John Axtell (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Thu, 08 Mar 2001 19:12:05 -0800
I think you are in a key area. Just how much commumnity does it take to raise a
child? a deep question to which I have no particular answer.
Marko Koskinen wrote:
> > But I must admit Marko's quote (above) about leaving problem solving to the
> > guilty party confuses me greatly. Marko, are you actually proposing that
> > when someone has such a problem that they violate someone else's rights, the
> > responsibility for solving that problem resides with an outside third party?
> No. I'm suggesting that the community takes responsibility as a whole of
> the problem and that means that the community provides help if requested
> for the person having the problem. In practice this could mean that if
> someone violates the common rules, s/he would be given a chance to form
> a "problem solving group" that would help the violator to get over the
> problem. I'd guess that most of the problems and violations would be so
> "small" that they wouldn't need any such group, but the violator could
> come up with a solution to the violation him/herself.
> This view bases on a systemic view of human consciousness. This means
> that human consciousness is in fact an illusion created by aim to reach
> a common result in a complex network of human relationships. Human
> consciousness is "born" in social interactions. This means that
> individuals exist only to reach common result and have no value in
> themselves. But the way to reach this common result is via freedom,
> cause freedom means the amount of different possibilities to survive.
> The greater freedom the greater chance of survival. And because the
> system consists of individuals the freedom renders to these individuals
> meaning that the more freedom (meaning the amount of possible choices
> that don't restrict others freedom) an individual has the more valuable
> s/he is to the whole system. This theory consists of the idea that
> emotions are a type of reorganization of the organism-environment system
> so that positive feelings mean integration and negative feelings mean
> And how this all relates to the problem solving process? If all behavior
> aims to common result then all problems are also common problems. And I
> agree that a problem solving process needs internal motivation, but I
> also believe that the process is more effective if it's not done alone.
> With this I mean that when there is someone who actively listens to the
> one who is talking and thinking about the problem, the process is more
> And I don't believe this process should be made mandatory, but I think
> people who need such "consultation" help, will seek it out and I don't
> see why offering such help would be counterproductive.
> PS. The whole articles that I base this thinking can be found from
> following addresses:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 29 2001 - 11:16:58 EST