What are we?

(The whole of its parts, the parts of its whole. Everyone and everything within its self)

In the development of an ethical, moral, and intellectual self, a varied approach is necessary. Modern iterations both politically and philosophically are present, but inadequate. Third party systems, philosophies like pragmatism, and religious movements like unitarian churches are 20th century attempts at a universal way of communication and acting. These efforts require the creation of a modular way of thinking and interacting to manifest a balanced social order. The development of a universal toolbox of socially and intellectually interacting is the best way to achieve this result.  

The first step in this process is the development of the self within a system. A person is an individual with a collection of people. The modern debate between collectivism and individualism is one that stems from this debate. Do we fix the individual, thus correcting larger self inadequacies, or do we set up a system to correct for individual inadequacies. Syndicalism corrects for this in libertarianism and autocracy corrects for this in larger collective movements. Both applied to the letter cause larger societal catastrophe. The problem in these ways of thinking stems from an inductive barrier in the way we think.

An answer to these problems may never be discovered due to a lack of an ability to conceive and discuss the whole of society. Without the ability to discuss a larger collective the development of the self lacks any value. Conversely, a lack of understanding in ethos or self responsibility leads to a society that lacks oppositional and creative voices. A society moving haphazardly in one direction is as, if not more dangerous, than one moving nowhere. The result of either society is the same. There is no larger collective social or individual movements of growth.

In the development of self there is a societal necessity to figure out where one sits in two fashions. The first is in practicality. What does a person do within society? This is not limited to labor. Who do we interact with, what do we do in our free time, what do we eat? These are the practical decisions that decide who become passively. Next is the why. Why do we eat what we eat, why do we interact with those people, and why do we choose our hobbies? These assessments are made by self observation, and decided based on disposition. The self with the whole is less proactive.

People simply are. We choose social groupings based on disposition and societal relation. Religious people join church groups, atheists like science, and gamers buy nicer TVs. Within every grouping, there is the desire for the individual to be conceptive. The removal of that desire forms better social grouping. The idea that society simply is based on impulse makes for better individuals, and a better society.

Make decisions based on what is and can be, not what is based on what could be. Society isn’t lost, and people grow.