Contact theSOPAbout theSOPSupport theSOPWritersEditorsManaging Editors
theSOP logo
Published:September 26th, 2010 13:14 EST
IDENTITIES: How Governed, Who Pays? Future Identities  Chapter 11

IDENTITIES: How Governed, Who Pays? Future Identities Chapter 11

By HB Paksoy

11. Technological and Future Identities

by H.B. Paksoy

     1. The designer communities are hard at work in creating computer systems which will in turn design virtual humans. These virtual humans will need to have Identities. Will these virtual humans brag about their creators, claim that their humans were more intelligent than the humans of another brand?

     2. Or worse, will the virtual humans immediately set out to battle each other, for primacy over resources? After all, the humans are creating these virtual humans in their own images, biases and fragilities.

     3. Computers are already designed built and programmed to have very specific serial numbers. They can already identify each other by hardware (nalburiye) and software (tuhafiye).

     4. The current heuristic software can adapt to the physical conditions and physical choices. The designers, on the other hand, will introduce emotional entries and partialities into the software, reflecting their own intractable preferences.

     5. What will be the human designers` preference in terms of human emotion substitution are going to be, as the software in existence as yet cannot respond on the emotional plane?

     6. The definitions fashioned and factored by the designers at this stage will invariably influence the later day variants of the same, as the subject is not technology that can be leapfrogged.

     7. The manifestations of emotions in virtual humans will create a backlash from other designers, in their versions of virtual humans. Thus, the eternal competition among human polities will be transferred to virtual polities.

     8. The Thought Employer observer who have the greatest chance of studying human thought patterns, and their results, often get bogged down in a small corner, usually due to exigencies of professional life (tenure, promotion-requiring publications which in turn demand specialization).

     9. Then the Thought Employer does not undertake the applicable attempt to communicate the findings of those observations to the computer designers. Or, the Thought Employer`s attempts are completely ignored.

     10. The designers tend to believe they can cure all societal ills with their creations.

     11. Thought Employers passionately believe they have access to accumulated and profound knowledge of all societal ills and their cures.

     12. Neither the designer, nor the Thought Employer are able to communicate with each other. This non-communication is ironic in the age of new means and modes of communication, in most cases fostered by the fact that successful designers have not even been through a general education process and the Thought Employers have avoided non-book sciences.

     13. The sin of the Thought Employer is greater, as the life of the polity is simply too precious to leave to a single specialty.

     14. Thus, interactions will take place among identities. The final effect of those interactions will be decided by the members of identities concerned, without forgetting that an `armed` visit will always be returned in kind.

     15. The governing strata does not lean toward expending efforts to bridge the ensuing gap between competing identities.

     16. Large organizations within a polity need and use all innovations that can be mustered, to remain ahead of the competition.

     17. Many a polity has already attempted to forgo human folly in favor of new technology in the belief that the latter will conquer the former.

     18. Those who believe this assumption have always been sadly disappointed.

     19. The governance strata, on the other hand, always pays attention to human folly; even only if to exploit it for the benefit of the governance strata.

     20. The educational system of a polity will reflect the approach of that polity to governance.

     21. If the educational system of polity exhibits a division between elite and non-elite educational institutions, and acknowledged as such, then the governing strata is first and foremost engaged in perpetuating itself to remain in governance.

     22. The danger is greatest when the illusion of education is given to those who attend the educational institutions, when in reality an indoctrination exercise is engaged. This is valid for both the elite and the non-elite varieties.

     23. The image of superiority acquired by individuals in an educational institution is invariably harmful to the polity.

     24. That a given community will have a specific Identity in a polity is already discussed. A community need not be ethnic based. Designers are one of the tools of the governing strata, and as such they will designate themselves as a rather influential community within the polity, without specifically becoming a part of the governance strata.

     25. On the other hand, the community of designers will choose to ally themselves with the governing strata by embracing the governing strata attributes.

     26. Of course, even in a highly structured non-socially-mobile polity the community of designers are prone to compete with each other, thus creating rival sub-communities. This is not much different in effect, than the various forms and incarnations of the Praetorian Guard phenomenon.

     27. This type of competition within a community, despite some other beneficial effects of competition, will not profit the polity; instead, the infighting will weaken its capabilities.

     28. During this intra-community competition, the Identities of the individuals will come into conflict not only with the opposing communities, but also within their own factions.

     29. As designer communities engage each other in competition, depending on what is at stake, they will resort to extreme measures to win.

     30. Extreme competitive measures will finally begin to affect the internal Identity of the designer community (much like any other community)

     31. This, in turn, will create disgruntled individuals who cannot abide by the new Identity of the Community. These disgruntled individuals then will turn on the community of designers.

     32. If the governance strata does not intervene effectively, then the internecine fighting will negatively affect not only the future of the governance strata, but also the polity.

     33. As the technology develops, the interpersonal relations, which are the basis of all human relations are forced to change.

     34. Even the construction of the first fireplace weakened the bond between the ruler and his nobles, re-structuring the sleeping arrangements into different rooms, thereby reducing intimate contact.

     35. Progressively, each new technological development continued to increase the distance between individuals, lessening the bonds that constitute an identity.

     36. New technologies will continue to emerge. Each new technology will contribute to the related change in the identity.

     37. When individuals work at computer terminals, physically separated from each other, they interact antiseptically and without the attendant germinating qualities of human contact.

     38. Organizations and institutions within a polity will sooner-or-later recognize the effects of this process on the identity.

     39. The isolation of the individual in a cubicle or in front of a terminal will be seen by institutions as an opportunity to divide the identity further.

     40. The efforts to divide the identity will work only to the benefit of those who are dividing the identity.

     41. Any identity that is divided cannot benefit itself.

     42. When a mosaic identity does not have checks and balances built into its structure for governance, the dominant institutions within will attempt to pit the sub-groups within that mosaic identity against each other.

     43. This is especially valid for mosaic identities where the sub-groups are roughly equal in population to the dominant identity.

     44. The objective of pitting one identity against another in a given polity is to keep the sub-groups busy with each other, to induce them to lose sight of the operations of the dominant identity.

     45. The internal organs of a polity will also be emboldened by the actions and policies of the governance strata, and attempt to penetrate the sub-groups for their own purposes---apart from the general policies of the governance strata.

     46. The activities of the officially constituted organs of a polity will take on the importance of a checks-and balances system, if such a system is not provided in the organizational principles of the polity concerned.

     47. The organs of the mosaic identity will then form unsanctioned checks-and balances according to the internal vision of such equations within each institution, in competition against each other.

     48. The vision of each institution will be at variance with each other but will reflect the identity of the organization involved, at variance with the identity they are charged to safeguard.

     49. The institutions involved will invariably be striving for prominence over the competing institutions.

     50. Although each institution in the competition for prominence start from the same basic premise, preservation and continuance of the identity that spawned them, each will have its own vision of how that goal should be accomplished.

     51. The institutions in a mosaic identity will also be at variance with each other in the competition for prominence as to what the end result should be.

     52. The ultimate objective of each institution is to maintain a governance system under which the institutions can exist, grow and attain dominance over all others.

     53. When the institutions concerned realize that they are being blocked in their vision and actions by other institutions within the polity, they will strive to form coalitions.

     54. The coalitions may be with the sympathetic segments of the governance strata, or with other institutions; depending on the influence calculus attempted by the concerned parties.

     55. In an effort to gain the upper hand in the large scale competition with others, the formally constituted institutions in a polity may forcefully back candidates into the ranks of the governance strata who are perceived to be sympathetic to that institution.

     56. This will further weaken whatever checks-and-balances may have been built into the organizing principles of the polity, to keep the polity under the authority of the governance strata.

     57. As a result, the governance strata will begin losing control of the future to the institutionalized functionaries who may or may not have a broad vision for the identity as their primary focus is their own power base in the institution.

     58. All coalitions and alliances in an authoritarian mosaic identity will be attempted in secret, for advantage purposes.

     59. All rival institutions will discover such secret alliances, and will manage suitable means to leak the information to broader audiences both domestic and international.

     60. By leaking the coalition and cooperation arrangements, the institution leaking the information is acting out of self-interest, to gain ascendancy over rivals.

     61. When the institutions involved in the struggle for primacy employ or command large numbers of personnel, some will be assigned to tasks unrelated to the original mission of the institution not originally found in their charters.

     62. A portion of the personnel assigned to an institution by formal charter provisions will be diverted into formations of secret armed militia.

     63. The armed groups spawned by formally chartered institutions against their charters will have a dual aim: to thwart other institutions` efforts and to act as a decoy. 64. The decoy function is much more elaborate and difficult to detect, as the decoy will have to act as if it is working against the interests and objectives of the institution that spawned it.

     65. The purpose of the decoy function is to attract and discover the identity of the opposition under double or triple disguise.

     66. Once the opposition is discovered, then it is possible to deal with it more effectively.

     67. The decoy method will be used by a large number of institutions especially in governance systems intolerant of open opposition or expression of views.

     68. The decoy method is always preemptive.

     69. Those in opposition to the entrenched governance system may not be effectively organized due to the active counter measures of the internal security organs of the identity, but their views will eventually find support from outside polities and identities; as long as the opposition`s views suits the needs and objectives of those outside entities.

     70. Narcissism will be used as a means of directing the desires and thoughts of individuals who are not aware of the process.

     71. Narcissism will be used much like panem at circenses, to distract the masses away from the activities o the governance strata.

     72. In no restriction polities, narcissism will be used in ways that reflect the methods of more authoritarian brethren.

     73. The institutions engaged in either openly authoritarian methods or re-direction of desires and thoughts will always claim that their efforts are expended in favor of the masses they serve.