Being gunned down in a shower of lead is the growing fear many people face as crime soars out of control in America. Guns are not the problem, but more than likely socioeconomic conditions, felon coddling policies, corruption, and people being allowed to evade the law are. On May 7, 1931, the most sensational manhunt New York City had ever known had come to its climax. After weeks of search, “Two Gun” Crowley—the killer, the gunman who did not some or drink—was at bay, trapped in his sweetheart’s apartment on West End Avenue. One hundred and fifty policemen and detectives laid siege to his top-floor hideaway. They chopped hoes in the roof; they tried to smoke out Crowley, the “cop killer,” with teargas. Then they mounted their machine guns on surrounding buildings, and for more than an hour one of New York’s fine residential areas reverberated with the crack of pistol fire and the rat-tat-tat of machine guns. Crowley, crouching behind an overstuffed chair, fired incessantly at the police. Ten thousand excited people watched the battle. Nothing like it had ever been seen before on the sidewalks of New York. When Crowley was captured, Police Commissioner E. P. Mulrooney declared that the two-gun desperado was one of the most dangerous criminals ever encountered in the history of New York. “He will kill,” said the Commissioner, “at the drop of a feather.” However, how did “Two Gun” Crowley regard himself? We know, because the police were firing into his apartment, he wrote, the blood flowing from his wounds left a crimson trail on the paper. #RandolphHarris 1 of 22

In this letter Crowley said: “Under my coat is a weary heart, but a kind one—one that would do nobody any harm.” A short time before this, Crowley had been having a necking party with his girl friend on a country road out on Long Island. Suddenly a policeman walked up to the car and said: “Let me see your license.” Without saying a word, Crowley drew his gun and cut the policeman down with a shower of lead. (This is why tinted front windows are illegal in California). As the dying officer fell, Crowley leaped out of the car, grabbed the officer’s revolver, and fired another bullet into the prostrate body. And that was the killer who said: “under my coat is a weary heart, but a kind one—one that would do nobody any harm.” Crowley was sentenced to the electric chair. When he arrived at the death house in Sing Sing, did he say, “This is what I get for killing people”? No, he said: “This is what I get for defending myself.” “Two Gun” Crowley did not blame himself for anything. Is that an unusual attitude among criminals? If you think so, listen to this. “I have spent the best years of my life giving people the lighter pleasures, helping them have a good time, and all I get is abuse, the existence of a hunted man.” That is Al Capone speaking. Yes, America’s most notorious Public Enemy—the most sinister gang leader who ever shot up Chicago. Capone did not condemn himself. He actually regarded himself as a public benefactor—an unappreciated and misunderstood public benefactor. And so did Dutch Schultz before he crumpled up under gangster bullets in Newark. Dutch Schultz, one of New York’s most notorious rats, said in a newspaper interview that he was a public benefactor. And he believed it. #RandolphHarris 2 of 22

I have had some interesting correspondence with Lewis Lawes, who was warden of New York’s infamous Sing Sing prison for many years, on this subject, and he declared that “few of the criminals in Sing Sing regard themselves as bad men” or women. “They are just as human as you and I. So they rationalize, they explain. They can tell you why they had to crack a safe or be quick on the trigger finger. Most of them attempt by a form of reasoning, fallacious or logical, to justify their antisocial acts even to themselves, consequently stoutly maintaining that they should never have been imprisoned at all.” If Al Capone, “Two Gun” Crowley, Dutch Schutlz, and the desperate men and women behind prison walls do not blame themselves for anything—what bout the people with whom you and I come in contact with? A wrong idea which people have or which belongs particularly to our times, is that understanding can be different, that people can—that is, have the right—to understand the same thing differently. This is quite wrong from the point of view of the system. Understanding cannot be different. There can only be one understanding, the rest is non-understanding, or incomplete understanding. However, at the same time people often think that they understand things differently. We can see examples of this every day. How can we find an explanation of this seeming contradiction? In reality, there is no contradiction. Understanding means understanding of a part in relation to the whole. #RandolphHarris 3 of 22

However, the idea of the whole can be very different in people according to their knowledge and being. This is why the system is again necessary. People learn to understand by understanding the system and everything else in relation to the system. However, speaking on an ordinary level without the idea of a school or a system one must admit that there are as many understandings as there are many people. Everyone understands everything in one’s own way or according to one or another mechanical training or habit; but this is all a subjective and relative understanding. The way to objective understanding lies through school systems and the change of being. In order to explain this I must return to the division of man into seven categories. You must realize that there is a great difference between men no. 1, 2, and 3 on one hand and men of higher categories on the other hand. In reality the difference is much greater than we can imagine. It is so great that all life from this point of view is regarded as being divided into two concentric circles—the inner circle and the outer circle of humanity. To the inner circle belong men no. 5, 6, and 7; to the outer circle, men no. 1, 2, and 3. Men no. 4 are on the threshold of the inner circle, or between the two circles. The inner circle is in its turn divided into three concentric circles; the innermost, to which belong men no. 7, the middle, to which belong men no. 6, and the outer-inner circle, to which belong men no. 5. #RandolphHarris 4 of 22

This division does not concern us at the moment. For us, the three inner circles form one inner circle. The outer circle, in which we live, has several names, designating its different features. It is called the mechanical circle, because everything happens there, everything is mechanical, and the people who live there are machines. It is also called the circle of the confusion of tongues, because people who live in this circle all speak in different languages and never understand one another. Everyone understands everything differently. We have come to a very interesting definition of understanding. It is something that belongs to the inner circle of humanity and does not belong to us at all. In men in the outer circle realize that that do not understand one another, and if they feel the need of understanding, they must try to penetrate into the inner circle, because understanding between people is possible only there. Schools of different kinds serve as gates through which people can pass into the inner circles. However, this penetration into the inner circle higher in comparison with the one in which a man is born requires long and difficult work. The very first step in this work is the study of a new language. You ma ask: “What is this language we are studying?” It is the language of the inner circle, the language in which people can understand one another. #RandolphHarris 5 of 22

You must realize that standing, so to speak, outside the inner circle we can know only the rudiments of this language. However, even those rudiments will help us to understand one another better than we could even understand without them. The three inner circles have each a language of their own. We are studying the language of the outer of the inner circles. People in the outer-inner circle study the language of the idle circle, and people in the middle circle study the language of the innermost circle. If you ask e how all this can be proved, it can only be proved by further study of oneself and further observation. If we find that with the study of the system we can understand ourselves and other people, or for instance, certain books, or certain ideas better than we could understand them before, and particularly if we find definite facts which show that this new understanding develops, that will be, if not proof, at least a sign of the possibility of proof. We must remember that our understanding, exactly as our consciousness, is not always on the same level. It is always moving up and down. That means that at one moment we understand more, and at another moment we understand less. If we notice these differences of understanding in ourselves, we shall be able to realize that there is a possibility, first, of keeping to those higher levels of understanding, and second, of surpassing them. However, theoretical study is not sufficient. You must work on your being and on the change of your being. #RandolphHarris 6 of 22

If you formulate your aim from the point of view that you wish to understand other people, you must remember one very important school principle: you can understand other people only as much as you understand yourself and only on the level of your own being. This means that you can judge other people’s knowledge, but you cannot judge their being. You can see in them only as much as you have in yourself. However, people always make the mistake of thinking that they can judge other people’s being. In reality, if they wish to meet and understand people of higher development than themselves they must work with the aim of changing their being. In many easy-going and steady types a few drinks will trigger an oft-times welcome loss of inhibitions more readily than with any other category. These are the normally consistent and dependable types, who have one drink too many and wind up getting in a fight, taking their clothes off, or wetting their pants. The most important rule to remember, concerning alcohol, is that whatever form it is taken in will have the effect of brining the qualities of the Demonic to the surface. Thus, a normally jolly person, when drunk, will become a morose, dour and cynical person. The dry, technical person will turn into a sort of arrested development life of the party, who might even sing a ribald song he learned in high school. The strong assertive person will become sentimental, nostalgic, maudlin over youthful errors and lost romance and might even cry in one’s bonded whiskey. #RandolphHarris 7 of 22

The bank clerk will relive the beach at Anzio; and the individual who is usually bouncing around like a rubber ball, will be found in a darkened corner, morosely serious over what one feels is one’s lack of accomplishment and how people do not know what one is going though. When that old-time fundamentalist coined the term, “demon rum, he never knew how right he was! Since different participants in a social occasion may perform quite different roles, it might be argued that what is an occasion of play for one individual may be an occasion of work for another, as in the case of the guest and the servant at a party. Nevertheless, too much relativity is not justified. However differently participants may feel about a past social occasion, they can presumable agree as to which occasion they are talking about. Further, one who must work during and at an occasion they are talking about. Further, one who must work during and at an occasion defined for play still knows that his job locates him in a play occasion, not in a serious one, the fact that it does being an important job-contingency from him. There is another sense, however, in which multiple social realities can occur in the same place. Once a social situation is referred back to the social occasion that sets the tone for the gathering in it, we must admit the possibility that the same physical space may be caught within the domain of two different social occasions. The social situation then may be the scene of potential or actual conflict between the sets of regulations that ought to govern. #RandolphHarris 8 of 22

