Closely related to the problem of exploitation and use, even though even more complicated, is the problem of authority in the twenty-first century man. Authority refers to an interpersonal relation in which one person looks upon another as someone superior to one. When we consider time, the difference is again either between the instinctive and the intellectual centers or between the moving and the intellectual. However, we are so accustomed to these phenomena that we rarely think how strange and incomprehensible they are. Of course, for a man who have never thought about himself and never tried to study himself, there is nothing strange in this or in any thing else. However, in reality, from the point of view of ordinary physiology, these phenomena look almost miraculous. A physiologist knows how many complicated processes must be gone through between swallowing cranberry juice or a glass of water and feeling its effects. Every substance entering the body by the way of mouth has to be analyzed, tried in several different ways, and only then accepted or rejected. And all this happens in one second or less. It is a miracle, and at the same time it is not. For, it we know the difference in the speed of centers and remember that the instinctive center, which has to do this work, has 30,000 times more time than the intellectual center by which we measure our ordinary time, we can understand how it may happen. It means that the instinctive center has not one second, but about eight hours of its own time for this work, and in eight hours this work can certainly be done in an ordinary laboratory without any unnecessary haste. So our idea of the extraordinary speed of this work is purely an illusion which we have because we think that our ordinary time, or the time of the intellectual center, is the only time which exists. #RandolphHarris 1 of 20

Therefore, time has a sense of authority. Now, we must try to understand another characteristic of centers in which will later give us very good material for self-observation and for work upon ourselves. It is supposed that each center is divided into two parts, positive and negative. This division is particularly clear in the intellectual center and in the instinctive center. All the work of the intellectual center is divided into two parts: affirmation and negation; yes and no. In every moment of out thinking, either one outweighs the other or they come to a moment of equal strength in indecision. The negative part of the intellectual center is as useful as the positive part, and any diminishing of the strength of the one in relation to the other results in mental disorders. In the work of the instinctive center the division is also quite clear, and both parts, positive and negative, or pleasant and unpleasant, are equally necessary for a right orientation in life. Pleasant sensations of taste, smell, touch, temperature, warmth, coolness, fresh air-all indicate conditions which are beneficial for life; and unpleasant sensations of bad taste, bad smell, unpleasant touch, feeling of oppressive heat or extreme cold, all indicate conditions which can be harmful to life. It may definitely be said that no true orientation in life is possible without both pleasant and unpleasant sensations. They are the real guidance of all animal life on the Earth and any defect in them results in a lack of orientation and a consequent danger of illness and death. Think how quickly a man would poison himself if he lost all sense of taste and smell, or if, in some unnatural way, he conquered in himself a natural disgust of unpleasant sensations. #RandolphHarris 2 of 20

In the moving center the division into two parts, positive and negative, has only a logical meaning; that is, movement as opposed to rest. It has no meaning for practical observation. In the emotional center, at a first glance, the division is quite simple and obvious. If we take pleasant emotions such as joy, sympathy, affection, self-confidence, as belonging to the positive part, and unpleasant emotions such as boredom, irritation, jealousy, envy, fear, as belonging to the negative part, things will look very simple; but in reality they are much more complicated. To begin with, in the emotional center there is no natural negative part. The greater part of negative emotions are artificial; they do not belong to the emotional center proper and are based on instinctive emotions which are quite unrelated to them but which are transformed by imagination and identification. This is the real meaning of the theory of James and Lange, at one time very well known. They insisted that all emotions were really sensations of changes in inner organs and tissues, changes which took place before sensations, and were the actual cause of sensations. That really meant that external events and inner realizations did not produce emotions. External events and inner realizations produced inner reflexes which produced sensations; and these were interpreted as emotions. At the same time, positive emotions such as “love,” “hope,” “faith,” in the sense in which they are usually understood—that is, as permanent emotions—are impossible for a man in the ordinary states of consciousness. They require higher states of consciousness; they require inner unity, self-consciousness, permanent “I,” and will. #RandolphHarris 3 of 20

