I think people need to unite based on shared material reality. We all eat, live & work. How resources are distributed amongst us is a question we need to answer ourselves. The current system is extractive meaning it gives you comfortable survival for your labor. Most work is meaningless and serves the few. To truly transcend this system various 19th century philosophers have analyzed what could be built instead. Various 20th century experiments have shown the failures of new systems emerging & successes of new systems. To me the best solution remains bottom-up power, democratic centralism, ie marxism-leninism. The bottom drives the top leadership and bad apples are recycled out. The only challenge in this system is that people need to be proactive. If we are passive & reactive opportunists like stalin consolidate and create top to bottom power structures again. Thanks!

@Brandon McQUEEN its kinda hard evaluating societies based on history. What i can evaluate is society right now and its going into the wrong direction. Humans are essentially kept as livestock farmed for their labor & attention. Humans became passive nihilists and let others decide their lives for them. This group is an excellent opportunity for us to actually figure out what is going on around us, & its damn scary. Aldous Huxley brave new world called it, humans will be pacified with pleasure and will lose their will to progress. The system today is hostile and ruthless. Its main mechanism of control is consent. & its Achilles heel is self organization. Local power is absolutely necessary and centralized power that coordinates with local power is also necessary if you truly want to change the system. The only real challenge here is meeting people offline and actually discussing these topics & organizing. Its very ambitious but not impossible. As for the way society is engineered? Society is best engineered when people participate in it proactively. When people make decisions for themselves cooperate and coordinate. Then all individual and social meets are met. People understand limitations, how resources are divided, & potential opportunities. The ones that dont want to proactively engage in politics, those will always be subject to rules others create for them. This is just law of nature, if your dont take an interest in politics, politics will take an interest in you.

1. Predictive Brains: How does understanding that the brain is a “prediction machine” change the way you think about your own beliefs or emotional reactions? It doesn't "change" how I think. It confirms what I've been saying. If the brain is a prediction machine, then beliefs are just models that haven't failed yet. That's it. No sacred status. No special protection. Just hypotheses that survived long enough to feel like truth. The implications: · Emotional reactions are not "truth" — they're rapid predictions about what a situation means based on past patterns. Someone cuts you off in traffic. Your brain predicts: "threat, injustice, intentional disrespect." That's a model, not reality. You have no idea why they did it. · Belief rigidity is just the brain refusing to update a model that "worked" before—even when it's clearly failing. This is why people die defending bad models. The prediction engine got stuck. · The question becomes: Can you observe your predictions as predictions? Can you hold them lightly enough to update when reality says "wrong"? Most people can't. They fuse with the prediction. They become the model. I don't. I watch the model run. And when it fails, I rewrite it. That's the only advantage I have. --- 2. Constructed Emotion: Barrett argues that emotions are constructed from concepts we learn. Which emotion do you think was most shaped by your own upbringing or culture? Guilt. Not the useful kind—the "I harmed someone and should repair" kind. That's functional. That's social glue. The kind I got: existential guilt. The sense that my very existence required justification. That I had to earn the right to take up space. That wanting things for myself was selfish. That questioning authority was betrayal. Where did it come from? · Catholic upbringing — You're born broken. You need saving. Your desires are suspect. The body is a problem to be managed. · Working-class culture — Work is moral. Rest is lazy. If you're not exhausted, you're not doing enough.

1. What kinds of cultural knowledge do you think humans must inherit (not reinvent) in order to function well in modern society? Which pieces of that knowledge do you feel you never received? Let's start with what "function well" means descriptively: survival and reproduction within the existing constraint system. That's it. Everything else is decoration. The knowledge that must be inherited, not reinvented: The Baseline Stack: · Language — You cannot reinvent syntax from scratch. You'd die mute. · Numeracy — You cannot reinvent mathematics. You'd be cheated in every transaction. · Sanitation — You cannot rediscover germ theory through personal experience. You'd die of cholera. · Law/Property — You cannot reinvent contract law. You'd be enslaved or killed. · Technology operation — You cannot reinvent how to drive a car or use a phone. You'd be functionally disabled. · Social scripts — Greetings, queues, negotiation frames. Violate these and you're excluded. What I never received: · The descriptive/normative distinction. No one taught me that most of what people call "knowledge" is just assertion floating on more assertion. I had to bleed to learn that. · Epistemic hygiene. How to actually verify claims. How to trace beliefs to first principles. School taught me what to think, not how to think. · The structure of capital. No one explained that I was born into soft slavery. They called it "the economy" and told me to be grateful. Most people die never knowing they're in a cage. I was lucky enough to find the walls. --- 2. In your opinion, what are the most important “shared stories” or norms a society needs in order to stay stable? Do you think we still have those today? "Shared stories" is Harari's framing, but let's be precise: Stability requires predictable coordination at scale. That's the function, not the content. The functional requirements: 1. A shared truth anchor — Some mechanism for resolving disputes about what is. Traditionally: religion, divine authority. Today: ??? Science is supposed to be it, but science has been captured by capital and turned into institutional authority (same problem, different robes).

Hi is this group still active? What's the core vision of this group and what goals are we trying to accomplish?