TED Community » cst commonsense

More About Me

I'm passionate about

Changing the world - at least to start with

An idea worth spreading

'Super Fast Track Education' - opening the eyes of young people of the world and helping them think for themselves http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/sft.html

Talk to me about

Anything that can move the world forward - especially by funding 'Super Fast Track Education' my idea to help change the world see http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/sft.html

Comments

• TEDCred score: +0.90 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• +1

  A comment on Conversation: Why do people find the need to entrench themselves in rules and policies?

  Dec 23 2012: Hi Kaleb - In the beginning there was the agricultural revolution and the first human settlements - close knit societies depended upon co-operation, so naturally rules followed this need. (and most of our societies other ideas such as money & institutions)
  
  However, I believe we need only one rule - "don't do unto others what you would have them do unto you." I try to apply this and have introduced my three children as a simple philosophy for life.
  
  Normally, as I also have an instinctive dislike of authority as it often represents unfairness or stupidity or power concentration, I try to follow the following:
  
  "Obeying their rules only encourages them to create new ones. Disobey as often as possible: for gain, for sport, for the art of it." - Ethan Mordde
  
  To create a 'good' society we need just one thing - that is to make sure ALL of our children are trained in the ability to 'think'. This is because if they can really think, we shall unshackle them from unfairness and stupid rule makers. This is I believe the worlds greatest challenge for long term success, and is clearly a difficult one since we cannot even manage to feed many of them presently.
  
  See: Super Fast Track Education:
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/sft.html
  
  Rgds
  JP
  
  If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you
  really make them think, they'll hate you.

• A reply on Conversation: When will we have the first 'clever' Robot? And if it is imminent (< 25 years), why are we not planning for change greater than any before?

  Nov 18 2012: I Agree - I have developed a new scheme for young people to get them to really think for themselves, to see the world for what it really is and how little control we have over anything...... 'Democracy' I agree, is a sham.
  
  To get a whole new generation (world-wide?) to really think is the single most important thing we could do to help change the world for future generations.
  
  see: super fast track
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/sft.html
  
  and: New political structures
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/politicalsystems.html
  
  rgds
  JP

• A reply on Conversation: When will we have the first 'clever' Robot? And if it is imminent (< 25 years), why are we not planning for change greater than any before?

  Nov 18 2012: Hi Ken,
  
  Yes you are absolutely right. We already have the ability to have massive excess energy if we decided to 'invest' in it. The reason we don't is mainly because of the 'status-quo' thinking and we misunderstand marginal costing within our economic practice.
  
  see:
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/economy.html#marginal
  and
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/energy.html
  
  rgds
  JP

• A reply on Conversation: When will we have the first 'clever' Robot? And if it is imminent (< 25 years), why are we not planning for change greater than any before?

  Nov 18 2012: Hi Barry,
  
  Yes, always the timing - I tell my kids they are going to live through the most exciting period in human history. Even without clever robots, we shall see massive change - China, India, the rest of Asia, the world is turning on its axis of power... throw in new technologies like on the fly translation apps and humans hooked up to electronic systems and data feeds... the world will be so different in 50 years.
  
  But my premise should still hold, even if it is not for a 100 years or more... then we shall face the same political and economic issues. Why not start planning for them now just in case?
  
  rgds
  JP
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: Can we ever have an unbiased classroom.

  Nov 18 2012: Hi Cayla,
  
  No we cannot. But does it matter?
  
  The whole point of education is to get young people to THINK. And if achieved, they will see the bias for what it is. Reminds me of the quote:
  
  If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you
  really make them think, they'll hate you.
  
  see: Training to make you think - super fast track education
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/sft.html
  
  and Fit For Life
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/education.html
  rgds
  JP

• A comment on Conversation: Our New World Order

  Nov 18 2012: Hi Roger,
  
  Great Idea!
  
  We have been able to transcend from capitalism et al for some time, but it has not happened - and the underlying question is why not?
  
  Interestingly, we are soon approaching a time (less than 50 years, so within one lifetime now I expect), that unless we 'transcend' we are very likely to come very unstuck as a race.
  