Note the famous conflict of definitions in the situation between summer tourists, who would like to extend summer-resort informality to the stores in the local town, and the natives, who would like to preserve proper business decorum in such places. Even within the same social establishment it is possible to find these overlapping definitions in the situation. Thus, in an office building or library where a rather strict decorum may obtain, the maintenance crews may see the occasion quite differently: they may work in profane clothing, run down the hallway when a quick repair is required, enter rooms at will, shout easily down the hall, plug a portable radio into the outlet nearest to their work, and maintain a level of conversational loudness quite prohibited to the office staff. Here we find something more than different roles in the same occasion, for no single main activity may be accorded precedence, at least in the short run. The social situations that occur in these overlapping behavior settings support gatherings tht possess a special type of normative disorganization. The possibility that the same physical space can come to be used as a setting for more than one social occasion, and hence as a locus for more than one set of expectations, is regularly recognized in society and typically restricted. Thus, in the important case of public streets, there is a tendency in Western society to define these places as the scene of an overriding social occasion to which other occasions ought to be subordinated. Potentially competing definitions in the situation then give way to a kind of public decorum. #RandolphHarris 9 of 22

This decorum itself, of course, is typically subverted momentarily by parades, convention antics, marriage and funeral processions, ambulances, and fire trucks, all of which impress their special tone upon the public ear for a brief times. In the military case, younger officers become interested in new possibilities. They find opportunities to experiment. Some of them are supported and protected by more senior officers who are sympathetic. As their careers advance, they get continuing opportunities to refine their ideas on things like naval aviation, tank tactics, or airborne logistics. And their careers give them access to increasing resources for testing their ideas in field exercises and war games. At some point combat situations arise in which some of these ideas are put to the most stringent tests. Eventually, some of these idea-bearing officers may be able to forge an entire career system for other officers who want to pursue some new mode of combat. This is what happened to Admiral William Moffett, whose career became synonymous with the rise of naval aviation. It is also the story of Admiral Hyman Rickover and the development of nuclear submarine forces, although both officers entered into the new area midway through their careers. The problem facing today’s makers of military personnel policy is that no one can know which young officers have the key ideas for surprising new operational concepts of the next decade. #RandolphHarris 10 of 22

By definition, the big surprises are those deviating enough from incremental change that they cannot be confidently foreseen. As a result, the specialists within the military services who make personnel decisions face precisely the kind of hard-to-predict situation that is common in Complex Adaptive Systems. The British, for example, could not foresee that merging their early naval flyers into the newly formed Royal Air Force, which was dominated by long-rage bomber pilots, would seriously interfere with efforts to implement technical innovations that could apply to aircraft carriers. While most of the technical advances required for carrier combat were made in British experiments, those new technologies and methods ended up being fully exploited by American navel flyers and commanders. The loss of the naval career path for experienced British naval pilots is a major part of the story of why the British could not implement their own innovations. Several of the principles we have come to in our review of complex systems research are relevant here. Two considerations suggest that now is a good time to weight exploration heavily relative to exploitation for military personnel systems. First, many military experts believe that the current profusion of technical possibilities, including the Information Revolution, makes radical chances in combat over the next two decades seem extremely likely. Second, for the United States in the immediate future, there is no military enemy of comparable strength. #RandolphHarris 11 of 22

If we accept the premise that exploration is to be strongly emphasized, the Complex Adaptive System perspective suggests several questions to ask about how to pursue that goal. First, what are the sources of “new types” of strategy-bearing officers and changes in frequencies of types? It seems wise to expose junior officers to new technology and its possibilities at the earliest possible points in their training. It may also make sense to include the biographies of previously innovative officers in their training, to help them see that their own vision of the future possibilities can be linked to their career prospects. The concepts that will be vital in the future involve combing knowledge of military requirements with knowledge of new technical possibilities. Officers will be valuable who have mixed exposures to the two knowledge bases, and who appreciate how previous innovators managed their careers. The personnel example lets us foreshadow some of the issues that will be discussed later on involving interaction patterns. If the aim is to produce officers with unusual and useful combinations of knowledge, what controls the interactions among types? The system that assigns new posts to officers takes on central import. To the extent possible, the assignment system should mix experiences with the deliberate intention of exploring new technical possibilities and operational concepts. It should accept more “risky proposals,” whose payoff may not be obvious. It should also create crosscutting contact networks for future use in allowing easy recombination. #RandolphHarris 12 of 22

This means tht the apparently boring personnel activity of rotating officers through posts needs to be deeply informed by the best recent theories of new technology and related combat possibilities. Of course, realism dictates that many other factors must play a role in such placements. However, considerable benefit can be gained from every step that can be taken to increase the career controllers’ vision of the “space of possibilities” being explored by the individuals in the organization as they develop their careers. What other barriers should be erected or removed in order to change patterns of interaction among types? For example, policies that keep assignments within interest areas will affect who interacts with whom. In our military example, if an officer develops an interest in logistics, it is better for the next placement to in logistics? Is it the same for all types? Should the rates of rotation be similar for most officers, or should they be a function of the outcomes of previous rotations, with some officers therefore having many shorter postings? Finally, we can observe that the officers will be evaluated as their careers progress. At each stage of their careers, the officers, and therefore the new ideas they embody, need to be assessed, and the character of this assessment will determine the speed and direction of the system’s adaptation. For example, the officers can be expected to adjust to the rules established by personnel and policy makers, who must avoid making changes too rapidly or slowly, can identify the coevolutionary character of this dynamic. #RandolphHarris 13 of 22

Thus a Complex Adaptive Systems perspective generates a systematically interrelate set of questions about the personnel management area. These are questions that arise, as we noted previously, because Complex Adaptive System theory suggests general analogs for the principles of artificial selection that once fascinated Darwin. Now, behind every good scheme to encourage cooperation is usually some mechanism to punish cheaters. Social and political cohesion of a nation may deter a country from cheating because of the dear of ostracism. Other kinds of punishment arise. The short-term gain from cheating seems small in comparison with the subsequent costs. However, even the slightest fear of collapse of two nation’s mutual trust should be enough to keep the two competitors abiding by the agreement. Trust can break down for all sort of reasons. Only in an ongoing relationship is there an ability to punish, and thus a stick to motivate cooperation. A collapse of cooperation carries an automatic cost in the form of a loss of future profits. If this cost is large enough, cheating will be deterred and cooperation sustained. Using the principle of looking ahead and reasoning back, we see that cooperation must end when there is no longer any time left to punish. Yet neither wants to left cooperating while the other cheats. If ever someone cooperate, then someone must get stuck in the end. Since neither is willing to play the fool, cooperation never gets started. This is true no matter how long the game is, provided the end is known. Let us loo at this argument a little more carefully. Right from the start, both players should look ahead to predict the last play. #RandolphHarris 14 of 22

On this last play, there will be no future to consider, and the dominant strategy is to cheat. The outcome of the last play is a foregone conclusion. Since there is no way to affect the last play of the game, the penultimate play effectively becomes the last one to consider. Once again, cheating is a dominant strategy. The reason is that the play in the next-to-last period has no effect on the strategies chosen in the final period. Thus the penultimate period can be considered in isolation. For any period in isolation, cheating is a dominant strategy. Now the play of the final two periods can be take as a given. Cooperating early on will not help, as both players are resigned to cheat in the final two periods. Hence, the third-to-last period is effectively the past one to consider. The same argument applies and cheating is a dominant strategy. This argument unwinds all the way back, so that there is no cooperation even in the first play. The logic of this argument is impeccable, and yet in the real World we find episodes of successful cooperation. There are various ways to explain this. One is that all actual games of this kind are repeated only a finite number of times, there is always the possibility that the relationship will go on. Then the players have some incentive to sustain the cooperation for the sake of such future contingencies; if this incentive is large enough, the cooperation will persist. #RandolphHarris 15 of 22

Another explanation is that the World contains some “nice” people who will cooperate no matter what the material advantages of cheating may be. Now suppose you are not so nice. If you behaved true to your type in a finitely repeated game of prisoners’ dilemma, you would start cheating right away. That would reveal your nature to the other players. To hide the truth (at least for a while) you have to behave nicely. Why would you want to do that? Supposed you started by acting nicely. Then the other player would think it possible that you are one of the few nice people around. There are real gains to be had by cooperating for a while, and the other player would plan to reciprocate your niceness to achieve these gains. That helps you, too. Of course you are planning to sneak in a defection near the end of the game, just as the other player is. However, you two can still have an initial phase of mutually beneficial cooperation. This while each side is waiting to take advantage of the other, both are benefiting from this mutual deception. A third qualification to the emergence of trust in a repeated prisoners’ dilemma is that the gains from cheating take place before the costs of the breakdown of cooperation occur. Therefore the relative importance of the two depends on the relative importance of the present versus the future. In business contexts, current and future profits are compared using an appropriate interest rate to discount the future. In politics, the judgement of present versus future is more subjective, but it seems that time beyond the next election counts for very little. This makes cooperation hard to achieve. #RandolphHarris 16 of 22

Even in business, when times are bad, the whole industry is on the verge of collapse, and the management feels that there is no tomorrow, competition may become more fierce than in normal times. Similarly, the needs of war made current profits more important to Iran and Iraq, and contributed to the difficulties of OPEC. We have already seen how molecular manufacturing can provide clean solar energy without paving over desert ecosystems, and how clean energy and common materials can be turned into abundant, efficient goods, also cleanly. With care, sources of chemical pollution—even of excess carbon dioxide—can, step by step, be eliminated. This includes the pollutants responsible for acid rain, as well as ozone-destroying gases, greenhouse gases, oil spills, and toxic wastes. In each case, the story is about the same. Acid rain mostly results from burning dirty fuels containing sulfur, and from burning cleaner fuels in a dirty way, producing nitrogen oxides. We have seen how molecular manufacturing can make solar cells inexpensive enough and rugged enough to use as road surfaces. With green wealth, we can make clean fuels from solar energy, air, and water; consuming these fuels in clean nanomechanical systems would just return to their air exactly the materials taken from it, along with a little water vapor. Fuels are made, fuels are consumed, and the cycle produces no net pollution. With inexpensive solar fuels, coal and petroleum can be replaced, ignored, left in the ground. When petroleum is obsolete, with will stop sending our money to the Middle East, there will be no more oil spills. #RandolphHarris 17 of 22

The greenhouse gas of greatest concern is carbon dioxide, and its main source is the burning of fossil fuels. The above steps would end this. The release of other gases, such as the chloroflluorocarbons (CFCs) used in foaming plastics, is often a side effect of primitive manufacturing processes: foaming plastic will hardly be a popular activity in an era of molecular manufacturing. These materials can be replaced or controlled—and they include the gases most responsible for ozone depletion. The chief threats to the ozone layer are those same CFCs used as refrigerants and solvents. Molecular manufacturing will use solvents sparingly (mostly water), and can recycle them without dumping any. CFC refrigerants can be replaced even with current technology, at a cost; with nanotechnology, that cost will be negligible. Toxic wastes generally consist of harmless atoms arranged into noxious molecules; the same is true of sewage. With inexpensive energy and equipment able to work at the molecular level, these wastes can be converted into harmless forms. Many need never be produced in the first place. Other toxic wastes contain toxic elements, such as lead, mercury, arsenic, and cadmium. These elements come from the ground, and are best returned to the location and condition in which they were found. With nanotechnology, moreover, there will be little reason to dig them up in the first place. Nanotechnology will be able to break materials down to simple molecules and build them back again. Need it be said that this will permit complete recycling? #RandolphHarris 18 of 22

It is fair to say that eliminating these sources of pollution would be a major improvement. There does not seem to be much more to say, aside from the usual caveats: “Not immediately,” “Not all at once,” and “Not on a predictable schedule.” No one wants to make and dump wastes; they want something else, and get wastes s byproducts. With a better way to get what people want, dumping wastes can be stopped. People will also be able to get what they want while reducing their resource consumption. As materials grow stronger, they can be used more sparingly. As machines grown more perfect—in their motors, bearings, insulation, computers—they will grow more efficient. Materials will be needed to make things, and energy will be needed to run them, but in smaller amounts. What is more, nanotechnology will be the ultimate recycling technology. Objects can be make extremely durable, decreasing the need for recycling alternatively, objects can be made genuinely biodegradable, designed at the molecular level to decompose after use, leaving humans and mineral grit; alternatively, they can be made of microscopic snap-together pieces, making objects as recyclable as structures built and rebuilt out of a child’s blocks; finally, even objects not designed for recycling can be taken apart into simple molecules and recycled regardless. Each approach has different advantages and costs, and each makes current garbed problems go way. #RandolphHarris 19 of 22

Another key factor shifting power on the job has to do with the concept of interchangeability. One of the most important innovations of the industrial revolution was based on the idea of interchangeable parts. However, workers, to came to be regarded as interchangeable. Much of the relative powerlessness of the industrial working class derived precisely from this fact. So long as jobs required particular skills, and workers could be trained in a few minutes to do some rote task, one worker was as good as another. Especially in periods of labour surplus, wages would drop and workers, even when unionized, had little bargaining power. A “reserve army of the unemployed” usually was standing by to step into any available jobs. By contrast, as pointed out in the past, the jobless today cannot step into available jobs unless they happen to have the right mixture of skills at the right moment. Moreover, as the knowledge content of work rises, jobs grow more individualized—id est, less interchangeable. Knowledge workers are less and less replaceable. The tools are used differently by each knowledge worker. One engineer uses the computer differently from the next. One market analyst analyzes things one way; the next is different. When a worker leaves, either the company must find another with matching skills, which becomes mathematically harder (and more costly) as the variety of skills increases, or else it must train a new person, which is also expensive. Hence, the costs of replacing anyone individual grow, and his or her bargaining power rises correspondingly. #RandolphHarris 20 of 22

The boss of a gain project team in the defense industry puts it this way: “Years ago you might have everybody doing the same thing…Today it is different. Now if we lose somebody, it takes six months to train an individual to understand our system.” Furthermore, because work is team-based, “When we pluck an individua out, the whole team becomes dysfunctional.” The net result of such changes is that companies tend to use fewer but better-paid workers than in the past, and in the fast-growing, leading-edge industries, the old authoritarian command structure is phasing out, replaced by a new, more egalitarian or collegial style of work. Seen in its historical context, this represents a significant shift of power in the workplace. Many Non Profit Organization (NGOs) that still operate at local and national levels can be expected before long to make their presence felt at the global level—just as environmentalists, feminists and civil rights organizations began locally, then moved up to the national scale before placing their issues on the World addenda. Today, for example, the rights of homosexuals are fiercely contested inside many nations. As gender rations change in many countries, with male babies outnumbering baby girls 120:100 in China, for example—the shortage of women is likely to promote male homosexuality. I never thought there might be a use for same sex relations, but it could be to balance out some populations. In country after country, gays will exit in the closet and, whether overtly or covertly, organize politically, as they already have in North American and Europe. They will then elevate the demand for gay rights, including the legislation of gay marriage, which President Biden recently signed into law, and is now making its way to the global stage. #RandolphHarris 21 of 22

Struggles over a raft of twenty-first-century moral issues will also give birth to entirely new NGOs. They will arise to gain support for research into “nano—diseases” or o fight for or against the neuro-manipulation of human intelligence. When humans are eventually cloned—as lively, despite attempt to ban it—we may see global movements organized to deny or protect the rights of clones. There have been rumors of actual human clones, but then these accusations are disputed. Tomorrow we will have many more powerful ways to alter both bodies and brains with the help of genetics and science generally. Just as academic, economic, political and other boundaries are breaking down, so, too, are the boundaries that define what it means to be human. How much can we alter a body—chemically, biologically, genetically or mechanically—before it its no longer “human” enough to merit equal treatment with humans? Tomorrow NGOs will battle globally over what separates a human from a “transhuman” and what rights each should have. So profound are the moral issues that will soon face us, and so emotive, that we can easily picture them giving rise to new fanatic movements and becoming yet another source of global terror. Collectively, even now, NGOs form a pot of boiling passions, ideas, early warnings and proposed social innovations, good and bad. They are already able to organize and act more rapidly than governments and their bureaucracies (another important example of de-synchronization). What they do will have enormous, largely unexpected impacts on the production and distribution of wealth in the global economy. And that leads us to what might be regarded as the biggest NGOs of all: Religions. #RandolphHarris 22 of 22

CRESLEIGH HAVENWOOD

Lincoln, CA | from the high $600s

Now Selling!

Residence Two a spacious single story home with over 2,600 square feet of home thoughtfully designed to maximize every available foot of space.

Three bedrooms, three bathrooms, and a three car garage all come included in this home. The layout of an entertainer’s dream with large kitchen and working island, dining room connected through the butler’s pantry, and a large great room overlooking the ample rear yard.

Best of all, each Cresleigh home comes fully equipped with an All Ready connected home! This smart home package comes included with your home and features great tools including: video door bell and digital deadbolt for the front door, connect home hub so you can set scenes and routines to make life just a little easier.

Two smart switches and USB outlets are also included, plus we’ll gift you a Google Home Hub and Google Home Mini! https://cresleigh.com/havenwood/quick-move-homesite-60/

In any pursuit which deals with talent as an important factor towards success, academic or official licensing is of secondary importance. What is of prime importance is the result which is obtained through the use of the medium and how it is received by those to whom it is directed. Pedigrees are of questionable importance when the dog is sleeping while the burglar makes off with the solid gold dinner service. Nor do they help your legal defense when the mail carrier is bitten. Likewise, it is useless to have a grandmother who read tea leaves and a Scorpio rising in your chart, if you cannot land a boyfriend, keep a husband, get a job or avoid pregnancy. How you ever noticed how a man’s best friend will always be his opposite in appearance? The women you have always had as your best friends have been opposites of your own appearance, have they not? If you are extremely pretty, you best friend may have been the one you found yourself trying to convince others of accepting as beautiful even thought they may not have seen it at the time. If you are an active type, you will attract quiet people. If you are quiet, you will gravitate towards energetic types. In short, the reasons opposites attract is because we need those opposites to make ourselves whole. Sometimes there are two types of human beings, who, being usually unaware of their true nature, go through life complaining about their unrequited love—invariably to none other than those individuals who become the sometimes-disdainful objects of their desires. #RandolphHarris 1 of 20

Unfortunately, if caterwaulings are long and loud enough, and their love objects are nice enough, even though dominant by nature, a very curious phenomenon develops. The dominant love object, in attempting to “keep peace” and divert grave traumas on the part of his or her suitor, becomes literally vampirized by the “weaker” person! Thus, it becomes a situation wherein the master finds himself fast becoming the slave—but without the benefits of such an arrangement, as the newly developed “slave” had not based his or her choice of a “master” upon any natural pleasures of the flesh or mental attractions! There are two side of man that must be developed, that is, there are two lines of possible development that must proceed simultaneously. These two sides of man, or two lines of possible development, are knowledge and being. It is a necessity to develop knowledge, and particularly self-knowledge, because one of the most characteristic features of man’s present states is that he does not know himself. Generally people understand the idea of different levels of knowledge, the idea of the relativity of knowledge, and the necessity for quite new knowledge. What people do not understand in most cases is the idea of being as quite separate from knowledge; and further, the idea of the relativity of being, the possibility of different levels of being, and the necessity for the development of being, separately from the development of knowledge. #RandolphHarris 2 of 20

