I can only think in simple concepts and I know that the balance I seek is somewhere between boredom and frustration. In one I experience too little change and in the other too much. I am a kind of porridge just right kind of guy. How hot you like it, is of course a personal preference.

As day follows night you will always have rulers. Try to make good out of bad situation.
Anarchy is war.

I think you are looking for the religious section.

The word you are looking for is homeostasis.

Why doesn't that person's justified true belief qualify as knowledge? — Bartricks

Knowledge should work all of the time, not some of the time.

(Caveat) Knowledge should always be considered within a certain frame of reference. Newton's law of motion is true when objects move at a certain fixed speed and under a certain gravitation pull.. Einstein showed Newtons law of motion do not hold when objects speed up/slow down or experience less or more gravity.

Governments are systems for allowing bullying and exploitation. — iolo

I live in a plural democracy. I have the ability to vote for who I believe best represents my values.

‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’

Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947

Stability is a logically necessary property of everything since everything either is trying to change its current state or isin't. Therefore everything is trying to achieve stability since instability means that one is trying to change its current state. Therefore everything has a goal of achieving its own personal stability by logical necessity. — Qmeri

I think what you are trying to articulate is 'balance'. If we consider all living things to be like tightrope walkers or cyclists. Without (stability/balance) they topple over. Living things have to balance the output of energy to the input of energy. Too little food/light/warmth...we die. And too much is also very unhealthy. In all things we seek balance: rest and work, certainty - uncertainty. I often return to this theme of yin/yang in all living things.

How much you suffer depends on your willingness to suffer.
How much you suffer depends on your awareness of your suffering.

I can give you many examples, but I consider these statements to be self-evident.

This is the problem. That you desire to reduce your desires will guarantee you fail. — khaled

Desiring the alleviation from suffering is a necessary precursor to enlightenment.
Once you (truly) realize, desire is the cause of (much of) your suffering, this knowledge will help you lose your desire for these things.
Buddhism is realization. Buddhism is enlightenment.

Most people are not doing the job they want but the job that pays for the things they want.

Fear of failure seldom leads to succes.

That’s circular. — Possibility

No it is not circular. As a young child I lived in a very cold house (ice on the inside of the windows). We had no central heating, just an open fireplace in the living room. I constantly had a cold in the winter. However it didn't bothered me all that much because I thought that this was perfectly normal. Now I live in a centrally heated home but whenever I am anywhere where it is cold I feel miserable. Knowledge has a huge influence on perception.

life: a replicating chemical reaction. — ovdtogt

This definition still holds. It is just that it concerns a special kind of chemical reaction: namely the synthesizing of inorganic to what we consider to be 'organic' compounds. And maybe I should have said self-replicating instead of replicating.

if I am driven by a desire to own a Porsche, how does that make me do what I want?
If I am driven by my fear of failure, how does that make me get what I want?

and excludes things like fire, or crystals — Pfhorrest

Oxidation is not life. Crystals are not life.
Apart from chemists, only life has the ability to incorporate inorganic carbon compounds into 'organic' compounds through a network of processes and only life is able to make a replicate copy of this 'network of processes'.

Mules can't reproduce, for example, but they're still alive. — Pfhorrest

Everything we consider to be alive has been created through replication even though they themselves may be unable to sexually reproduce. Even your mule. No living cell (with or without an ability to reproduce) has been created 'artificially'.

And oxidation (fire) is not replication.

The loss of that many flowers would be devastating. — NOS4A2

True. Scientific research has had a devastating effect on nature.

At least I find new logically proven mathematical theories quite reliable even before they are confirmed empirically — Qmeri

I totally agree with you there. Mathematics is logic in it's most purest form and has made many physical discoveries only proven correct many years later (Einsteins relativity theory, gravity waves, black holes) were all discovered through mathematics. And calling a mathematical hypothesis religion is of course very extreme. I just like defining the boundaries. As you said 'black and white' are the opposite extremes and the colors of the rainbow are the permutations of light in between.

Yes. You would think we would have figured out how to create a basic cell by now. One that is able to synthesize organic molecules.

Replication is not a necessary feature of life — Pfhorrest

Show me one life form that has come into existence without replication. The essence of life has to be that it can produce an (almost) identical copy of itself.

As long as you don't destroy the last flower on earth, I don't see the problem.

O Humans suffer more because they know they suffer.

Logic+empricism was invented way before science with mixed results. — Qmeri

Of course many things have helped towards the advancement of science. Just consider the printing press and the science and application of optics which gave us the microscope and telescope. Optics gave us the enlightenment in art and science.

Even mathematics has to be empirically proven to be correct. Many discoveries where first done mathematically and only years later proven to be accurate. String theory will remain in the sphere of religion until someone is able to empirically prove it as was the case with gravity waves until recently.

I think expecting 7 billion people to live on this planet ( with 2 billion more to come) and live sustainable in balance with the rest of the ecology might be a bridge too far.

Anarchy is not an end in itself, it is a means to an end. Anarchy is the civil disobedience in an autocratic political system in order to achieve a (more) plural democracy.

Simple machines include things as elementary as a wedge — Pfhorrest

The problem is not the wedge. How this wedge was able to start making copies of itself is the problem.

oversimplification. — TheMadFool

I like to start with an (over)simplification that we can agree on and then work our way up from there. Lets see if can agree on the 'basics'.

We know life at it most basic level can be defined as a chemical process and then speculate how 'life' might have conceivably evolved from there.

The Limitations of Logic

Logic without empiricism is Religion. Logic with empiricism is Science.

Without climate change we would never have evolved as a species. From the oxygen producing bacteria to a meteorite crashing into the surface of the earth. Our intelligence will secure our survival as a species.

The fact society operates as it does is testament that we are incapable of doing as we want. We are driven by our fears and desires and they more or less dictate how we behave.

The Op is "Anarchy is Stupid'

The essence of Anarchy concerns dis-obeying. Perhaps you should just restrict your thoughts on that.

Freedom entails choices. The more choices you have, the more freedom you have. — Harry Hindu

Totally agree with you there. No such thing as absolute freedom. The more choices (options) you have the more freedom you have. This is also the reason a lot of people are so dissatisfied with life. They see other people who have more freedom (choices) in life than they do, not realizing that being free from loneliness, fear, pain, hunger, and the other necessities for survival is all that is required for a 'good' life.

Contributing to suffering is not the same as causing suffering — Congau

If I dump my rubbish I am causing and contributing towards the pollution of the environment. Contributing merely means I am not alone in exhibiting this behaviour.

You are constantly obeying rules. You are just not aware of it because you agree with most of them. You have been pre-conditioned by your parents and teachers to obey societies rules without questioning them.

Observe, obey oh yes. let us quibble about semantics. Observe is what I do when I see 2 people arguing.

Why should I obey anyone? — iolo

You don't know why you should obey the rules (not made by you) that regulate traffic or society?

I wonder what the world would look like if everyone did what they wanted? Most people just do what they believe they have to most of the time.

Change in of itself is meaningless as it has to be detected by someone. — Wittgenstein

Do you believe anything exists without a (sub)conscious observer?
Does time, space and matter a priori require the existence of life?

No it isn’t. — Possibility

Clever...

But an impetus that would underly both the chemical reactions and the resultant replicating system is the clincher. — Possibility

I would think a degree of separation of a chemical process from it's surrounding would be a fairly necessary prerogative. The 'system' would need to develop a certain amount of control over the process at a fairly early stage.