Positive emotions are emotions which cannot become negative. However, all our pleasant emotions such as joy, sympathy, affection, self-confidence, can, at any moment, turn into boredom, irritation, envy, fear, and so on. Love can turn into jealousy or fear to lose what one loves, or into anger and hatred; hope can turn into daydreaming and the expectation of the impossible things, and faith can turn into superstition and a weak acceptance of comforting nonsense. Even a purely intellectual emotion—the desire for knowledge—or an aesthetic emotion—that is, a feeling of beauty or harmony—if it becomes mixed with identification, immediately unites with emotions of a negative kind such as self-pride, vanity, selfishness, conceit, and so on. So we can say without any possibility of mistake that we can have no positive emotions. At the same time, in actual fact, we have no negative emotions which exist without imagination and identification. Of course it cannot be denied that besides the many and varied kinds of physical suffering which belong to the instinctive center, man has many kinds of mental suffering which belong to the emotional center. He has many sorrows, griefs, fears, apprehensions, and so on which cannot be avoided and are as closely connected with man’s life as illness, pain, and death. However, these mental sufferings are very different from negative emotions which are based on imagination and identification. These emotions are a terrible phenomenon. They occupy an enormous place in our life. Of many people it is possible to say that all their lives are regulated and controlled, and in the end ruined, by negative emotion. #RandolphHarris 4 of 20

Negative emotions do not help out orientation, they do not give us any knowledge, they do not guide us in any sensible manner. On the contrary, they spoil all our pleasures, they make life a burden to us, and they very effectively prevent our possible development because there is nothing more mechanical in our life than negative emotions. Negative emotions can never come under our control. People who think they can control their negative emotions and manifest them when they want to, simply deceive themselves. Negative emotions depend on identification; if identification is destroyed in some particular case, they disappear. The strangest and most fantastic fact about negative emotions is that people actually worship them. I think that, for an ordinary mechanical man, the most difficult thing to realize is that hos own and other people’s negative emotions have no value whatever and do not contain anything noble, anything beautiful, or anything strong. In reality negative emotions contain nothing but weakness and very often the beginning of hysteria, insanity, or crime. The only good thing about them is that, being quite useless and artificially created by imagination and identification, they can be destroyed without any loss. And this is the only chance of escape that man has. If negative emotions were useful or necessary for any, even the smallest, purpose, and if they were a function of a really existing part of the emotional center, man would have no chance because no inner development is possible so long as man keeps his negative emotions. #RandolphHarris 5 of 20

In life we need to have great control of our emotions. When people are angry, they may not realize how unlike themselves they are being. The goal, therefore, is to prevent from becoming easy by using strategies. The general principle for sequential-moves in life is that each individual should figure out the other individuals’ future responses, and use them in calculating one’s own best current move. So important is this idea that it is worth codifying into a basic rule of strategic behaviour. Look ahead and reason back. Anticipate where your initial decisions will ultimately lead, and use this information to calculate your best choice. In the Charlie Brown story, this was easy to do for anyone (except Charlie Brown). He had just two alternatives, and one of them led to Lucky’s decision between two possible actions. Most strategic situations involve a longer-sequence of decisions with several alternatives at each, and mere verbal reasoning cannot keep track of them. Successful application of visual aid can be helpful in coming up with a plan. For instance, travelers from Princeton to New York have several choices. The first decision point involves selecting the mode f travel: bus, train, or car. Those who drive then have to choose among the Verrazano Narrows Bridge, the Holland Tunnel, the Lincoln Tunnel, and the George Washington Bridge. Rail commuters must decide whether to switch to the PATH train Newark or continue to Penn Station. Once in New York, rail and bus commuters must choose among going by foot, subway (local express), bus, or taxi to get to their final destination. The best choice depends on many factors, including price, speed, expected congestion, the final destination in New York, and one’s aversion to breathing the air on the Jersey Turnpike. #RandolphHarris 6 of 20

Drawing a road map would help. One which describes one’s options at each junction, looks like a tree with its successively emerging branches—hence the term “decision tree.” The right way to use such a map or a tree is not to take the route whose first branch looks best and then “cross the Verrazano Bridge when you get to it.” Instead, you anticipate the future decision and use them to make your earlier choices. For example, if you are commuting to the World Trade Center, the PATH train would be superior to driving because it offers a direct connection from Newark. We can use just such a tree to depict the choices in a life strategy, but one new element enters the picture. Life has many people and variables. At various branching points along the tree, it may be the turn of different players to make the decision. A person making a choice at an earlier point must look ahead, not just to one’s own future choices, but to those of others. One must forecast what the others will do, by putting oneself figuratively in their shoes, and thinking as they would think. General Electric (GE) makes electricity-distribution equipment in Salisbury, North Carolina. The plant is a model that GE wants to replicate at three hundred other factory locations. In the past, if a piece of equipment malfunctioned, a machine operator like Bob Hedenskog would have had to report it to his foreman and wait for help. #RandolphHarris 7 of 20

