We human beings are at our best not when we are engaged in abstract solitary reflection or on our individual transformation for its own sake but when we are engaged together in the act of transforming the world. The act of idea-generation through authentic thinking and the sustained engagement in the conversation of humankind, if conducted in the context of pursuit of truth, beauty, and goodness, will lead to powerful moral action that will engender a New World. To engage in such moral action and to become a co-creator of a New World is to become a world-weaver in the act of weaving the world and a history-maker in the act of making history.

One of the ways I have conceived of the p2p foundation platform is through a process of ‘opportunistic updating’ using the whole web as a source. In other words, I’m presupposing that there is a collective wisdom out there, but that it is insufficiently connected or aware of itself (or better formulated, it’s different individual manifestations are insufficiently aware of each other), and that bringing this together in a platform as a curator, can create more of a collective self-awareness, a recognition of commonality, mutuality and complementarity, and hence, an increased mutual alignment where non necesserally existed before.

This assumes that there is no center that ‘knows the truth’, that collective intelligence is co-constructed.

I find this idea well expressed by Kimura here below, and it resonates with my own efforts and my original and still curent intentions with and for the P2P Foundation. See also below, the video by Julian Assange, where he also describes a shift to ‘omnicentricity’, and says the ‘current generation is burning mass media to the ground’.

Yasuhiko G. Kimura‘s full essay is available here.

Yasuhiko Genku Kimura:

“For the locus of thinking is within the individual. It is not the collective but the individual composing the collective that alone can think and generate ideas. The ideospheric transformation of the kind I speak is a synergetic phenomenon that emerges when individuals in sufficient numbers become authentic, independent thinkers, that is, originators of ideas, producers of dialogues, and contributors to the network of conversations that comprises the world.”

The configuration of the ideosphere throughout history has remained concentric with external authorities at the center surrounded by circles of believers and followers, where an authority did the thinking for its followers. Even today, in the scientifically and technologically advanced Western world, our educational system is, for the most part, designed to produce well informed, intellectually-adept, and professionally-marketable non-thinking adults. Thus the philosopher Martin Heidegger states: ‘The most thought-provoking thing in this most thought provoking time is that we are still not thinking.’ For, authentic thinking requires self authorship, which in turn requires authentic self-knowledge about which our education is utterly silent.”

In following the evolutionary thrust for optimization that is driving our collective transformation toward an unprecedented height of culture and civilization, the ideospheric configuration we require for the 21st century is omnicentric, having independent yet interconnected centers within the intellectually and spiritually sovereign individuals, living and working as self-authorities in the matter of thinking, knowing, and acting. Then, the thinking, knowing, and acting of these authentic individuals will synergetically co-develop throughout the omnicentric configuration of the evolving ideosphere. The Information Revolution that is underway with the omnipresent Internet is simultaneously the manifestation of, and the apparatus for, this new omnicentric configuration of the ideosphere.”

Thus, the transformation of the ideosphere does not mean the propagation of any particular set of ideas. Rather, it is the transformation of the configuration of the ideosphere itself from concentricity to omnicentricity in which every individual will engage in authentic, independent thinking in synergy with others.”

We human beings are at our best not when we are engaged in abstract solitary reflection or on our individual transformation for its own sake but when we are engaged together in the act of transforming the world. The act of idea-generation through authentic thinking and the sustained engagement in the conversation of humankind, if conducted in the context of pursuit of truth, beauty, and goodness, will lead to powerful moral action that will engender a New World. To engage in such moral action and to become a co-creator of a New World is to become a world-weaver in the act of weaving the world and a history-maker in the act of making history.”

There is no complete individual transformation apart from real world transformation. For the individual is the whole world; for the individual is the whole of humanity.”

In another essay, he explains very well what the intention of alignment means, and how this practice differs from agreement- or opinion-based organisations.

Yasuhiko G. Kimura:

“Alignment is congruence of intention, whereas agreement is congruence of opinion.

Opinion is a supposition elevated to the status of a conclusion held to be right but not substantiated by positive proof—rational or evidential. Because disagreement means difference of opinion, disagreement often escalates into a dispute as to whose opinion is right. When the dispute is not resolved through the logic of argument, the illogic of might tends to enter the realm of right , sometimes resulting in violent conflict.

Alignment does not require agreement as a necessary condition. Alignment as congruence of intention is congruence of resolution for the attainment of a particular aim. An aim being in and of the future, unknown or unpredicted variables inevitably enter the generative equations for its achievement. Inherent in alignment, therefore, is the spirit of quest.

The spirit of quest generates open and evolving dialogue-in-action. Participants of a quest bring in diverse points of view while remaining united in the same quest. When they jointly choose a course of action, they know that the choice is a tentative mutual agreement, to be modified, altered, or even discarded along the way. The question is not “who is right” but “what is best” for the fulfillment of the intention.

Alignment engenders synergy.

Following R. Buckminster Fuller?s definition, synergy means behaviors of whole systems unpredicted by behaviors of their subsystems taken separately and observed apart from the whole.(1) When individuals are aligned in quest, their collective intelligence often produces results that are beyond the intelligence of any single individual. Although the locus of thinking always remains within the individual, the synergetic impact of the thinking of others takes the individual beyond the normal mode and boundary of his or her thinking.

Intelligence follows intention. Aligned intention creates a synergetic field of spiritual coherence that works as a conduit for enhanced intelligence and empowered action beyond the usual limitation of the individual. This explains in part the occurrence of concentrated upsurges of phenomenally creative geniuses in certain epochs in history, such as the ancient Greek civilization, the Renaissance, and the Enlightenment.

In an alignment-based organization or movement, disagreement among participants does not diminish but rather enhances the power of the alignment and its synergetic impact. Plurality and diversity of ideas and views, united in a shared intention, mutually enrich one another toward the achievement of an end. In an agreement-based organization or movement, on the other hand, disagreement among participants often leads to internal strife, divisive politics, splitting into cliques, or eventual demise.

An agreement-based organization can transform itself to an alignment-based organization by shifting its value focus from agreement to alignment, from opinion to intention. Alignment is not a static state; it is a dynamic process of constant aligning and realigning in the continual movement of time through the timeless commitment to an intention.

People who differ in their opinions can align in their intentions. No more do we need the usual politics of opinion-domination, which is subverting the very integrity of human-unity. What we need instead is a new politics of intention-alignment, which is a cocreative art of peaceful and mutually contributory coexistence of people and nations through alignment beyond agreement or disagreement.”

Watch this video by Julian Assange: