A Practical Solution For Every Problem

[Gabriel]

The goal of this paper is to provide a pragmatic solution to every problem we experience on our planet today.

The idea is very simple. Everything we do should be done from the premise of, "I genuinely want what is best for myself and the planet." This means doing everything within the power of the individual to genuinely strive towards manifesting their "higher self" into this world.

Practically speaking, this would mean forgiving anybody who has wronged you; spending more time with your children; travelling to the coast; taking that new job; starting a new hobby; learning about a new subject; standing up to whoever makes you feel guilty; confronting whoever makes you fearful, etc. The goal is to ask yourself the question, "What can I do to genuinely treat myself with self-interest," and do whatever it is you need to do to be your true self. If you act from this premise then you will have taken a step towards aligning with your best self.

This would also mean eating genuinely healthy food (food without pesticides, hormones, or anything that would cause harm to the human body), emitting no polution into the air, using less of our natural resources (let alone misuse them), using very little if any electricity, etc. Anything we do as a species that is unnatural to ourselves and/or the planet must be redirected in the other direction.

This can work by fully converting to solar power, wind energy, geothermal energy, and hydro-power, and fully stepping away from fossil fuels and eventually electricity.

Spiritually speaking, this would mean gaining a basic understanding of our astrology charts, fully accepting, feeling, and healing our unaligned states of emotion and mind, perhaps taking psychedelics, and maintaining our best selves through consistancy of healthy behavior. More specific behaviors would depend on the individual.

If everybody completely aligned with their highest self then all of us would be living in a physically and spiritually healthy manner. It is also worth noting that we don't need to worry about anybody but ourselves in this endeavor, because the only person who can change ourselves can't change other people. However, self-change can be inspirational to others, and that will move other people to change more than anything else we can do

When this eventually happens I see a planey that has clean air and serves genuinely healthy food. Our cars will be replaced with vehicles that run on green energy, and we'll be using 100% natural packaging and bottling. Corporations won't fight for the customer's money but will instead be concerned about their well-being. People will care about other people because they care for themselves, and children will be brought up in a free environment. Emotional misery will be a thing of the past because we will have time and desire to study and nurture all types of emotion. Pharmaceutical supplements will be healthy instead of destructive. The government won't be an authority but a place to get help should we need it. The planet will be a place to grow and develop instead of industrialize and produce, and the people will be absolutely nurtured and content instead of mistreated and deprived.

All of the above (and more) can be achieved if our species put the well-being of the planet and the subjective experience as our first and foremost priority at all times.

Edited November 4, 2018 by Gabriel

[studiot]

Have you been reading Roosevelt's four freedoms speech ?

Also lifestyle stuff belongs in politics, yes?

Edited November 4, 2018 by studiot

[Gabriel]

7 hours ago, studiot said:

Have you been reading Roosevelt's four freedoms speech ?

No, but after reading it I see the similarities between his speech and my paper. However, he tends to say "Freedom is what we're looking towards," and I tend to say, "Here is how we can live on this planet long term while in good health."

Also, I figured it would belong in philosophy because it's an idea that a premise should be introduced into the subjective experience as the primary filter for manifesting actions into the physical world. 

Edited November 5, 2018 by Gabriel

[Sensei]

8 hours ago, Gabriel said:

This would also mean eating genuinely healthy food (food without pesticides, hormones, or anything that would cause harm to the human body),

Pesticides and hormones are added not without the reason.. Mass production of food for large population at low cost forced farmers to find a way to prevent crops from being attacked by bugs, fungi and microbes (which always existed and caused starvation in the past since the discovery of agriculture thousands years ago).. Hormones are added to increase rate of growth. I agree with you that addition of them badly influences human body, so their usage should be reduced to reasonable minimum. The more people is living on the Earth (overpopulation), the more food is needed for them, which requires using mass production accelerating techniques such as pesticides, antibiotics and growth hormones.

