What is your vision of "Utopia"?

Uptopia's usually fail due to the slow poison caused by power, money - which leds to greed.

Example, COMMUNISM, an ideal concept which failed due to the corruption. The dictator, Stalin, was supposed to step down from power and everyone was to be "equal."

Humans are flawed by nature, however there are ways to prevent them.

Re: What is your vision of "Utopia"?


My utopia is a behemoth that embraces all life; that, today, spans only the Earth, but is constantly moving and mutating; always evolving in a single direction, reaching beyond itself; struggling not merely to survive but to extend its knowledge, its power, and its control over matter, both across space and through time; valuing only this end; generous to those who would be its benefactors and ruthless to those who would be its malefactors; afraid of no truth, tolerant of every honest opinion and well-intentioned impulse, but intolerant of every lie and every foul act; rewarding with the greatest power those who most capably serve it; resisting every attempt to force it into sterile repetition; loving the educated and hating the indoctrinated.

Very nice description, Heimdall. It had an almost poetic rhythm. I'm with you 100% on the point of constant evolution: stagnation is death. I also liked the "toleration" clause; it's a nice parallel to what we were talking about in Frank's thread about respecting beliefs. You should check that out if you haven't already.


On another point, I want to move this topic to a more immediate focus, i.e.: "how would we move towards that goal today"/"what style of government would be most conducive to a Utopia?", but I'm unsure whether we should just evolve this topic or start a new one in the Politics thread. What's the general opinion? Thanks.

I hope my response is appropriate for this topic. To answer the question, "What is your vision of utopia?" - I would have to say that my own personal utopia would be when I die, and my life is nothing but complete blackness or devoid of anything (assuming that's a fair enough description of my afterlife), hence it would be a "thing" where I no longer have to think or be physically alive anymore. An example: where I can "return" to that state I was in before I was ever born. I doubt anybody can remember their cognitive existence and/or mind states before they were ever born/conceived.

I hope that was a satisfactory response...

It's an interesting response, and I see no problem with it, but I was leaning more towards the direction of an earthly Utopia. welcome aboard, B.I.S.!

Why, thank you! But I doubt anybody's reply could compete with Heimdall's description of utopia. That was lovely...



This newbie suggests that we keep that topic here, in this thread. It's a very interesting, open-ended question and I love reading everyone's opinions.

This is the standard definition of Utopia, by Webster's

: a place of ideal perfection especially in laws, government, and social conditions

Because of what Utopia represents, it's standards can't be lowered to fit the people, so the only way to reach an utopian society would be for the people to better themselves to utopian standards.

An utopian existence can't be achieved by only a portion of the world population, as the people outside the Utopia's influence would, without a doubt interfere. This would escalate into war, and death.
So the first step into creating a Utopia would be to unify the world under a global government of elected representatives from each nation. Each country would be able to make it's own rules, but must still answer to the global government. There would be civil wars I'm sure, so the process, could take decades.

Humans are by nature selfish creatures, that is the main quality that must be eradicated. I'm assuming of course, that this people have the means to do so. My goal for this is to develop a pack mentality, which would ensure that people are more accepting and protective towards each other, while maintaining free will and the ability to strive for more. The remaining changes would come faster after this, I believe.

There would be a thorough scrutiny of laws, moral and penal. The ones deemed unnecessary/archaic would be discarded while the ones that are essential would be strengthened. The Global government would meet every five-ten years to amend laws as society evolves, ensuing a fair and ever-evolving penal code.

I think that covers all three aspects of what a Utopia represents.

Awesome, Eryemil, that's a near-perfect mirror of my thoughts, as well. A friend and I were discussing a better form of democracy(to our minds): have people vote on issues, not candidates. It would eliminate the need for having to choose between the limited, near-identical candidates(not this year, though...not that it helped us any) and their views, and would let policy be the deciding factor. I'm not sure if it would be practical to have people vote on individual laws, but I suppose that in enough time, it could happen. He and I imagined a kind of council made up of representatives for the side of the issue that won, all in charge of enforcing the laws as they see fit. If voters weren't to be in control of laws, then these laws would then pass to a Congress consisting of people more our "peers" than the ones today.

That's all I have so far, anyone else want to add?

How could I integrate your idea into my model Taliesin? I think it sounds brilliant.

Thanks, Eryemil, the part I forgot to add was that the existing laws would be up for re-evaluation every 5 or ten years, to ensure that the laws serve today's people, not those of 2 centuries ago.

The only part I'm fuzzy on is the world government part. I suppose we could just have a president of the presidents, and have the leaders of each province answer to the leaders of the country, and have the country's heads answer to the world leader. I do think we'll never get anywhere as it stands, though.

I was also thinking about the style of upbringing mentioned in K-Pax, where a child just circulates through the community, thus getting to know everyone and learning everything they know. I'm not sure about the psychological ramifications of such a rootless upbringing on a child, though. Your thoughts?

I'm not really sure that the idea to raise children in a communal way is the right one Taliesin. Their intellectual needs would be satisfied, but what about their emotional needs?

Putting the weight in the world on just one's man back sounds a bit irresponsible don't you think? Besides, some countries would never, for example follow an American leader, which can create even further problems.
Also there is the fact the leaders from the most powerful countries would, without a doubt, win the elections.

Oh, and by the way, I already mentioned that the Global Government would meet every five to ten years to amend the law.

Eryemil said:


Yeah, I'm a bit fuzzy on that too. The objective I had in mind was to foster a sense of community, and have everyone interconnected, but you're right: it would be damaging on a child.

As to the "One leader" bit, it might be prudent to install a council, but I'm not sure what this council would be comprised of. Philosophers and artists? Scientists and Priests? All of the above? Politicians clearly aren't cutting it.

I think everyone should be allwowed to to run, as long as they have never broken the law.

I don't know, though: even breaking the law can give you a perspective on the value of laws that others might not have. Where do we draw the line after which people can run? I'd say at the people who've achieved a kind of wisdom that would be useful, but how would we really know?

The only way to know would be to totally interfere with their privacy, which wouldn't work at all. And besides, who are we to say who's wise?

Are humans capable of perfection? Of course not. But are they capable of growing ever closer in their approximation of it? Certainly. A Utopia is a perfect society well beyond the capacity of mere mortals like us to create. However, we can create better societies than those that have existed. Of course, we can also create worse societies.

We seem to have the capability of doing more harm than good.

One can never really have community "utopia," because people will do what they wish to break with any social norm established. The only utopia possible is a personal one; how happy and healthy is your personal life?

Cicerone: That's a large part of my plan: get together a whole bunch of self-driven, self-satisfied people and set up a community where those values can be culturally transmitted. it'll be a Utopia based off many smaller ones.

Quote, "... a whole bunch of self-driven, self-satisfied people..." does not guarantee that all of them are sane nor not dangerous to themselves or to society at large.