A Russian philosopher, Vladimir Solovieff, used the term “being” in his writings. He spoke about the being of a stone, the being of a plant, the being of an animal, the being of a man, and the divine being. This is better than the ordinary concept because in ordinary understanding the being of man is not regarded as in any way different from the being of a stone, the being of a plant, or the being of an animal. From the ordinary point of view a stone, a plant, an animal are or exist, exactly as a man is or exists. In reality, they exist quite differently. However, Solovieff’s division is not sufficient. There is no such thing as the being of a man. Men are too different for that. In the past, we discussed how the man is divided into seven concepts. In addition to this we already know finer divisions. They may live entirely under influences A. They may be equally affected by influences A and C. They may be more under influences B than A. They may have a magnetic center. They may have come into contact with school influences or influence C. They may be on the way to becoming men no 4. All these categories indicate different levels of being. The idea of being enter into the very foundation of thinking and speaking about man in religious thought, and all other divisions of men were regarded as unimportant to comparison with this. Men were divided into pagans, unbelievers, or heretics on the one hand, and into true believers, righteous men saints, prophets, and so on. All these definitions referred not to differences in views and convictions, that is, not to knowledge, but to being. #RandolphHarris 3 of 20

In modern thought people ignore the idea of being and different levels of being. On the contrary, they believe that the more discrepancies and contradictions there re in a man’s being, the more interesting and brilliant he can be. It is generally, although tacitly, and not always even tacitly, admitted that a man can be given to lying, he can be selfish, unreliable, unreasonable, perverted, and yet be a great scientist or a great philosopher or a great artist. Of course this is quite impossible. This incompatibility of different features of one’s being, which is generally regarded as originality, actually means weakness. One cannot be a great thinker or a great artists with a perverted or an inconsistent mind, just as one cannot be a prizefighter or a circus athlete with consumption. The widespread acceptance of the idea that inconsistency and amorality mean originality is responsible for the many scientific, artistic, and religious fakes of our present time and probably of all times. It is necessary to understand clearly what being means, and why it most grow and develop side by side with knowledge, but independently of it. If knowledge outgrows being or being outgrows knowledge, the result is always a one-sided development, and a one-sided development cannot go far. It is bound to come to some inner contradiction of a serious nature and stop there. Some time later we may speak about the different kinds and the different results of one-sided development. Ordinarily, in life we meet with only one kind, that is, when knowledge had outgrown being. The result takes the form of a dogmatization of certain ideas and the consequent impossibility of further development of knowledge because of the loss of understanding. #RandolphHarris 4 of 20

The exchange of words and glances between individuals in each other’s presence is a very common social arrangement, yet it is one whose distinctive communication properties are difficult to disentangle. Pedantic definitions seem to be required. Any individual may give information through linguistic means formally established in society for this purpose, namely, speech or recognized speech substitutes such as writing and pictorial signs or gestures. One speaks here of an individual sending messages to someone who receives them. However, the individual may also give information expressively, through the incidental symptomatic significance of events associate with him. In this case one might say the he emits, exudes, or gives off information to someone who gleans it. Linguistic messages can be “about” anything in the World, the sender and the subject matter having no necessary connection, coinciding only when autobiographical statements are being made. Expressive messages are necessarily “about” the same causal physical complex of which the transmitting agency is an intrinsic part. Consensus as to the meaning of linguistic messages seems more firmly established than it is in regard to that of expressive messages. Linguistic messages can be translated, stored, and help us as legal evidence; expressive messages tend to be ones for which the giver cannot be made legally responsible, it being usually possible for him to deny that he meant quite what others claim he meant. #RandolphHarris 5 of 20

Linguistic messages are felt to be voluntary and intended; expressive messages, on the other hand, must often preserve the fiction that they are uncalculated, spontaneous, and involuntary, as in some cases they are. Ever linguistic message caries some expressive information, namely, that the sender is sending messages. In any case, most concrete messages combine linguistic and expressive components, the proportion of each differing widely from message to message. The information that an individual provides, whether he sends it or exudes it, may be embodies or disembodied. A frown, a spoken word, a kick is a message that a sender conveys by means of his own current bodily activity, the transmission occurring only during the time that his body is presented to sustain this activity. Disembodies messages, such as the ones we receive from letters and mailed gifts, or the ones hunters receive from the spoor of a not distant animal, require that the organism do something that traps and holds information long after the organism has stopped informing. This study will be concerned only with embodies information. No ordinary English verb seems to cover all the senses—sights, hearing, smell, tastes, and touch—that restrict the media and provide the receiving equipment through which an individual is able to obtain information. Terms such as “perceive,” which have a special visual reference, have had to be used in a wider way, while terms such as “experience” have had to be used more narrowly. Some terms such as “audit” or “monitor,” have had to be manufactured. #RandolphHarris 6 of 20

In everyday thinking about the receiving sense, it is felt that ordinarily they are used in an “unveiled” or “direct” way. This apparently implies a restriction on boosting devices—mechanical, chemical, or electrical—except s these raise the faulty senses of a particular individual to average unassisted strength: glasses, for example, but not binoculars; devices to assist with audio impairment but not microphones. Electric lighting would have to be allowed as merely raising a room to day-time standards. When one speaks of experiencing someone else with one’s unveiled sense, one usually implies the reception of embodies messages. This linkage of unveiled senses on one side and embodied transmissions on the other provides one of the crucial communication conditions of immediate interaction. Under this condition any message that an individual sends is likely to be qualified and modified by much additional information that others glean from him simultaneously, often unbeknownst to him; further, a very large number of brief messages may be sent. Now the individual can, of course, receive embodied messages by means of one’s unveiled sense without much chance of these communication roles being reversed, as when he spies on persons through a crack in the wall or overhears them through a thin partition. Such asymmetrical arrangements may even be established as part of an occupational setting, as in the procedure by which psychoanalysts or priests observe their clients without being as easily observed in return. #RandolphHarris 7 of 20

Ordinarily, however, in using the unveiled senses to receive embodies messages from others, the individual also makes oneself available as a source of embodies information for them (although there is always likely to be some differential exploitation of these monitoring possibilities). Here, then, is a second crucial communication of face-to-face interaction: not only are the receiving and conveying of the unveiled and embodies kind, but each giver is himself a receiver, and each receiver is a giver. The implication of this second feature are fundamental. First, sight begins to take on an added and special role. Each individual can see that he is being experienced in some way, and he will guide at least some of his conduct according to the perceived identity and initial response of his audience. In the asymmetrical case, where a person is being spied upon by direct or indirect means, he may greatly modify his conduct if he suspects he is being observed, even though he does not know the identity of the particular audience that might be observing him. This is one of the possibilities celebrated in Orwell’s 1984, and its possibility is one of the forces operative in socially controlling person who are alone. Further, he can be seen seeing this. Ordinarily, then, to use our unveiled sense is to clearly seen as the agents of our acts, there being very little chance of disavowing having committed them; neither having given nor having received messages can be easily denied, at least among those immediately involved. #RandolphHarris 8 of 20

The factor emerges that the special mutuality of immediate social interactions is when two persons are together, at least some of their World will be made up put of the fact (and consideration for the fact) that an adaptive line of action must always be pursued in this intelligently helpful and hindering World. Individuals sympathetically take the attitude of others, present, regardless of the end to which they put the information thus acquired. In human society every act of every individual tends to become a gesture, since what one does is always an indication of what one intends to do. The consequence is that the individual in society lives a more or less public existence, in which all his acts are anticipated, checked, inhibited, or modified by the gestures and the intentions of his fellows. It is in this social conflict, in which every individual lives more or less in the mind of every other individual, that human nature and the individual may acquire their most characteristic and human traits. The two distinctive features of face-to-face interaction: richness of information flow and facilitation of feedback have enough structuring significance to provide one analytical rationale for the separate treatment this reports gives to the social norms regulating behaviour of persons immediately present to one another. The physical distance over which one person can experience another with the unveiled sense—thereby finding that the other is “within range”—varies according to many factors: the sense medium involved, the presence of obstructions, even the temperature of the air. #RandolphHarris 9 of 20

On Shetland Isle, during cold nights, mainland visitors walking together alone the bay in apparent isolation who laughed loudly by the strict local standards could cause Shetlanders an eighth of a mile away to rise their eyebrows. Conversely, when an individual whispers or uses eye expressions, his body acts as a focusing barrier, effectively restricting the usual sphere of propagation of sense stimuli, so that reception is limited to those very close to him or directly in front of him. On the subject of the disciplined use of language, in addition to courses in the philosophy of science, every school—again, from elementary school through college—offer a course in semantics—in the processes by which people make meaning. The fact that some English teachers have been consistently obtuse in their approach to this subject means they ignored it. This has always been difficult for me to understand since English teachers claim to be concerned with teaching reading and writing. However, if they do not teach anything about the relationship of language to reality—which is what semantics studies—I cannot imagine how they expect reading and writing to improve. Every teacher ought to be a semantics teacher, since it is not possible to separate language from what we call knowledge. Like history, semantics is an interdisciplinary subject: it is necessary to know something about it in order to understand any subject. #RandolphHarris 10 of 20