In my opinion the best would be to build hermetic agricultural skyscrapers, 50+ floors, with hydroponics, monitored in the real-time, with robots and drones which will take care of plants. If microbes, fungi or bugs would appear in them, single floor could be easily decontaminated.

If overpopulation won't be prevented, future human generations won't be able to enjoy the real food, but e.g. artificial meat (aka "cultured meat", "clean meat"), artificial organic compounds, will be the only option. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultured_meat

It's possible to make microorganisms (GMO) which will make the all needed for human proteins, carbohydrates, fats, vitamins, etc. and culture them instead of the real animals and the real plants. Animals on the farms won't suffer anymore (and won't even exist (only in ZOO), as not needed anymore).

 

Edited November 5, 2018 by Sensei

[studiot]

5 hours ago, Gabriel said:

Also, I figured it would belong in philosophy because it's an idea that a premise should be introduced into the subjective experience as the primary filter for manifesting actions into the physical world. 

 

General Philosophy in a Science Forum is about formal Philosophy, and its relation to Science.

As I said lifestyle stuff is not formal philosophy- This is not to denigrate your topic but I think

ScienceForums is a unique scientific forum in that it provides a place for both of these in addition to straight Science.

So take advantage of that.

[swansont]

13 hours ago, Gabriel said:

 
This would also mean eating genuinely healthy food (food without pesticides, hormones, or anything that would cause harm to the human body), emitting no polution into the air, using less of our natural resources (let alone misuse them), using very little if any electricity, etc. Anything we do as a species that is unnatural to ourselves and/or the planet must be redirected in the other direction.

This can work by fully converting to solar power, wind energy, geothermal energy, and hydro-power, and fully stepping away from fossil fuels and eventually electricity.
 

Fossil fuels are natural, so this does not fit into your thesis. (what is natural vs unnatural is often poorly defined, as it is in this case)

Further, solar, wind and hydro typically generate electricity, so you can't have them and "step away" from electricity.

[Gabriel]

9 hours ago, Sensei said:

In my opinion the best would be to build hermetic agricultural skyscrapers, 50+ floors, with hydroponics, monitored in the real-time, with robots and drones which will take care of plants. If microbes, fungi or bugs would appear in them, single floor could be easily decontaminated.

If overpopulation won't be prevented, future human generations won't be able to enjoy the real food, but e.g. artificial meat (aka "cultured meat", "clean meat"), artificial organic compounds, will be the only option. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultured_meat

It's possible to make microorganisms (GMO) which will make the all needed for human proteins, carbohydrates, fats, vitamins, etc. and culture them instead of the real animals and the real plants. Animals on the farms won't suffer anymore (and won't even exist (only in ZOO), as not needed anymore).

Overpopulation isn't an easy beast to slay. Everybody would need to be conscious of the fact that it's happening and take action against it, but I only see a small minority doing so. However, agricultural skyscrapers combined with GMO is a good idea to fix this problem only if we stop having so many children.

Another idea is to have each (abled) adult grow enough food for themself and one other throughout their life. If everybody (or even almost everybody) did this we could feed the mouths that are already here while focusing on having less children at the same time.

 

 

4 hours ago, swansont said:

Fossil fuels are natural, so this does not fit into your thesis. (what is natural vs unnatural is often poorly defined, as it is in this case)

Further, solar, wind and hydro typically generate electricity, so you can't have them and "step away" from electricity.

Thank you for pointing that out. It won't let me edit the post anymore but I changed it in my notes to fix this oversight:

This would also mean eating genuinely healthy food (food without pesticides, hormones, or anything that would cause harm to the human body), emitting no polution into the air, using less of our natural resources (let alone misuse them), etc. Anything we do as a species that affects us in unnatural and unhealthy ways must be redirected in the other direction.

This can work by fully converting to solar power, wind energy, geothermal energy, and hydro-power, and fully stepping away from fossil fuels and overuse of natural resources.

 

[Sensei]

58 minutes ago, Gabriel said:

and fully stepping away from fossil fuels

Just to point one thing. Fossil fuels are not the only source of energy, but they are used to make plastic, which is currently essential material in mass production (because of its durability and inactivity).

Going full solar panels, solar towers, wind turbines and dams etc. will bring energy, but won't give you carbon and hydrogen to make plastic.

One way is to use currently existing microorganisms (GMO could be used to make more durable, with accelerated rate of production) which process sugars (from crops) (in the case of GMO microorganism could be adopted to consume something else, some organic waste) and expel ethanol, which after distillation, and heating to enough temperature will decompose to ethylene and water. C₂H₅OH -> C₂H₄ + H₂O. Ethylene can be easily polymerized to polyethylene, or used to make the more complex hydrocarbons. But currently this method without skyscrapers is causing increase of price of food. Many farmers who can pick 1) make food for humans or feed for farm animals or 2) make crops for biofuel, chooses to make the second, because it is bringing them more money for the same effort and the same area land.

Second one is to make ethanol straight from CO₂ from air, water and energy.

Edited November 5, 2018 by Sensei

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, Gabriel said:

This can work by fully converting to solar power, wind energy, geothermal energy, and hydro-power, and fully stepping away from fossil fuels and overuse of natural resources.

 

Too late; we'll either die or live, because of it...

[Sensei]

3 hours ago, Gabriel said:

and fully stepping away from fossil fuels

...and fossil fuels are used for production of asphalt (road building), and tires (synthetic rubber) (automotive industry).. and many more usages..

All of them would have to be replaced by alternatives, before entirely giving up fossil fuels.

 

Edited November 5, 2018 by Sensei

[John Cuthber]

14 minutes ago, Sensei said:

All of them would have to be replaced by alternatives, before entirely giving up fossil fuels.

There is a huge difference between the massive damage caused by CO₂ from use of petroleum as fuel and the (admittedly not-trivial) damage caused by their use in plastics etc.

[Sensei]

14 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

There is a huge difference between the massive damage caused by CO₂ from use of petroleum as fuel and the (admittedly not-trivial) damage caused by their use in plastics etc.

I didn't speak about damage caused by burning fossil fuels, and this way releasing CO₂ to atmosphere, but what has to be done to entirely give up fossil fuels (i.e. the all reasons to dig for them), which Gabriel said in the initial post.

Different fractions of refination of crude oil find use, in many different industries. They all must be replaced at the same time, to loss interest in crude oil.

 

Edited November 5, 2018 by Sensei

[John Cuthber]

Fair point, but the OP's post is impossible.

[Gabriel]

4 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

Fair point, but the OP's post is impossible.

It's not impossible. It requires a dramatic change in lifestyle, and it will be a change that takes many years to fully implement, but if everybody in charge of the world acted from the premise I've mentioned above then there would definately be a chance for our survival (healthy survival no less). 

 

 

 

[John Cuthber]

On 4/11/2018 at 8:56 PM, Gabriel said:

This would also mean eating genuinely healthy food (food without pesticides, hormones, or anything that would cause harm to the human body)

 

That's impossible

 

[Gabriel]

On 11/5/2018 at 10:26 PM, John Cuthber said:

 

That's impossible 

Well, not exactly. There are ways for everyone to eat healthy food for the rest of their lives such as growing in their backyards and buying food from farms that use pheromones or perform crop rotations instead of using pesticides. If all of us started to avoid pesticides then the farms who use them will be forced to think of an alternative method because they will not have any sales. The idea is to create an alternative that is, actually, healthy for the planet and the human body while still being 100% effective at the same time.

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, Gabriel said:

Well, not exactly. There are ways for everyone to eat healthy food for the rest of their lives such as growing in their backyards and buying food from farms that use pheromones or perform crop rotations instead of using pesticides. If all of us started to avoid pesticides then the farms who use them will be forced to think of an alternative method because they will not have any sales. The idea is to create an alternative that is, actually, healthy for the planet and the human body while still being 100% effective at the same time.

