking about cultural diversity in the narrow sense of the diversity of forms of meeting.
the Monopoly on the Internet is now the form of "Forum":
1. Everyone has the right to speak.
2. The moderator censor has an "absolutely constitutional" power. That is, it can do everything, but within the framework of a unilateral "User agreement".
Disadvantages of the Forum form:
1. Censoring of opinion is useful,
2. Self-esteem factor.
- The main fake is not "offtop", and – bickering.
With the 1st part, in a dispute born truth,
With 2nd hand, the dispute in most cases becomes counter-productive, because the goal is not the truth, and protection of self. And this 2nd goal, as a rule, outweighs the 1st.
3. Noise.
- ?90% of the statements are of little use - they are made either by random people far from the topic, or difficult snobbish slang.
Forum and threat to the survival of Civilization:
Shortcomings of the Forum give rise to its social inefficiency.
The ineffectiveness of public consultation creates a fertile ground for manipulation of public consciousness.
I see the solution to this problem in a variety of forms of the meeting.
"Deliberative structure" and the survival of Civilization:
for example, it seems to me effective not a global forum, in which the whole world is involved, but a structured, - consisting of dialogue cells:
The cell censor is not the owner of the platform site, but the user.
Each user has a personal sub-forum in which he / she participates in and manages it for his / her own purposes -
Bans, he is not individual violators of the Agreement, and is arbitrary, and off everyone who he doesn't like.
By the way, the cumbersome nature of "Agreements", which no one reads, also speaks about the impasse in the form of the Forum.
the main Thing is that the user opens his / her personal sub-forum so that others can see him / her.
then there will be only 2 problems:
1. Interaction Of "Cells".
Here is here and will need organization agreements, but not born violence "Public Treaty", and born civilized free competition.
2. Effective the search for under-"forums" for interested other users, - the sample under-"forums." - It's a purely technical problem.
Accordingly, the "Deliberative structure" should be developed in conjunction with the"Soul-finder".
meaning of cultural diversity:
As in the ordinary world, the performance fee is "Foam". -
99% of the "Deliberative structure" will not be used "as intended".
But it is incomparably better than the threat to the survival of Civilization posed by the use of artificially limited social forms.
on the Contrary, the development of the "Deliberative structure" requires soil, a wide "material" demand for it.
While diversity of cultures was literally beneficial for the survival of mankind in the stone age, cultural diversity – in the narrow sense - of the diversity of the forms of the Internet is essential for the survival of Civilization.
Advantages of the "Deliberative structure":
Amazing - definitely formulate simple questions on the forums, but can't get answers, though the answers are there, you can even find yourself, if you spend enough time. Just those who already know, would have spent on the answer 100 times less time.
But meeting people we still have to explain why I need this answer.
But this is sometimes harder to explain, and besides not everyone want to post this reply.
So, selected each other, the interlocutors should understand each other "at a glance".
A factor of mutual understanding for the effectiveness of the search for solutions weightier even knowledge.
the main threat to the survival of Civilization today is the manipulation of public consciousness by special state bodies, primarily in authoritarian countries, and of them – primarily in Russia.
The most effective means of reducing this danger is a variety of means of self-determination of social consciousness, namely - "Deliberative structure":
Accordingly, the public in democratic countries must engage in the most effective means.
For example, to ensure that money is spent not on increasing the means of mass murder of people who only increase the threat and, in particular, play up the authoritarian forces, today, and spent adequately – in proportion to their effectiveness.
Proportionally, namely, not $1 trillion – on the murder weapon, and $1 billion – on counter - manipulative means, and – on the contrary.
|