However, it would be extremely useful to the growth of their intelligence if our youth had available a special course in which fundamental principles of language were identified and explained. Such a course would deal not only with the various uses of language but with the relationship between things and words, symbols and signs, factual statements and judgements, and grammar and thought. Especially for young students, the course ought to emphasize the kinds of semantic errors that are common to all of us, and that are avoidable through awareness and discipline—the use of either-or categories, misunderstanding of levels of abstraction, confusion of words with things, sloganeering, and self-reflexivness. Of all the disciples that might be included in the curriculum, semantics is certainly among the most “basic.” Because it deals with the processes by which we make and interpret meaning, it has great potential to affect the deepest levels of student intelligence. And yet semantics is rarely mentioned when “back to the basics” is proposed. Why? My guess is that it cuts too deep. To adapt George Orwell, many subjects are basic but some are more basic than others. Such subjects have the capability of generating critical thought and of giving students access to questions that get to the heart of the matter. This is not what “back to the basis” advocates usually have in mind. They want language technicians: people who can follow instructions, write reports clearly, spell correctly. #RandolphHarris 11 of 20

There is certainly ample evidence that the study of semantics will improve the writing and read reading of students. However, it invariable does more. It helps students to reflect on the sense and truth of what they are writing and what they are asked to read. It teaches them to discover the underlying assumptions of what they are told. It emphasizes the manifold ways in which language can distort reality. It assists students in become “crap-detectors.” Students who have a firm grounding in semantics are therefore apt to find it difficult to take reading tests. A reading test does not invite one to ask whether or not what is written is true. Or, if it is true, what it has to do with anything. The study of semantics insists upon these questions. But “back to the basics” advocates do not require education to be that basic. Which is why they usually do not include literature, music, and art as part of their agenda either. However, of course, in using the ascent of humanity as a theme, we would of necessity elevate these subjects to prominence. The most obvious reason for such prominence is that their subject matter contains the best evidence we have of the unity and continuity of human experience and feeling. And that is why in our teaching of the humanities, we should emphasize the enduring creations of the past. The schools should stay as far from contemporary works as possible. Because of the nature of the communications industry, our students have continuous access to the popular arts of their own times—its music, rhetoric, design, literature, architecture. #RandolphHarris 12 of 20

Their knowledge of the form and content of these arts is by no means satisfactory. However, their ignorance of the form and content of the art of the past is cavernous. This is one good reason for emphasizing the art of the past. Another is that there is no subject better suited to freeing us from the tyranny of the present than the historical study of art. Painting, for example, is more than three times as old as writing, and contains in its changing styles and themes a fifteen-thousand-year-old record of the ascent of humanity. This does not mean we should subsume art under the heading of archeology, although it is recommended that the history of art forms be given a serious place on the curriculum. However, art is much more than a historical artifact. To have meaning for us, it must connect with those levels of feeling that are in fact not expressible in discursive language. The question therefore arises whether it is possible for students of today to relate, through feeling, to the painting, architecture, music, sculpture, or literature of the past. Well, only with the greatest difficulty. They, and many of us, have an aesthetic sensibility of a different order from what is required to be inspired, let alone entertained, by a Shakespeare sonnet, a Haydn symphony, or a Hals painting. To oversimplify the matter, a young man who believes Madonna to have reached the highest pinnacle of musical expression lacks the sensibility to distinguish between the ascent and descent of humanity. #RandolphHarris 13 of 20

However, I do not want to tarnish the reputation of popular culture. The products of the popular arts are amply provided by the culture itself. The schools must make available the products of classical art forms precisely because they re not so available and because they demand a different order of sensibility and response. There is no excuse for schools to sponsor rock concerts when students have no heard the music of Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, or Chopin. Or for student to have graduated from high school without having read, for example, Shakespeare, Cervantes, Milton, Keats, Dickens, Whitman, Twain, Melville, or Poe. Or for students not to have seen at least a photograph of paintings by Goya, El Greco, David. It is not the point that many of these composers, writers, and painters were in their own times popular artists. These artists are relevant not only because they established the standards with which civilized people approach the arts. They are relevant because the culture tries to mute their voices and render their standards invisible. It is highly likely that students, immersed in today’s popular arts, will find such an emphasis tedious and even painful. This fact will, in turn, be painful to teachers, who, naturally enough, prefer to teach that which will arouse an immediate and enthusiastic response. However, our youth must be shown that not all worthwhile things are instantly accessible and that there are levels of sensibility unknow to them. Above all, they must be down humanity’s artistic roots. And that task, in our own times, falls inescapably to the schools. #RandolphHarris 14 of 20

There are two subjects indispensable to an understanding of where we have come from. The first is the history of technology, which as much as science and art provides pat of the story of humanity’s confrontation with nature and indeed with our own limitations. It is important for students to be shown, for example, the connection between the invention of eyeglasses in the thirteenth century and experiments in gene-splicing in the twentieth: that in both cases we reject the proposition that anatomy is destiny, and through technology define our own destiny. We need students who will understand the relationships between our technics and social and psychic Worlds, so that they may begin informed conversations about where technology us taking us and how. The second subject is, of course, religion, with which so much painting, music, technology, architecture, literature, and science are intertwined. The curriculum must include a course in comparative religion. Such a course would deal with religion as an expression of humanity’s creativeness, as a total, integrated response to fundamental questions about the meaning of existence. The course would be descriptive, promoting no particular religion but illuminating the metaphors, the literature, the art, the ritual of religious expression itself. Many say schools and religion must not touch on each other. However, if we do not ask them to consider how different people of different times and places have tried to achieve a sense of transcendence, I do not see how we can claim to be educating our youth. No education can neglect such sacred texts as Genesis, the New Testament, the Koran, the Bhagavd-Gita. Each of them embodies a style and a World-view that tell as much about the ascent of humanity as any book ever written. #RandolphHarris 15 of 20

Much like we have churches that teach religion, we should also have centers that teach the United States Constitution on the weekends, over and over, like the preachers do in the church. Perhaps we can decrease violence and educate people from all walks of life what the United States of America’s Constitution provides for American citizens. This recognition of the law of our land would also reduce protests and property violence because people could reference their Constitutional Rights and others would have to recognize them. This could also reduce the instance of school bullying, discrimination, and arrests. Perhaps it would also help to begin and sustain a serious conversation that will allow us to distance ourselves from the thought-World, and then criticize and modify it. Over the years, research on these various mechanisms for creating, transforming, and destroying agents or strategies (and therefore types) has led to the establishment of an important trade-off principle, usually referred to as exploration versus exploitation. This principle captures the tension of Complex Adaptive Systems between creation of untested types that may be superior to what currently exists versus the copying of tested types that have so far proven best. This trade-off characterization has turned out to be illuminating across a wide range of settings from simple genetics to organizational resource allocation, wherever the testing of new types comes at some expanse to realizing benefits of those already available. Two extremes illustrate the trade-off. #RandolphHarris 16 of 20

Eternal boiling occurs when the level of mutation, temperature, or noise is so high that the system remains permanently disorderly. In such a state, any potentially valuable structures are broken apart before they can be effectively put to use. Organizations and polities sometimes find themselves in periods of continuous upheaval that produce this effect. There may be striking new ideas, but before it is known whether they will actually work, their underpinnings are swept away in subsequent waves of change. If mutation rates are too high in a biological population, there will be many variant organisms that cannot survive, along with a few that are important improvements over earlier types. However, a surprising new discovery will itself be subject to high rates of (usually lethal) mutations, and so its superiority will not have enough time to establish itself in the population before it is disrupted by deleterious random chance. In these situations, exploration completely swamps exploitation. Premature convergence is the opposite phenomenon. Premature convergence occurs when needed variability is lost too quickly. This can happen when very speedy imitation of an initial success cuts off future system improvements. A fashion in health care can sweep through a community and wipe out alternatives that might have proven superior with some additional testing and refinement. A new product can become a standard before sufficient trials of alternatives have occurred. A new variant that might actually have the potential to be better may lose out because it cannot overcome the advantages accruing to the established standard. In these situations, exploitation quickly swamps exploration. #RandolphHarris 17 of 20

There are not simply two ways that something good can go wrong. In general, investments in options and possibilities associated with “exploration” frequently come at the expense of obtaining returns on what has already been learned, “exploitation.” The two possibilities form a fundamental trade-off. An early and striking exposition of the trade-off occurred in the context of the “two-armed bandit problem,” in which a player with a fixed supply of coins plays two slot machines that have unknown and potentially different rates of payoff. To decrease sampling error in estimates of which machine pays more, and thereby increase longer-run expected gains, coins should be played on both machines. However, to maximize gain in the short run, coins should be played on the machine that is currently estimated as best paying. The trade-off can be seen in many different practical situations. For example, companies must decide whether to invest resources such as capital and management attention, in developing ideas for wholly new products or in marketing, refining—or reducing costs of—existing products. Students must decide between taking more courses in a subject in which they have done well or trying out new fields. Though there is not a single decision maker, the gene pool of a biological species also confronts the problem. Higher mutation rates will produce move variations on currently fit animals, with attendant chances of discovering improvements. However, they will also yield higher levels of infant mortality due to lethal random changes in organisms’ genetic codes. #RandolphHarris 18 of 20