Today Hedenskog makes the necessary decisions himself. He telephones a GE engineer in Plainville, Connecticut, for advice and takes responsibility for repair. On his own initiative he has ordered $40,000 worth of replacement parts, which he anticipated his machinery would need. He is part of a group of about seventy-five employees who, through committees of their own, make production, scheduling, and even some hiring decisions. Together they have cut worker-hours per unit of production by two thirds, and have slashed the time to customer delivery by 90 percent. Some workers quit when this system was introduced, explaining that they did not want to carry the additional responsibility it entailed. However, employee turnover has fallen from 15 percent in the first year of the new system’s operation to 6 percent four years later. Similar stories are flowing in from all parts of the high-tech World. Ford Australia recently built its EA Falcon with an innovative work system that, contradicts the traditional Western way of assuring quality—namely, that management check the output of workers who are following engineers’ minutely detailed instructions. Ford concluded that detecting defects first and correcting them later was not working. Only by allowing workers more discretion—no longer preprogramming their every move—could the goal of zero defects be approached. And this means recognizing the power of the operators right down to the shop floor level. #RandolphHarris 8 of 20

At the Mazda Motor Manufacturing factory Huntsville, Alabama, ordinary plant workers get three weeks of training, including session on psychology. A small group of new hires are given six minutes to dream up twenty-five ideas on how to improve the common garden-variety bathtub, and then get only two minutes to come up with thirty more suggestions. Mazda is trying to loosen people up and unblock them. After the initial three weeks, workers spend additional weeks on more job-specific training. Mazda estimates it spends $15,000 to hire and train the average employee. These increasingly commonplace accounts underscore the historic shift currently taking place from “manufacture” to “mentifacture”—the progressive replacement of muscle by mind in the wealth creation process. However, by giving employees more say-so over the details of their work is only the tip of a more significant iceberg. To put this power shift into perspective, it is helpful to read the early history of the industrial revolution in England and Western Europe, and the complaints made by the earliest employers about the fecklessness, unreliability, drunkenness, and ignorance of the agrarian people from whom the early factor work force was drawn. Every society imposes it own distinct work discipline or “regimen.” Workers are supposed to obey certain rules, often unspoken. Their performance on the job is monitored, policed, and a structure of power is in place to enforce the rules. #RandolphHarris 9 of 20

If First Wave or agricultural societies, most peasants toiled endlessly, yet barely survived. This agrarian work force, organized into family production teams, followed a regimen set by the rhythms of season, sunrise, and sunset. If a peasant was absent or lazy, his own relatives disciplined him. They might ostracize him, beat him, or cut his food rations. The family itself was the dominant institution in society, and, exceptions aside, it imposed the work regimen. Its dominance over the individual family member was reinforced by social pressures from the villagers. Local elites might hold the power of life and death over the peasanty. Tradition might restrict social, pleasures of the flesh, and religions behaviour. The less affluent often suffered the cruelest hunger and poverty. And yet in their daily work lives they seemed less minutely restricted than those in the small but growing industrial labour force. The agrarian work regimen had lasted for millennia, and until only a century or two ago, the vast majority of human beings knew no other and assumed it to be the only logical and enteral way of organizing work. Even the most positive aspects of one’s work situation do not alter the fact that one’s work is alienated and only to a limited extent a meaningful expression of one’s energy and reason; furthermore, the trend for increasing automatization of industrial work diminishes this latter factor rapidly. Eventually, one is under the influence of our whole cultural apparatus, the advertisements, movies, television, newspapers, just as everybody else, and can hardly escape being driven into conformity, although perhaps more slowly than other sectors of the population. What holds true for the industrial worker holds true also for the farmer. #RandolphHarris 10 of 20