  Cameron's ideas are just there to get him and his party re-elected, within our political system (UK), even he can do practically nothing to really change the course of politics, economics or culture (and he quite frankly has been very poor at even at the simple bits that he can influence). Ask yourself when was the last time politics made a real fundamental change to our way of life in the UK, (answer: introduction of NHS in 1949).
  
  The answer to the question of why we have not transcended, and why we will find it extremely difficult to do so is 'Nature's Survival Function' it is quite simple, but we do not take it into account. I am not a pessimist, but we need to understand what we face and the size of the problem if we are to have any chance of doing it before Nature does it for us.
  
  see: The Human Contradiction
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/humancontradiction.html
  and
  New Political Systems
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/politicalsystems.html
  and
  The Tweet Revolution
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/economy2.html#tweet
  and
  Childish Economics
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/childish.html
  rgds
  JP

• A comment on Conversation: How do you simplify your life to lessen your carbon footprint on a daily basis?

  Nov 18 2012: Hi Noel - Just sit still, don't think, (thinking takes consumes energy) - generally do as little as possible and we will all live in a much better world?
  
  Or perhaps ask why are we in this predicament when the human race unlocked the infinite (clean) power source of the atom over 60 years ago - and ask why we still don't have plenty of excess, clean energy for the whole world and why are we not surging ahead developing plentiful almost free energy for the next generations (thorium, geothermal, solar)...
  
  Perhaps, if you try the other end of the telescope and you may see the answers written clearly. With enough energy we can solve the co2 problem, but it has probably gone past the tipping point now anyway, sorry kids.
  
  see:
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/energy.html#climate
  and
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/energy.html
  rgds JP

• A comment on Conversation: Idea: "Country-in-a-country" special economic zone

  Nov 17 2012: Not fundamentally flawed provided you control the currency (eg all electronic money, tagged to each individual, so not swappable or it just dissipates into nearby communities). The people in this 'new land' would of course have to do everything within it as the outside will be a no go area as they will not have any external currency to spend. Imports and exports would require tight control both physically and monetarily for it to work.
  
  I have done a fair bit of similar thinking, for regeneration areas of high unemployment.
  
  see: Job Hubs, from welfare to work:-
  
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/health.html
  
  JP
  
  :
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: Are humans irrational? If so, how can we build stronger institutions to compensate for human shortcomings in rationality?

  Nov 17 2012: This is the most important question that the human race faces and it is due to become a survival issue for many of us and our children within the next 50 years or less.
  
  Yes we are 'irrational' in the sense that we are social animals driven mainly by cultural and social instincts. Our thinking and sentient ability is an add-on to our essential nature.
  
  We have yet to understand the importance of Nature's relentless path in creating us. We are still very much children trying to survive against Natures awesome power - 4 billions years of success.
  
  I don't believe humans are limited, we are hampered by Nature's quest for survival and are still just pawns. Natures cares not a jot if most of us disappear, Natures course is simply onward and upward and in the process it is very likely that Nature will create improved humans (just a few) that should enhance Nature's chance of continuing her upward path. If not then again Nature's cares not and with infinite patience she will nurture other species with her relentless probability of survival function.
  
  see:
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/humancontradiction.html
  
  Can we create improved structures to help with our irrationality? But this is a circular argument - yes if we were able to plan rationally - but the very socio-political structures we now have (across the world) prevent this happening. It does look like things will get very messy before (and if) we finally are forced to adapt culturally.
  
  see:
  
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/economy2.html#tweet
  
  JP
• +2

  A comment on Conversation: Debate: Is corruption a moral or a legal issue?

  Oct 27 2012: Easy - you only need one rule - "Do to others what you would have them do to you". or indeed the reverse. You shall find that this covers almost everything.
  
  Is that a legal or moral stand? I have no idea, when legality differs from moral values, if those moral values can pass the above test then morality must be correct. Interestingly this definition covers both the local cultural and societal values too. These of course change over time and place. That's why the above definition is so powerful. It should always be applicable even in a thousand years on a far off planet or to any sentient species.
  JP
  
  see: Hello Anyone There?
  http://www.commonsensethinking.co.uk/philos.html