The exploration of making new animals unlike their parents comes at the cost of forgoing the fitness already embodies in the parents. Lowered mutation would make offspring more similar to the parents, exploiting what the parents have proven to be valuable in reaching reproductive readiness—but at the cost of exploring less. For decades, people have proposed replacing automobiles with some form of mass-transportation system, and it seems that cost revolutions (including inexpensive tunnelling) may finally make this practical. Before junking the car, though, it is worth seeing how it might be improved. Molecular manufacturing can make almost anything better. Automobiles can be made stronger and safer, lighter, higher performance, and higher efficiency, while getting excellent milage and burning clean, inexpensive fuels, perhaps in fuel cells powering quiet electric motors. Using aerodynamic forces to hold the car to the road, there is no reason why a comfortable passenger car should not be able to deliver uncomfortable, drag-racer acceleration. To imagine an affordable car built with molecular manufacturing, first imagine loading it with all the attractive features that you have ever heard proposed. This includes everything from today’s self-adjusting seats and mirrors, excellent sound systems, and specially tuned steering and suspension systems, through automated navigation displays, emergency braking, and reliable super-duper airbags. Now, instead of just having the position of the seats, mirrors, and so forth adjust to a driver, as some cars do today, our smart-material BMW will also be able adjust its size, shape, and color (already possible), facing owners with choices such as, “What should our BMW look like for this occasion?” #RandolphHarris 19 of 20

Those seeking an image of solid conservatism and wealth will also drive these cares. But they may still be interested in certified antique BMWs, made from traditional steel, paint, and rubber. If environmental regulations permit it, the car might even have a genuine gasoline-brining engine. The latter can no doubt be cleaned up by fancy nanotechnology-based emission-control systems. Our transportation system today effectively ends in the upper atmosphere. Travel beyond still takes the form of “historic missions.” There is no reason for this situation to continue for long, once molecular manufacturing becomes well established. The cost of a spaceflight is high because the spacecraft are huge, fragile things, made in such small numbers that they are almost hand-crafted. Molecular manufacturing will replace today’s delicate monsters with rugged, mass-produced vehicles (which, with greater efficiency, need not be so large). The vehicles will cost little, but the energy? Today, the energy cost of a ticket to orbit in an efficient vehicle would be less than one hundred dollars. Low-cost vehicles and energy will drop the total cost to a fraction of this. We will know that spaceflight has become inexpensive when people see the Earth as just a small part of the World, and understand in their bones that space resources make continued exploitation of Earth’s resources unnecessary. In the long run, efficient, clean, low-cost manufacturing can transform the way human beings affect the Earth by their presence. Even stay-at-home humans will be better able to heal the damage they have done. #RandolphHarris 20 of 20

Cresleigh Homes

At Riverside Residence 1, there’s space for all of it. 👏 All your clothes, shoes, furniture – you name it, we’ve got a place for it! Can’t wait for you to take in the spacious floor plan for yourself.

Let your decor dreams take flight and find the home that gives you the space to truly be yourself. It’s almost 2023 and you deserve a place you love!

Discover luxury living with Cresleigh Homes. You will  enjoy a new home community offering expansive one-, two-, story homes.

Come check out all we have to offer on our website. https://cresleigh.com/cresleigh-riverside-at-plumas-ranch/

#PlumasRanch
#CresleighHomes

The World population in 1950 was 2.5 billion, in 2022, it is 8 billion. The American population in 1950 was 151, 325, 798, in 2022 332,403,650. With this rapid expansion in humanaity, it is also important to consider their strain on the natural environment and promote birth control in the developed and undeveloped World. The mental health industry is overloaded, and many people are showing sighs of mental disorder, not only due to rising cost, but also because the planet is over populated. In diagnosing mental disorder and following its hospital course, psychiatrists typically cite aspects of the patient’s behaviour that are “inappropriate in the situation.” Since this special kind of misconduct is believed to provide one obvious sign of “mental sickness,” psychiatrists have given much time to these improprieties, developing the orientation and observational skills needed to study them, describe them in detail, seeking to understand their meaning for the patient, and obtaining a mandate to discuss them in the academic press—a mandate required because many of these delicts are petty, embarrassing, or messy. We sociologists should be grateful for this harvest, all the more so because it has been brought in by delicate hands. We can express our gratitude by trying to appropriate the yield for our own market, offering in exchange some observations about social situations that we appropriated long ago from anthropology. By and large, the psychiatric study of situational improprieties has led to studying the offender rather than the rules and social circles that are offended. Through such studies, however, psychiatrists have inadvertently made us more aware of an important area of social life—that of behaviour in public and semipublic places. Although this area has not been recognized as a special domain for sociological inquiry, it perhaps should be, for rules of conduct in streets, parks, restaurants, theaters, shops, dance floors, meeting halls, and other gathering places of any community tell us a great deal about its most diffuse forms of social organization. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21

Sociology does not provide a ready framework that can order these data, let alone show comparisons and continuities with behaviour in private gathering places such as offices, factory floors, living rooms, and kitchens. To be sure, one part of “collective behaviour”—riots, crowds, panics—has been established as something to study. However, the remaining part of the area, the study of ordinary human traffic and the patterning of ordinary social contacts, has been little considered. It is well recognized, for instance, that mobs can suddenly emerge from the peaceful flow of human traffic, if conditions are right. Yet, little concern seems to have been given to the question of what structure this peaceful intercourse possesses when mob formation is not an issue. Some data have been drawn from a study of a mental hospital (hereafter called Central Hospital), some from a study of a Shetland Island community (hereafter called Shetland Isle), some from manuals of etiquette, and some from a file where I keep quotations that have struck me as interesting. The issue with disapproved behaviour is the strength of approval for upholding. Some approved acts receive applause upon performance, as when heroism or very great skill is displayed, and sometime so do bad actions. Furthermore, some acts pass quite unnoticed and do not constitute a felt event, as when an American high-school girl refrains from wearing nylon hose with her saddle shoes but wears bobby socks instead. #RandolphHarris 2 of 21

A second variable has to do with the consequence of failing to uphold the rule. At one extreme are acts, neither demanded nor expected, that are rarely performed. At the other extreme are mandatory acts such as the paying of fines, where failure to comply may lead to jail. Between these extremes are “tolerated” acts, which are specifically noted with only an inhibited frown, constituting offenses that the offended person, given the setting, is obligated to let pass. In can be seen, then, how much mischief may be done by equating two situations because the same act is “approved” in each, since approval itself can mean significantly different things.  In the social sciences, when it comes to the “closed natural system,” such a system of concrete behaviour involves a differentiation of activities whose integration, one with another, allows for the emergence of over-all functions maintained through an equilibrium of interaction of the component activities. Presumably, the equilibrium can be different kinds—self-corrective, moving, and the like. A social order may be defined as the consequence of any set of moral norms that regulates the way in which persons pursue objectives. The set of norms does not specify the objectives the participants are to seek, nor the pattern formed by and through the coordination or integration of these ends, but merely the modes of seeking them. Traffic rules and the consequent traffic order provide an obvious example. #RandolphHarris 3 of 21

Any social system or any game may be viewed quite properly as an instance of social order, although the perspective of social order does not allow us to get at what is characteristically systemic about systems or what is gamelike about games. There appear to be many types of social order, of which the legal order and the economic order are important examples. Within each such order, mere behaviour is transformed into a corresponding type of conduct. Particular in accordance with the regulations of more than one of these orders. The most important type of regulation is the kind that governs a person’s handling of one’s self and others by virtue of one’s immediate physical presence among them in what is called face-to-face or immediate interaction. The term “public” is of extreme importance. The norms supporting public order, as public order is traditionally defined, regulate not only immediate interaction but also matters that need not entail immediate contact between persons: for example, during medieval times, the obligation (often ill sustained) to keep one’s pigs out of the streets, even though there was much available there for pigs to eat, and the obligation to extinguish lights and fires by a given hour least the town be endangered by fire. Nowadays, householder is obligated to maintain one’s walks and roads in good repair and to keep one’s town land free of noxious refuse. In addition, public order traditionally refers more to the regulation of immediate inter-acquainted than it does to interaction occurring in private walled-in places where only families meet. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21

Traditionally, “public places” refer to any regions in a community freely accessible to members of that community; “private places” refer to soundproof regions where only members or invitees gather—the traditional concern for the public order beginning only at the point where a private gathering begins to obtrude upon the neighbours. Behaviour plays a role in the physical traffic among people. Although it may be felt that this involves conduct of little weight, a matter merely of etiquette and manners, it is implied that for though generosity, loyalty, and moral courage are without doubt nobler and more praiseworthy qualities than charm and courtesy, nevertheless polite habits and a correct manner of speech and behaviour may benefit those who possess them no less than a noble spirit and a stout heart benefits others. For since each one of us is daily obliged to meet other people and converse with them, we need to use our manners many times each day. However, justice, fortitude, and the other virtues of the higher and nobler sort are needed less frequently. We are not required to practice generosity or mercy at all hours, nor could any man do so very often. Similarly, those who are endowed with courage and strength are seldom called upon to show their valour by their deeds. #RandolphHarris 5 of 21

There are many social settings that persons of certain status are forbidden to enter. Here an effort to prevent penetration of ego-boundaries, contamination by undesirables, and physical assault seems to be involved. Rules of trespass, for example, prevent unauthorized individuals from entering a private dwelling place at any time, and a semiprivate one during off hours. Less familiar are the many rulings that restrict the right to be present in open, unwalled public places: in nineteenth-century London, for example, the exclusion of common people from riding promenades such as Rotten Row; in Islamic cities built on quartier basis, the restriction of persons to their own neighbourhood after dark; the temporary prohibitions, during periods of martial law, upon being about after dark; evening curfews making it illegal for youths below a certain age to be about without the company of an adult; boarding-school rulings about late-hour presence on town streets; military rulings placing certain areas out of bounds or off limits for categories of personnel; informal police rulings requiring night-tomes racial segregation on public streets in designated areas of the city. Where these rules or exclusion exist, it is plain that the individual’s mere presence, regardless of one’s conduct while present, communicates either that one possesses the entrance qualifications or that one is behaving improperly. Here we find one motive for either wanting to enter a particular place or wanting not to be seen in it. #RandolphHarris 6 of 21