We describe a complex system, whether adaptive or not, as a population of agents. The agents are instances of various possible types. And the population has mechanisms that create, destroy, and transform the agents. Death is the most obvious transforming mechanism, destroying agents and possibly destroying a type if all its instances die, as happened to the dinosaurs. Birth creates new agents. Death and birth processes apply not only to biological entities but also to organizational entities such as companies and political units. In the simplest case, copying can be understood as the most primitive birth process. When it functions without error, the result is an increase in the frequency of one of the population types, whether the population is virus particles or documents. Copying is seldom perfect, however, although in the realm of digital technology it can now come very close. In the genetic case, mutation is a copying error that serves as an important source of variety. It can function to create new types, as well as to alter the relative frequencies of existing types. It is striking that many kinds of Complex Adaptive Systems have mechanism that function similarly to genetic mutation. For example, temperature in systems in which the elements have energy levels, such as the annealing of metals, also functions to “mutate” arrangements of atoms into new configurations. Process errors in factories and laboratories can have this same impact of creating new types. The ink-jet principle was accidentally discovered when a research laboratory syringe malfunctioned. There are many other processes that introduce “noise” into operations of copying or re-creation, thereby producing variants that are sometimes highly novel. #RandolphHarris 11 of 20

These mechanisms tend to have certain properties in common. They introduce variation into a system from uncontrolled forces external to the system, such as radiation, external heat, or disruptions of quality control. As a result of the uncorrelated, exogeneous source of variation in types, most of the variants introduced into orderly systems by such processes are deleterious—with occasional small improvements and a sprinkling of very rare spectacular advances. Exploring for new possibilities by nearly random variation can therefore be expensive. In fact, random variation is even slower than enumerating all the possibilities, since random generation will add duplication. With ransom variation, you examine each piece in the haystack and put it back if not the needle, possibly to draw it again later. By contrast, there are a number of other mechanisms that produce new types or change in type frequencies in a more targeted, less random, fashion. They tend to be endogenous, triggered by events internal to the system in which they operate. In particular, selection creates copies of some agents or strategies from a population an eliminates copies of others. Simple selection has an important effect. Over time, it reduces the variety of types in a finite system, although in the beginning it may increase the relative frequency of some rare types. Neither copying nor deletion generates novel types (except through errors in copying). So when a personal computer manufacturer offers two models of its product, and consumers buy one enthusiastically, many new copies of the preferred design will be made. This is a kind of selection process. It will gradually result in the copies of the other design being a rare type in the product population, even though most of them may continue to function. If consumers abandon the machines of the less preferred design, their actions function like death in biological populations, reducing even further the relative frequency of that type. #RandolphHarris 12 of 20

When an athlete decides to greet fellow players with a “high five” instead of a traditional handshake, the choice of behaviour is a form of selection, in this case selection by imitation. The agent replaces a current strategy with a new one copied from the actions of another agent—perhaps an athlete who is highly admired. No new agents are created, but one changes type. A succession of similar decision will transform the culture of greeting in the athlete population. In selection mechanism there are criteria at work in determining what types are copied and what types are replaced. Consumers evaluate one version of a product as being more desirable than another version. Athlete do the same for greeting gestures. Such evaluations require some kind of attribution of credit, either explicit (“the product is highly rated by a consumer magazine”) or implicit (popular athletes use the new greeting). We will devote more attention to the attribution of credit later on, but now is a good time to point out the relationship between the attribution of credit and the level of variety. If the selection among types favours more common types, then a type with a slightly frequent edge can grow quickly to become predominant in the population. The convention examples of this dynamic are the competition between the DVD and the BlueRay systems, and the competition between the QWERTY and Dvorak keyboard arrangements. Economists often refer to the benefits that accrue to an individual user from the sheer numbers of other users as network externalities. #RandolphHarris 13 of 20

These examples illustrate their force in both accelerating convergence and reducing variety. When the type that is “in the lead” is best, and conditions are not changing, rapid convergence on standard is desirable. The convergence on a single type of video image player, or keyboard can unleash considerable benefits, especially where there are strong economies of scale. There can be more movies on video and more new computers introduced as a result. However, as we pointed out earlier, in changing conditions, or when types so far available are not the best possible, the loss of variety can become a serious problem. Intensive development of the possibilities inherent in BlueRay and Dvorak typing does not occur. New video player formats or keyboard layouts do not survive in the marketplace, even if they might be superior alternatives. In the industrial past, Britain, with an empire “on which the sun never set,” might buy cotton at depressed prices from one of its backward agrarian colonies—Egypt, say. It could ship the cotton to factories in Leeds or Lancaster, turn the cotton into clothes, then send these higher-value-added goods right back and sell them to Egyptians at artificially high process. The resultant “superporifts” were returned to England, where they helped finance additional factories. Britain’s great navy, troops and administrators protected its colonial markets from munity within and competition without. #RandolphHarris 14 of 20

