Intriguing The Not So Tantalized

Research In Progress.... Need to understand the topic better before publishing this response.

Notes:

Benton, Michael. "My Understanding of Anarchism 3.0" Dialogic (May 13, 2012)

-Occupy Movement's general assembly and decision making processes are partly inspired by anarchist principles) and that leadership should always be held accountable. Most anarchists are also opposed to privatization of basic necessities (at the least) under the control of a corporatocracy. These types of monopoly relations rest upon the infantilization of dependent populations
-We believe democracy doesn't come from a small group of people at the top of society, instead, democratic processes depend on the full involvement of informed/engaged citizens from all sections of a society.
- Is this what it means to be a "free" person in a democracy? Instead anarchists seek "liberty" for individuals and communities through participatory economics and consensus decision making.

"Political Philosophy." Wikipedia

- Political philosophy is the study of such topics as politics, liberty, justice, property, rights, law, and the enforcement of a legal code by authority: what they are, why (or even if) they are needed, what, if anything, makes a government legitimate, what rights and freedoms it should protect and why, what form it should take and why, what the law is, and what duties citizens owe to a legitimate government, if any, and when it may be legitimately overthrown, if ever. In a vernacular sense, the term "political philosophy" often refers to a general view, or specific ethic, political belief or attitude, about politics that does not necessarily belong to the technical discipline of philosophy. It provides insight into the various aspects of the origin of the state, its institutions & laws.

Are we no longer enlightened by the thoughts of progress and what could be? Where is that spark of inspiration that tells us we should aspire for greater achievements, for ourselves and the future of our society? Will there be a revelation of the masses to once again acknowledge the need for change?

We need a modern Age of Enlightenment. We are living on the cultural movement based out of the 18th century. Do not get me wrong; many great things have come from this time in history where society reformed using science and reason. It came from some of the most creative minds in history, such as Sir Isaac Newton and John Locke, and influenced great men like Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. It has led to documentations like the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, which formed the foundation of everything we hold dear in the US.

As Sir Ken Robinson states in "Changing Education Paradigms", "The current system (of education) was designed and conceived for a different age... in the intellectual culture of The Enlightenment ... and the industrial revolution." He asks how we are to educate children to take our place in the economies of the 21st century, while not knowing what changes it may incur in the coming weeks. And yet schools are like factories where students are processed through using an out of date method of education by age groups ('batches') rather than in groups by discipline. These are things we have to make changes in and make society adapt to us rather than conforming to easier, wrong route. On the outside our current system appears to work and people as a whole are comfortable with the regularity of the cycle all people go through as they develop from youth to adulthood. This comfort zone within the generations in charge of our society is what holds us back from change and adapting. Sir Robinson hopes to get over the old conceptions and not just be creative with unique ideas with values, but instead steer towards being divergent thinkers that see more answers and possibilities to a question.

Another view Enlightenment comes from Matthew Taylor who speaks about 21st Century Enlightenment. He believes that we need to see the world (21st century) from a new perspective, and understand who we are, who we need to be and who we should aspire to be. He thinks we can do so based on new insights into human nature. And based on his statements I believe this can be achieved and agree empathy is one of many key factors to bring about change. There needs to be more focus on the concern of others, and not make it about "me, me, me". Actually there needs to be a careful balance of the two.

Society has strayed away from the old-fashioned ways of a tight community, where people cared about the well being of their neighbors. There are still many smaller towns that keep to these ways of living but as a whole, more so larger cities and metropolises, everyone is moving at a fast pace, living their mundane routines, to engulfed in their personal needs to notice their surroundings and the other people within. I feel sorry for people who live that way, too busy to stop and look up at the sky, feel the breeze on their face and feel blessed to be alive, embracing the unknown.

I could not agree more with Mr. Taylor when he says we need to get our heads out of the self-help books and surround ourselves and interact with good, positive people. I weeded out the pessimists and negative acting people from my life over the years and have found myself at a more advantageous point, where I am more motivated and seek to do more things for myself and my those I hold dear to me. Rather than just sit at home or interact on my cell phone, I go socialize and make new memories out in public, while sharing a meal with family, or while on the lake or hiking with friends. These are memories that will last longer that any TV sitcom or several traded text messages.

Although I do not have the mental capacity to fully understand enlightenment and its affect on our society, nor will I know how to modernize it in the 21st century, I still attempt to familiarize myself with it. I researched it reading from multiple sources and various interpretations. What I found was usually beyond my comprehension. When reading Wikipedia's entry on the Age of Enlightenment, I came across a method of influenced thinking through means of a 'public sphere', mainly influenced by Jürgen Habermas. It intrigued me, and so again I started digging for more interpretations I could better understand. The public sphere allows for conditions to discuss public issues required for Enlightenment ideas to be shared and spread. It allows for the expression of public concern. And the end result was the breaking down of "barriers between cultural systems, religious divides, gender differences and geographical areas. This method helped in the development of many political infrastructures, some of which are still used today, as well as improvements on economic expansion and communication, to name a few.

I believe the public sphere is slightly being wounded with such things as PR, and different restrictions put on us by those who think they know what is best. And yet, there is hope for its restructuring with things such as blogging, which allows for everyone to express themselves without being censored. We can share our views and debate them in a more modern public domain, one for any and all to see at any time with the click of a mouse.

I believe as the experts do, that there is hope for change. There can be an updated version of enlightenment developed to better fit the 21st century. It is going to take a lot of self-awareness by the individual and the tolerance of change by the many. Matthew Taylor believes it will "take relying more on conscious decision making, rather than responding to the world around us," and with the expansion of empathy's reach. Sir Ken Robinson says, "It is about conforming ... changing the paradigm by doing the opposite of standardization." We need to continue to improve our communication and share our public concerns. And what better way to do this than by reaching out to the masses with the technologies that are continually being invented and reinvented. It's not going to happen overnight, and I doubt it will change much in my lifetime, but progress is possible. It can happen if we want it and by integrating it little by little, one thing at a time. All it takes a group of individuals willing to try. It has been done before, and if anyone understands that, it is anthropologist, Margaret Mead who put it best. "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtfully committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that has."

Additional sources:

Public Sphere -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%BCrgen_Habermas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_sphere

http://grammar.about.com/od/pq/g/publicsphereterm.htm

http://blogs.worldbank.org/publicsphere/defining-public-sphere-3-paragraphs

http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1280/1200