Further, we remember that for a healthy, harmonious life, people need to have access to knowledge and resources/products such as food, water, minerals, light, air, etc. We absorb some resources into ourselves, and they keep our human body alive, while other resources can be used by people to create tools to make human life on the planet easier. Here you need to remember Thaora's words that technology should assist spiritual development, not confine people within a materialistic world.
It is worth noting for a better understanding of my thoughts that at present modern society does not need to create some resources on their own (air, light), but in general situations may arise when people need to create those resources that are so commonplace for us. An example would be a space station or a city on a “dead” planet, if we allow ourselves to use the imagination a little, where people need to artificially create both air and lighting.
I realized a long time ago that there is a relationship between people and resources/products. A person either makes the decision on how to get or produce a product, or someone else makes this decision for him. Then there can either be a barrier (money, for example) between a person and a product, or the barrier may not exist. Once I wondered – what if there is also a third dimension, so to speak, between man and resources? This would be logical, given what I know about the Universe and life… And so, while working on the Manifesto and writing in a separate file the methods for people to get products, I wrote down that people can either produce products by their physical labor, or products can be produced by robotics… This was what I thought could exist – the 3rd direction in relations of the human being with the products he consumes.
Thus, there are 3 types of relationships between individual people and resources/products, each of which has 2 extreme values (erroneous), as well as one average and balanced value (correct).
I list them all in the table below where:
The first red row shows how people make decisions on how to extract resources and/or produce products.
The second green row shows how people produce products and/or extract resources.
The third blue row shows how people get different products and/or resources.
The extreme ways of self-organization of society are depicted in color; they are erroneous and will lead to problems, and people will suffer for their choice to live under such a social structure. In the middle column without a colored background, there are the most correct and reasonable ways of self-organization of society, in which people will not experience the suffering of the two most extreme ways of organizing society. By products, I also mean resources.
Each person decides by himself how to produce the products he personally receives.
The word “chaos” comes to mind.
Then some primitive society comes to mind, where each person lives by himself
The society has a leadership that makes decisions about the production of products in the country, and it also deals with other issues of the country.
At the same time, people in society have complete control over the country, which they can choose to exercise through universal open voting.
Not a single person decides how to make a product.
The total slavery of society can be an example; when one country completely controls absolutely all the people of the other; or, if we will go into what is still fiction, when people (by mistake or with malice) programmed robots/machines in such a way that all people become enslaved by them.
Products are produced only by people – by their physical labor.
That is, people make products with their own hands.
Hunters and gatherers, for example.
Some products are produced by physical labor of people, and some products are made by machines/robots.
Products are not created by humans.
It is produced by machines/robots, for example.
People themselves do not work at all, since everything is completely automated.
There is no barrier between a person and a manufactured product, and any person, without exception, can receive it.
Example: You enter a “store”, take the product you need and leave the store with it. No money or other restrictions between you and the product on the “shelf” of the store.
The manufactured products necessary for a healthy life are available to all people without exception (there is no barrier between a person and such products), and all other manufactured goods are available only to working people (there is a barrier between a person and a product, without which one can live a healthy life).*, **
There is a barrier between a person and manufactured products, which can be a pass, money, etc.
If you come to the store, take the product you need there and go out with it into the street without giving money to the cashier, then you will be considered a thief with all the ensuing consequences.
* Some vital products, logically, may include: clean water; food containing all vitamins and minerals necessary for a healthy body; minimal housing (1-room apartment or a small land with a small house) with all modern conveniences; access to knowledge and education; access to public transport; access to medicine and treatment.
** Some individual people might say that vital products are given only to workers, and personal cars, multi-room apartments, special types of food, etc. given only to those who do not work… Even though such a very strange idea of distributing food among the population is theoretically possible, it does not have common sense and is not logical.
Before I go into more detail about the average, balanced, and what I believe to be the correct way of organizing society, I would like to take a moment to explain why I think that the most extreme ways of organizing society are wrong and will lead to suffering.
First red row:
The extreme, where each individual person decides by himself how to produce products, brings up two pictures.
One picture is some primitive society that does not have technology, where each person tries to get food for himself as best he can. There is no mutual help between people, and the knowledge acquired by one person will disappear after his death instead of being preserved and serving as a lesson to other generations. As a result, many people in this very extreme way of organizing society will suffer, making mistakes because of their ignorance.
Another picture is the same fragmented society as in the previous example, but here people have technology. Because each individual person does what he wants in the absence of a general order and general rules of behavior, conflicts between people are inevitable in such chaos.
As for the other extreme, I hope you yourself perfectly understand why the total slavery of society is a mistake. By the way, if we move by one or two steps on the scale towards the golden mean, then we will receive serfdom and slave-owning societies that we had in our history.
Second green row:
When all products are made exclusively by people, people have to work very hard. There can be diseases, psychological depression, and high mortality. On the bright side, it can be noted that people are in nature, which is the focus of their attention – people cultivate their spirituality, observing how the world around them works.
As for the extreme, when all products are made exclusively by machines, robots, I remembered a saying about free cheese that exists only in a mousetrap. Since machines will do everything for a person, a certain number of people may lose the desire to learn and develop themselves, which will lead to a lot of mistakes and suffering; other people will also feel the consequences of the wrong decisions of people with little education. Then there is a negative thing in the fact that many people might focus their attention on the material world and they will not have time to develop their spirituality; as a result, people will have to stay for a life or two on the planet of the first category.