Of course, this caricatures a far more complex process. However, a key to the imperial game was to keep the advanced technology of the time—textile factories, for example—in Leeds or Lancaster. Today, by contrast, as advanced economies become more knowledge-based, factories count for less. What increasingly matters is the knowledge on which they depend. Knowledge, however, does not stay put, as the growing Worldwide theft of intellectual property shows. And America, at least for now, is losing the fight to protect it. Nor is all economically valuable knowledge technological. Thus Alain Minc, the controversial former chairman of Le Monde, tears apart the view that the United States of America is anything like the Rome or Great Britain of the past. It is not an imperial power but, as he puts it, the first “World country.” And the mission of its universities, unlike that of Oxford and Cambridge, is not to train a national elite. It is, in his words, to transmit knowledge that would mode “the future leaders of the World.” Writing shortly before the post-9/11 tightening of U.S.A. immigration controls, Mnic points out that in the previous fifty years the number of foreign students in the United States of America multiplied seventeen times. He might have added that an increasing percentage of these now return home armed with the latest scientific and technological knowledge in fields as advanced as large-scale network integration, nanotechnology and genetics—not exactly what imperialists and neocolonialists were known for in the past. #RandolphHarris 15 of 20

Worldwide food production has been outpacing population growth, yet hunger continues. In recent years, famine has often had political roots, as in Ethiopia where the rulers aim to starve opponents into submission. Such problems are beyond a simple technological solution. To avoid getting headaches, we will also ignore the politics of farm price-support programs, which raise food prices while people are going hungry. All we can suggest here is a way to provide fresh food at lower cost with reduced environmental impact. For decades, futurists have predicted the coming of synthetic foods. Some sort of molecular-manufacturing process makes such things with lose costs, but to some they prefer natural grown food and produce. Most agriculture today is inefficient—an environmental disaster. Modern agriculture is famed for wasting water and polluting it with synthetic fertilizers, and for spreading herbicides and pesticides over the landscape. Yet the greatest environmental impact of agriculture is its sheer consumption of land. The prairies of the West disappeared under the plow, and the plowed lands are becoming subdivision for housing. Around the World, this trend continues. The technology of the ax, the fire, and the plow is chiefly responsible for the destruction of rain forests today. A growing population will tend to turn every productive ecosystem into some sort of farmland or grazing land, if we let it. No technological fix can solve the long-term problem of population growth. Nonetheless, we can roll back the problem of loss of land, yet increase food supplies. One approach is intensive greenhouse agriculture. #RandolphHarris 16 of 20

Every kind of plant has its optimum growing conditions, and those conditions are far different from those found in most farmland during most of the year. Plants growing outdoors face insect pests, unless doused with pesticide, and low levels of nutrient, unless doused with fertilizer. In greenhouses patrolled by “nanoflyswatters” able to eliminate invading insects, plants would be protected from pests and could be provided with nutrients without contaminating the groundwater or runoff. Most plants prefer higher humidity than most climates provide. Most plants prefer higher, more uniform temperatures than typically found outdoors. What is more, plants thrive in high levels of carbon dioxide. Only greenhouses can provide pest protection, ample nutrients, humidity, warmth, and carbon dioxide all together and without reengineering the Earth. Taken together, these factors make a huge difference in agricultural productivity. Experiments with intensive greenhouse agriculture, performed by the Environmental Research Lab in Arizona, show that an area of 250 square meters—about the size of a tennis court—can raise enough food for one person, year in and year out. With molecular manufacturing to make inexpensive, reliable equipment, the intensive labour of intensive agriculture can be automated. With technology like the deployable “tents” and smart materials we have described, greenhouse construction can be inexpensive. Following the standard argument, with equipment costs, labour costs, materials costs, and so forth all expected to be low, greenhouse-grown food can be inexpensive. #RandolphHarris 17 of 20