 

What if your backyard is in the Arctic?

[Silvestru]

16 minutes ago, Gabriel said:

Well, not exactly. There are ways for everyone to eat healthy food for the rest of their lives such as growing in their backyards and buying food from farms that use pheromones or perform crop rotations instead of using pesticides. If all of us started to avoid pesticides then the farms who use them will be forced to think of an alternative method because they will not have any sales. The idea is to create an alternative that is, actually, healthy for the planet and the human body while still being 100% effective at the same time.

Have you considered that some people cannot afford to eat all organic? I am part of the (lower?) middle class in my country and I honestly can't afford to eat organic bio clean etc food every day.

8 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

What if your backyard is in the Arctic?

Haha beat me to it.

16 minutes ago, Gabriel said:

crop rotations

My Grandma used to do crop rotations on a very small level which means dividing a piece of land by 3 and farming a different piece each year.(at least 2 year break for each piece). Can you imagine applying that on a global level? imagine if you only eat one meal a day instead of 3. How would that sound to you as a voter?  

edit: my bad. Crop Rotation can also mean a different system.

Was refering to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-field_system

 

Edited November 7, 2018 by Silvestru

[Strange]

17 minutes ago, Gabriel said:

There are ways for everyone to eat healthy food for the rest of their lives such as growing in their backyards

Not everyone has a backyard. Not everyone with space has the time or ability. 

18 minutes ago, Gabriel said:

buying food from farms that use pheromones or perform crop rotations instead of using pesticides

Are such farming methods able to support the world’s growing population? Please support your answer with real data rather than wishful thinking. 

19 minutes ago, Gabriel said:

The idea is to create an alternative that is, actually, healthy for the planet and the human body while still being 100% effective at the same time.

It would be lovely. But is it practical?

 

[John Cuthber]

4 hours ago, Gabriel said:

Well, not exactly. There are ways for everyone to eat healthy food for the rest of their lives such as growing in their backyards and buying food from farms that use pheromones or perform crop rotations instead of using pesticides. If all of us started to avoid pesticides then the farms who use them will be forced to think of an alternative method because they will not have any sales. The idea is to create an alternative that is, actually, healthy for the planet and the human body while still being 100% effective at the same time.

On this planet, it is exactly impossible.

Not only is the production of sufficient food for humanity without the use of further pesticides impossible, there is no way to remove the pesticides that are already widespread in the environment- DDT is probably the best known example.

Please take the trouble to find out what you are talking about , before telling everyone that I'm wrong.

Incidentally, how did you come to the conclusion that pheromones are harmless to humans?
 

[Strange]

7 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Incidentally, how did you come to the conclusion that pheromones are harmless to humans?

Because they're like, you know, natural, man

[John Cuthber]

3 minutes ago, Strange said:

Because they're like, you know, natural, man

Yeah.
And so are (most of ) the most toxic things we know.

e.g.

http://theconversation.com/the-five-most-poisonous-substances-from-polonium-to-mercury-29619

https://io9.gizmodo.com/5861680/10-of-the-most-dangerous-chemicals-in-the-world

etc

[Strange]

While many life-saving medicines are "unnatural".

It's so confusing ... (if you take a simplistic approach to life)

[John Cuthber]

And many common drugs are improved versions of natural products (because the originals were not good enough)

The same is true of many foods,

It's almost as if some natural things- like senility and death are not all that wonderful.

[Phi for All]

23 hours ago, Gabriel said:

The idea is to create an alternative that is, actually, healthy for the planet and the human body while still being 100% effective at the same time.

The concept seems to be too focused on generalities and maximums. Solving EVERY problem, 100% effectiveness, and the assumption that capitalists will be more concerned with their customer base than they are with profits. There are also several errors that need to be corrected (more solar, but we need to give up electricity?!). Perhaps the OP would like to amend the proposition, or admit it might be a touch overreaching?