In many social situations certain categories of persons may not be authorized to be present, and that should they be present, this in itself will constitute an improper act. Common sense, however, also has something to say about those who are authorized to be present. The rule of behaviour that seems to be common to all situations and exclusive to them is the rule obliging participants to “fit in.” The words one applies to a child on one’s first trip to a restaurant presumably hold for everyone all the time: the individual must be “good” and not cause a scene or a disturbance; one must not attract undue attention to oneself, either by thrusting one’s self on the assembled company or by attempting to withdraw too much from their presence. One must keep within the spirit or ethos of the situation; one must not be de trop or out of place. Occasions may even arise when the individual will be called upon to act as if one fitted into the situation when in fact one and some of the others present know this is not the case; out of regard for harmony in the scene one is required to compromise and endanger oneself further by putting on an air of one who belongs when it can be shown that one does not. If you should happen to be paying an evening visit at a house, where, unknown to you, there is a small party assembled, you should enter and present yourself precisely as you would have done had you been invited. To retire precipitately with an apology for the intrusion would create a scene, and be extremely awkward. Go in, therefor, converse with ease for a few moments, and then retire. Take care to let it be known the next day, in such a way as that the family shall hear of it, that you were not aware that there was company there. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21

No doubt different social groupsings vary in the explicitness with which their members think in such terms, as well as in the phrases selected for doing so, but all groupings presumably have some concern for “fitting in.” The notion of “fitting in” relates to another bit of common sense: what is proper in one situation may certainly not be proper in another. The underlying general sentiment possessed by the individual—where in fact one has one—may have to give way to the requirements of the situation. This theme appears in social science literature in the form of “situational determinism,” for example, in race relations studies, where it is pointed out that castelike taboos in one sphere of life can exist alongside equalitarianism in other spheres, although the same set of persons is involved. However, here surely is the beginning of inquiry, not the end. Although an individual may conduct oneself in a particular way solely because of the felt pressure of propriety, this merely tells us about one possible motive for conforming. We still do not know why this particular form of conduct is the one here approved—namely, how the riling arose historically, and what its current social function is. To approach these issues, it is necessary to turn to a more roundabout analysis. #RandolphHarris 8 of 21

We must ask ourselves what our chances actually are. We must discover in ourselves functions and manifestations which we can, to a certain extent, control, and we must exercise this control, trying to increase it as much as possible. For instance, we have a certain control over our movements, and in many schools, particularly in the East, work on oneself begins with acquiring as full a control over movements as possible. However, this needs special training, very much time, and the study of very elaborate exercises. Under the conditions of modern life we have more control over our thoughts, and in connection with this there is a special method by which we may work on the development of our consciousness using that instrument which is most obedient to our will; that is, our mind, or the intellectual center. You must try to remember that we have no control over our consciousness. When I have said that we can become more conscious, or that a man can be made conscious for a moment simply by asking him if he is conscious our not, I used the word “conscious” or “consciousness” in a relative sense. There are so many degrees of consciousness and every higher degree means “consciousness” in a relative sense. There are so many degrees of consciousness and every higher degree means “consciousness” in relation to a lower degree. However, if we have no control over consciousness itself, we have a certain control over our thinking about consciousness, and we can construct our thinking in such a way as to bring consciousness. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21

By giving our thoughts the direction which they would have in a moment of consciousness, we can, in this way, induce consciousness. Now try to formulate what you noticed when you tried to observe yourself. You noticed three things. First that you do not remember yourself; that is, that you are not aware of yourself at the time when you try to observe yourself. Second, that observation is made difficult by the incessant stream of thoughts, images, echoes of conversation, fragments of emotions, flowing through your mind and very often distracting your attention from observation. And third, that the moment you start self-observation something in you starts imagination, and self-observation, if you really try it, is a constant struggle with imagination. If one realized that all the difficulties in the work depend on the fact that one cannot remember oneself, one already knows what one must do. One must try to remember oneself. In order to do this one must struggle with mechanical thoughts, and one must struggle with imagination. If one does this conscientiously and persistently one will see results in a comparatively short time. However, one must not think that it is easy or that one can master this practice immediately. Self-remembering, as it is called, is a very difficult thing to learn to practice. It must not be based on an expectation of results, otherwise one can identify with one’s efforts. It must be based on the realization of the fact that we do not remember ourselves, and that at the same time we can remember ourselves if we try sufficiently hard and in the right way. #RandolphHarris 10 of 21

We cannot become conscious at will, at the moment when we want to, because we have no command over states of consciousness. However, we can remember ourselves for a short time at will, because we have a certain command over our thoughts. And if we start remembering ourselves, by the special construction of our thoughts—that is, by the realization that we do not remember ourselves, that nobody remembers oneself, and by realizing all that this means—this will bring us to consciousness. You must remember that we have found the weak spot in the walls of our mechanicalness. This is the knowledge that we do not remember ourselves; and the realization that we can try to remember ourselves. Up to this moment our task has only been self-study. Now, with the understanding of the necessity for actual chance in ourselves, work begins. Later on you will learn that the practice of self-remembering, connected with self-observation and with the struggle against imagination, has not only a psychological meaning, but it also changes the subtlest part of our metabolism and produces definite chemical, or perhaps it is better to say alchemical, effects in our body. So today from psychology we have come to alchemy; tht is, to the idea of the transformation of coarse elements into finer ones. It will be objected that this idea—history as comparative history—is too abstract for students to grasp. However, that is one of the several reasons why comparative history should be taught. To know oneself is to know one’s history. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21

To teach the past simply as a chronicle of indisputable, fragmented, and concrete events is to replicate the bias of Technopoly, which largely denies our youth access to concepts and theories, and to provide them only with a stream of meaningless events. That is why the controversies that develop around what events ought to be included in the “history” curriculum have a somewhat hollow ring to them. Some people urge, for example, that the Holocaust, or Stalin’s bloodbaths, or the trail of Indian tears be taught in school. Although our students should know about such things, we must still address the question, “What is it that we want them to ‘know’ about these events? Are they to be explained as the “maniac” theory of history? Are they to be understood as illustrations of the “banality of evil” or the “law of survival”? Are they manifestations of the universal force of economic greed? Are they examples of the workings of human nature? Whatever events may be included in the study of the past, the worst thing we can do is to present them devoid of the coherence that a theory or theories can provide—that is to say, s meaningless. This, we can be sure, Technopoly does daily. The history teacher must go far beyond the “event” level into the realm of concepts, theories, hypotheses, comparisons, deductions, evaluations. The idea is to raise the level of abstraction at which “history” is taught. This idea would apply to all subjects, including science. #RandolphHarris 12 of 21

From the point of view of the ascent of humanity, the scientific enterprise is one of our most glorious achievements. On humanity’s Judgement Day we can be expected to speak almost at once of our science. I have already stressed the importance of teaching the history of science in every science course, but this is no more important than teaching its “philosophy.” I mention this with some sense of despair. More than half of the high schools in the United States of America do not even offer one course in physics. And at a rough guess, I would estimate that in 90 percent of the schools chemistry is still taught as if students were being trained to be druggists. To suggest, therefore, tht science is an exercise in human imagination, that is something quite different from technology, that there are “philosophies” of science, and that all of this ought to form part of a scientific education, is to step out of the mainstream. However, I believe it nonetheless. Would it be an exaggeration to say not one student in fifty knows what “induction” means? Or knows what a scientific theory is? Or a scientific model? Or knows what are the optimum conditions of a valid scientific experiment? Or has ever considered the question of what scientific truth is? The Identity of Man Bronowski says the following: “This is the paradox of imagination in science, that it has for its aim the impoverishment of imagination. #RandolphHarris 13 of 21

“By that outrageous phrase, I mean that the highest flight of scientific imagination is to weed out the proliferation of new ideas. In science, the grand view is miserly view, and a rich model of the Universe is one which is as poor as possible in hypotheses.” Is there one student in a hundred who can make any sense out of this statement? Though the phrase “impoverishment of imagination” may be outrageous, there is nothing startling or even unusual about the idea contained in this quotation. Every practicing scientists understands what Bronowski is saying. Yet it is kept a secret from out students. It should be revealed. In addition to having each science course include a serious historical dimension, I would propose that every school—elementary through college—offer and require a course in the philosophy of science. Such a course should consider the language of science. Such a course should consider the language of science, the nature of scientific proof, the source of scientific hypotheses, the role of imagination, the conditions of experimentation, and especially the vale of error and disproof. Many people still believe that what makes a statement scientific is that it can be verified. In fact, exactly the opposite is the case: What separates scientific statements from nonscientific statements is that the former can be subjected to the test of falsifiability. What makes science possible is not our ability to recognize “truth” but our ability to recognize falsehood. #RandolphHarris 14 of 21

