From ATE to 8 - A Möbius Journey

The dialog in this blog post, as well as many instances from my upcoming eBook; Will Freeman, refer to a conversation between student and teacher. "M" and "W" do not refer to Man and Women respectively. I purposely did this because, as an android, Will Freeman is asexual as well as gender neutral. M simply refers to a personified version of humanity and repurposed as a single individual throughout the dialogs of the novel.

I realize this is a unique way of de-individualizing characters, yet it further illustrates my intent to create a fictional world where consciousness is transformed and blended into and amoungst the community. If it sounds like a dystopia, trust me it's not. My intention for writing this book is to show the beautiful side of a resilient civilization reliant on technology and where things good go.

Besides the humanizing and tragic aspects of Will's struggles, I keep character development to a minimum. In its place, the utopian-"ish" communities are thriving with individual expression and flourishing amongst productive group interactions. Ego driven activities, including any and all "I" statements are replaced with "we". Ergo let go of the ego.

Fast forward to a time in the not too distant future where the following conversation takes place. This sample highlights the contrasting nature of factory farming practices of the late 21st century to the value of the individual amongst the swirls of society's deterministic algorithms and predictive analytics.

W: We actually ATE animals?

M: I can speak for all humanity when I point out that we didn't know any better. We really didn't have any other options or at least we didn't think we did.

W: You are a scholar and a historian. Isn't it sickening to realize that we behaved in such an abhorrent way?

M: It should sicken us. This behavior is reprehensible by today's standards. Contemporary historians look to our future as much as our past. We call this combination of feedback, reflection, and contemplation the Proustian Praxis.

W: We can discuss the Proustian Praxis later but in the meantime, let's understand the motivations and lackluster apathy exhibited by the masses.

M: There were very little Leviathan mechanisms, in the Hobbesian sense, to counteract these acts of cruelty. Essentially the justice system didn't offer the same innate protection to animal life as it claimed to do with the human species.

W: I am concerned about the culpability and residual effects on our psychology. These animals were not healthy, animals living happy, natural lives. We created beings with the single utilitarian purpose of satisfying humanities protein addiction. These 'facilities' were actually called slaughter houses!

M: You have to understand that the population explosion in the late 20th century put tremendous demands on a fragile political and economic system. Global economies and internet connectivity were just coming "online". Look at where we are today. We now protect the existence of all living creatures.

... the above dialog is an excerpt from my soon to be published eBook.

Daniel Sanderson

My primary professional aspiration is to constantly improve my own writing and communication skills because as Adorno says, "dialectics means intransigence towards all reification". Viva la evolución

Subscribe to data driven expositions to enhance human psychology

Get the latest posts delivered right to your inbox.

or subscribe via RSS with Feedly!