|
The Critiques are |
It is particularly important to read the Critiques of Revered Founding Documents and Historical Writings before proceeding to the documents and essays in this section. This is partly because the ideas were developed and the writing was done in that order. Thus, by jumping ahead you will not have the background information explained in previous pages with which to fully understand and digest the ideas of a page in another Section. Instead, if you first read the Critiques Section, you will be more prepared and able to grasp the points being made in the pages of this Section and to understand the full reasoning for each new idea as you encounter and strive to assimilate it. However, while it is probably best to read the Declaration of Individual Independence immediately after the Critiques Section, it is also probably best to read the Theory of Social Meta-Needs in the Fundamentals Section before reading in full detail its partial implementation by the Natural Social Contract. We (Paul and Kitty Antonik Wakfer) refer to the documents and essays of this section as "solution achievement" because we are convinced that they provide the clearest, most consistent solution (in the sense of a set of operating principles and methods) to the problem of social order without compromise of individual liberty which has ever been devised. Obviously then they must contain many original, "outside the box" concepts presented for the first time anywhere from such an integrated viewpoint. Because we are convinced that it is pointless to begin a journey until one's destination is fully determined and understood, the operating principles and methods contained in these solution achievement documents and essays are the necessary second stage (after determining that a journey away from one's present location must be undertaken) of the Self-Sovereign Individual Project - A program to achieve freedom from government coercion for those who understand it, want it, and are responsible enough to live it. The material presented in the other Sections (Freedom Dialogues and Commentaries and Focus on Freedom) should be viewed as adjunctive aids to understanding. |
|
The formal documents |
Even though enormous thought and thousands of hours of work has already gone into them, the complexity of the formal solution documents (particularly the Natural Social Contract) is such that while they are now in an advanced stage of adequacy, they remain in draft form until more vetting of them for errors, incompletenesses and inconsistencies has occurred. In addition, the Natural Social Contract and its annotations is so large in its scope, and necessarily so complex in detail, that no one should expect to be able to fully understand all its nuances without prolonged intensive study, deep analytical thought, and public questioning of its author (Paul Antonik Wakfer). All readers can be helpful in finding errors, incompletenesses and inconsistencies in the formal documents of this section so that they can be made ready for initial Execution, as soon as possible. Therefore, we request and we welcome all constructive comments concerning typos, grammar errors, incorrect linkages, logical contradictions, inconsistencies, incompletenesses, additions, deletions or other alterations to these documents (or the other essays of this section), both to their detail and to their overall approach. However, as always this should be done with public postings to the Yahoo group Morelife so that others can benefit from and/or add to the discussion. |
|
|
Comments, Questions |
As you read and study the documents and essays above, before you simply react with a general dismissal that "this won't work", please read fully, think deeply and widely, digest, and then post to the Yahoo group MoreLife comments, questions or critiques on specific points of the pages (the approach of full quotation with inline comments is always best). Contrasts with other approaches and why you might think they are better or ours is better are also useful. However, we are not interested in diatribes or mere statements that this whole approach won't work or that some other approach is better unless an argument (logical, reasoned, persuasive statement) for your position is included. |