What such a course would try to get at the notion that science is not pharmacy or technology or magic tricks but a special way of employing human intelligence. It would be important for student to learn that one becomes scientific not by donning a white coat (which is what television teaches) but by practicing a set of canons of thought, many of which have to do with the disciplined use of language. Science involves a method of employing language that is accessible to everyone. The ascent of humanity has rested largely on that. Not all games have dominant strategies, even for one player. In fact, dominance is the exception rather than the rule. Although the presence of a dominant strategy leads to very simple rules for action, these rules are inapplicable to many actual games. Other principles must then be brought into action. Just as a dominant strategy is uniformly better than every other strategy, a dominated strategy is uniformly worse than some other strategy. Just as you choose your dominant strategy if you have one, and can be sure that your rival will choose his if he has one, you should avoid your dominated strategies if you have any, and can be sure that your rival will avoid his, if he has any. If you have just two alternative strategies, and one of them is dominated, then the other must be dominant. Therefore examples of avoiding dominated strategies that are genuinely different from those choosing dominant strategies must be based on games in which at least one side has at least three strategies. #RandolphHarris 15 of 21

Today, as the super-symbolic economy develops, a new work regimen is once more supplanting an old one. In our remaining smokestack factories and offices, conditions today are still largely the same as they were decades ago. Around the World, and especially in the newly industrializing nations, hundreds of millions of workers are still chained to a Second Wave industrial discipline. And today, too, exactly as in the past, we still see employers underestimating the revolution taking place around them. They introduce computers and other advances, Third Wave technologies—but attempt to retain yesterday’s Second Wave work rules and power relationships. Trying to turn their employees into “electronic proles,” as George Orwell might have put it, they count keystrokes, monitor breaks, and listen on employee phone calls. They attempt to control the most minute details of the work process. These methods, characteristic of industrial work, are especially prevalent in the processing of insurance claim forms and routine data entry in other business. However, they can also be applied to higher-level work. According to a report by the U.S.A. Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, they are “increasingly being directed to more skilled technical, professional and managerial positions. The jobs of commodities broker, computer programmer and bank loan officer could lend themselves to monitoring. How long such methods will pay off, however, remains doubtful, for the work rules of the past contradict the new possibilities brought by advanced technology. #RandolphHarris 16 of 21

Wherever we see radical new technology and on an old work system, it is likely that the technology is misapplied and its real advantages wasted. History has shown repeatedly that truly advanced technologies require truly advanced work methods and organization. Employers today who still think they need electronic proles resemble those reactionary ironmasters and textile-mill owners who thought they could run the new stream-drive factories with methods designed for ox power. They either quickly corrected their mistake or were driven out of business by smarter competitors who learned out to reorganize the work process itself, matching the work regimen to the most advanced technologies of the time. Today in thousands of workplaces, from auto plants to offices, the smart companies are experimenting with, or actually exploiting, the new regimen. Its key characteristic is a changed attitude toward both knowledge and power. Today’s World economy is economically unrecognizable. Global output soared from $1.37 trillion in 1960 to $85.24 trillion U.S. dollars in 2019. And America’s role in the international money economy has changed dramatically. As Europe, China, and other regions have recovered over the years, they have become powerful competitors. As a result, the United States of America, instead of turning out 30 percent of the global output in the early 1950s, has seen its share drop to 21.5 percent. America commands far less of the global economy than it once did. The United States of America has been in relative decline for half century. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21

Yet, if we look in absolute terms, we find a very different picture. From the 1960s, America’s absolute wealth—admittedly measures in conventional and inadequate economic metrics—has soared. The roughly $1.37 trillion it produced in 1960 (in adjusted dollars) had ballooned $13.8 trillion in 2022. Through figures on the contribution of knowledge-based technologies, processes, organization and culture are “soft” and controversial, the United States of America could not have sustained its competitive position in the World—militarily as well as economically—if it had remained solely an industrial power. Now would it face the backlash and incomprehension that confronts it today. By increasing the role of knowledge in business and the economy, the United States of America is simultaneously underlining the importance of culture and, implicitly, calling attention to the fact that some cultures are more conducive to productivity than others. And that takes us to a related accusation against the United States of America—globalization brings different cultures into closer and sometimes hostile contact. Moreover, people everywhere are complaining about homogenization—that everywhere one goes one sees that same Wal-Marts, the same McDonald’ses, the same Hollywood films and so on. Is this just American forcing its way down everyone’s throat, as its critics insist? Or is something else happening here? #RandolphHarris 17 of 21

The answer, as we have seen, is that there are two Americas. It is yesterday’s mass-production America, not tomorrow’s de-massified America, that we see reflected in the drive toward homogeneity. Mass production, as we have noted, provides economies of scale to those who make or sell the same one-size-fits-all product over and over again, with as little change as possible. The reason is that altering a traditional assembly-line product is inordinately expensive. Thousands of workers may be forced to stand around and wait as the line is retooled—while the clock ticks and overhead costs continue to pile up. By contrast, to chance a product on a “smart” assembly line may require little more than a few new lines of software code. All the workers may have to do is push a button. The result has been to make variety economical, as seen in the tremendous diversity of brands, types, models, sizes and materials on store shelves. In short, as the costs of customization decline toward zero, and as people become more individuated, the drive toward uniformity will be replaced by its opposite—increasing diversity. Because waves of change overlap and, even in the United States of America, the revolutionary wealthy system is not yet fully developed, the United States of America still exports and advertises mass products and services. However, increasingly it is shifting to mass customization on its way to fully de-massified output designed for increasingly individual customers. Once upon a time a coffee shop offered only one or two choices. Starbucks outlets may look homogeneous, but they now provide customizers with dozens of possible blends and varieties. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21

Nike allows online customers to design their own sneakers, choosing among thousands of colour combination and adding their name or other words to the design. Enjoy M&Ms? You can now go online and put a short phrase on one side of your candy’s shell. Even the staid U.S.A. Post Office has experimented with allowing customers to put their own choice of a picture on the stamps they purchase—their baby’s face, for example. All these are halting steps toward truly personalized production—the opposite of the homogenization offered by industrial-era companies. A particularly interesting case is that of Spider-Man. When the America comic book based on that superhero was licensed for publication in India, the central characters and their backgrounds were altered to accommodate the religious sensitivities of Indian audiences. The hero was renamed so that Peter Parker the New York become Pavire Prabhkar of Mumbai. However, the more important change lay in the explanation of how Pavitr supposedly got his superhuman powers. While in the American version Peter’s capacities are enhanced by radio-active means, in India he is super-empowered by religious means. The hero gets his power from a yogi who performs a ritual on him…and the villain is a demon from the Hindu pantheon of gods. In short, cultural homogenization is the message of a fast-fading, mass production in America. #RandolphHarris 19 of 21

Heterogeneity, de-massification and personalization are the messages of a fast-rising new America that both needs and breeds diversity. And not just in goods and comic books. Third Wave media also improve access to an endless diversity of ideas, values, lifestyles and points of view, including every conceivable political ideology and cultural variant. That is why China, for example, despites its twin-track strategy, is still censoring and manipulating what most of its citizens can receive on the Internet. The serious question today is not how much homogeneity the United States of America suppress. The United States of America may currently be the World’s sole superpower. However, it faces constraints and complexities no previous superpower confronted—or imagined. Acting in its own perceived—and often mis perceived—self-interest, the United States of America has, with the rise of revolutionary wealth, helped form a new, multi-level global order very different from the one its last-generation leaders anticipated. Start with the World’s new, unseen and unprecedented game of games. The future of revolutionary wealth in our pockets and on the planet will be determined not just by the interplay of markets. Who gets what and who makes what have never, except occasionally in theory, been determined by markets alone. Wealth everywhere is shaped by power, culture, politics and the state. At the World level in recent centuries, nations have been the primary actors, but that may change. #RandolphHarris 20 of 21

Near the surface of the Earth, there is as much room underground as there is above it. This is usually ignored, because the room is full of dirt, rock, pressurized water, and the like. Digging is expensive. Digging long, deep tunnels is even more expensive. This expense, however, is mostly in the cost of equipment, materials, and energy. Tunneling machines are in wide use today, and molecular manufacturing can make them more efficient and less expensive. The energy to operate them will be no great problem, and smart materials can line tunnels as fast as they are dug, with little or no labour. Nanotechnology will open the lower frontier. With a little care, the environmental impact of a deep tunnel can be trivial. Instead of a solid rock far below the surface, there is rock with a sealed tunnel running through it. Nothing nearby need be disturbed. Tunnels avoid both the aesthetic impact of a sky full of noisy aircraft and the environmental impact of paving strips of landscape.  This will make them less expensive than roads, and they can, if desired, be more common than roads in the developed World today. They will even permit faster transportation. Japan and Germy are actively developing magnetic trains, like those in the Desert Rose scenario. These avoid the limitations of steel wheels on steel rails by using magnetic forces to “fly” the train along a special track. Magnetic forces to “fly” the train along a special track. Magnetic trains can reach aircraft speeds at ground level. On long runs through evacuated tunnels, they can reach spacecraft speeds, traveling global substantial acceleration).  Systems like this can give “taking the subway” a new meaning. Local transformation would be at fast automotive speeds, but long-distance transportation would be faster than the Concorde. With superconducting electrical systems, fast subways would be more energy-efficient than today’s slow mass transit. #RandolphHarris 21 of 21

Cresleigh Homes

There’s nothing like a move-in ready home! When you choose a homesite  #PlumasRanch Riverside, get ready to enjoy the best of this #CresleighHome development.

Not only does these homes maximize its single story space, it also sits squarely on one of the last cul-de-sac addresses in the neighborhood. It’s also adjacent to an orchard, and includes an upgraded wrought iron fence.

Many homes are ready for you! Give our office a call to take a 👀 peek: 530-870-8748. https://cresleigh.com/cresleigh-meadows-at-plumas-ranch/

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