What does this mean for the environment? It means that the human race could feed itself with ordinary, naturally grown, pesticide-free foods while returning more than 90 percent of today’s agricultural land to wilds. With a generous five-hundred square meters per person, the U.S of A population would require only 3 percent of present U.S.A. farm acreage, freeing 97 percent for other uses, or for a gradual return to wilderness. When farmers are able to grow high-quality foodstuffs inexpensively, in fraction of the room that they require today, they will find more demand for their land to be tended as a park or wilderness than a cornfield. Farm journals can be expected to carry articles advising on techniques for rapid and aesthetic restoration of forest and grassland, and on how best to accommodate the desires of the discriminating nature lover and conservationist. Even “unpopular” land will tend to become popular with people seeking solitude. The economics of assembler-based manufacturing will remove the incentive to make greenhouses that are poor quality, unattractive, and boxy; the only reason to build that way today is the high cost of building anything at all. And while today’s greenhouses suffer from viral and fungal infestations, these could be eradicated from plants in the same way they would be from the human body.  A problem faced by today’s greenhouses—overheating—could be dealt with by using heat exchangers, thereby conserving the carefully balanced inside atmosphere. Finally, if it should turn out that a little bit of bad weather improves the taste of tomatoes, that, too, could be provided, since there would be no reason to be fanatical about sheer efficiency. #RandolphHarris 18 of 20

In consideration of the disintegrative power of Technopoly, perhaps the most important contribution schools can make to the education of our youth is to give them a sense of coherence in their studies, a sense of purpose, meaning, and interconnectedness in what they learn. Modern secular education is failing not because it does not teach who Sarah L. Winchester, William Randolph Hearst, and a thousand other people are but because it has no moral, social, or intellectual center. There is no set of ideas or attitudes that permeates all parts of the curriculum. The curriculum is not, in fact, a “course of study” at all but a meaningless hodgepodge of subjects. It does not even put forward a clear vision of what constitutes an educated person, unless it is a person who possesses “skills.” In other words, a technocrat’s ideal—a person with no commitment and no point of view but with plenty of marketable skills. Of course, we must not overestimate the capability of schools to provide coherence in the face of a culture in which almost all coherence seems to have disappeared. In our technicalized, present-centered information environment, it is not easy to locate a rationale for education, let alone impart one convincingly. It is obvious, for example, that the schools cannot restore religion to the center of the life of learning. With the exception of a few people, perhaps, no one would take seriously the idea that learning is for the greater glory of God. It is equally obvious that the knowledge explosion has blown apart the feasibility of such limited but coordinated curriculums as, for example, a Great Books program. #RandolphHarris 19 of 20

Some people would have us stress love of country as a unifying principle in education. Experience has shown, however, that this invariably translates into love of government, and in practice becomes indistinguishable from what still is at the center of Russian and Chinese education. Some would put forward “emotional health” as the core of the curriculum. I refer here to a point of view something called Rogerian, sometimes Maslovian, which values above all else the development of one’s emotional life through the quest for one’s “real self.” Such an idea, of course, renders a curriculum irrelevant, since only “self-knowledge”—id est, one’s feelings—is considered worthwhile. Carl Rogers himself once wrote that anything that can be taught is probably either trivial or harmful, thus making any discussion of the schools unncecessary. However, beyond this, the culture is already so heavy with the burden of the glorification of “self” that it would be redundant to have the schools stress it, even if it were possible. However, it is humanity’s destiny to possession an ability to discovery of knowledge. Moreover, the arts and humanities must be part of our unending quest to gain a unified understanding of nature and our place in it. Thus, to chart the ascent of man called “the ascent of humanity,” we must join art and science. However, we must also join the past and the present, for ascent of humanity is above all a continuous story. It is, in fact, a story of creation, although not quite the one that the fundamentalists fight so fiercely to defend. It is the story of humanity’s creativeness in trying to conquer loneliness, ignorance, and disorder. And it certainly includes the development of various religious systems as a means of giving order and meaning to existence. In this context, it is inspiring to note that the Biblical version of creation, to the astonishment of everyone except possibly the fundamentalists, has turned out to be a near-perfect blend of artistic imagination and scientific intuition: the Big Bang theory of the creation of the Universe, now widely accepted by cosmologists, confirms in essential details what the Bible proposes as having been the case “in the beginning.” #RandolphHarris 20 of 20

Cresleigh Homes

Once you’ve lived in a #PlumasRanch home, you understand what all the fuss is about! Large kitchen islands, open floor plans, and flex spaces are hallmarks of all our designs. 🙌

Check out all the available models on our website – and come by for a tour!

#CresleighHomes
#CresleighMeadows