I wonder if the reason why you can't find a list of attributes for the best possible civilisation is because it depends on the attributes of the specific individuals within it. There is the question of best possible governments, forms of social order and general rules, but a lot comes down to the people in power, and other individuals. It does seem that there have been so many problems in civilisation, and utopia has never been achieved, but this may come down to human nature, and conflicts within social groups.

Thank you for your reply. I know it varies based on the individual which is why I included 'in your opinion' in the title. I was curious what other peoples thoughts were on the subject.

@RoadWarrior9
Your first two are very similiar to what I have,except I'm not a recluse,but a Family man to the core.

I would have a third which is Courage. The courage to compete with oneself and to grow,nurture and be creative.

Welcome to the forum, and I am sure you will get replies which are more optimistic. Your question does give scope to think about what works and what does not. I think that the 4 suggestions you make are important, especially free health care. I live in England, where there is a welfare state, even though there are many people in poverty, but I do believe that it is important to have a system to prevent people being left in dire poverty. I think that housing is also essential. But, so much comes down to the social dynamics.

So I thought I would ask here and see if anyone has any thoughts on what rules or attributes you would like to see in the civilization you participate in. — RoadWarrior9

I'll take a swing at it:

• Adequate healthcare, education, security, nutrition, housing, work, community, and opportunity for everyone
• Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness
• No reruns of "Two and a Half Men"
• Deport Dr. Phil.... to Australia

I'm serious about the first two.

No taxes
Free quality health care for everyone — RoadWarrior9

Please explain how you get free healthcare with no taxes.

Humans have by and large viewed and treated the non-human (plants, trees, animals, rivers, seas, the very earth itself) as a resource, erroneously as infinite and to be exploited at will with no to little cost - the slave principle. Civilizations were born and sustained on this maxim.

The slave principle continues to be applied though it's way past its expiry date and hence the clear and present danger of ecological collapse that'll sound the death knell for civilization as we know it. The solution: The partners principle - quid pro quo, nature takes care of you and you take care of nature.

Civilization, for sure, faces other threats such as AI takeover, nuclear war, to name a few but they all appear to be easily solvable if only we adopt the partners principle.

• No taxes
• Free quality health care for everyone

Please explain how you get free healthcare with no taxes.

@T Clark

I had mentioned in the second paragraph not to worry about the "how". In my mind this is a problem definition, not a problem solution phase. I typically start with the 100% best goal possible and if that is not feasible then back off until you find something practical.

@T Clark
Thanks for the input. You included quite a bit of information in your first two items. I already included what I would like for health care. My thoughts on some of your other items:

Work and Opportunity

• 100% employment opportunities
• All jobs are family wage jobs

Education

• Free K-12 education (Not paid for by taxes)
• Paid higher education. Students pay would be based on grades, performance, civilization needs for that type of degree or training etc.

Housing is kind of complicated - my thoughts on it are below. The section on cities includes housing:

• Allow civilization to focus on desired projects rather than 'for profit' projects. When I use the word 'maximize' below this means remove all artificial limitations that prevent desired outcomes and move the limit to physical limitations like lack or resources or labor, i.e. a physical constraint. Example:
  
  • Maximize ability to build modern new cities including continually improving them using the best current technology. This includes demolishing and recycling our current and old cities.

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness

- This falls under freedom in my mind.

I had not thought about security or nutrition. Not sure what you are looking for with community. On second thought, security would be covered by the laws of freedom.

I think I came at this from a bit different direction than you did. I don't necessarily think that a government or society should provide all the things I identified. It's the other way around. We can't call our society a good one if a significant number of people don't have the benefits I listed. If everyone can live a safe, healthy, secure life with enough good food and a decent place to live, what does it matter what specific policies lead to that outcome? If people are living good lives, what difference does it make if there are taxes?

I think that you are really talking more about the ideals for civilisation because if, for example, you are talking about free health care, but with no taxes we are talking about ideals. This is not intended as a criticism of your thread, I just think that for your thread discussion to work you need to think about the difference between ideals and practice. I am idealistic myself, but I try to balance this with practical living. Also, I do think that any ideas about civilisation have to take into human weaknesses unfortunately. If people had the thoughts of others in mind most of the time it would be a very different world indeed.

What do you mean by civilization ? The possible attributes for civilization would belimited by the definition of civilization. If for example social stratification is part of what you consider civilization, then total equality would not be possible, even though some may consider equality to be a feature of the best civilization.

If we are talking hypotheticals anyways, the ability to never have been born into the society in the first place. True freedom right there. Anything else posing as freedom is absolute bullshit. If you say that is impossible, then you already have your answer for the possibility of a better civilization.

@Hello Human
Definitions are fun. Oddly enough I stumbled across a mathematical definition of the word Civilization. Some of her/his assumptions may need to be defined better but it was an interesting read. I had not mentioned equality except with respect to job and education opportunities.

@schopenhauer1
I'm not quite sure what your point is. My high level statement on freedom was for beings that must work together in some type of civilization so they can achieve more that they could alone. This requires some limitations on freedom as far as I know and I tried to maximize it as much as possible within those limitations.

My "it's not as simple as that" reply would be that everyone who answers that question is a product, one way or another, of the society they were born into. We shouldn't assume that people's ideas of a perfect society are unanchored from their own society.

That said, I'd say the following:

1. Communities: we are social animals and, while there's obviously always exceptions, I think that individualism is a prime example of how our culture has worked against us for the benefit of the few. Investment in local resources and shared utilities would help this. It might sound horrifying to our individualist selves, but I think people raised in that environment would be happier, less stressed, and more socially conscious.
2. Universal Basic Income: I think this is owed. You cannot walk into a field and hunt an animal to eat. You instead have to pay a guy to give it to you. Money equal to a living wage is therefore an essential, not a perk, and all because of nothing less than a historic great theft of lands from the people who lived on them to a minority of (let's be honest) slave owners. UBI seems like a good way of compensating people for that crime. It would appeal to our egalitarianism (once other counter-empathetic measures are eliminated), eliminate poverty, make welfare administration much less costly, reduce crime significantly, etc;
3. Modernised democracy: It strikes me as odd that we have social media rife with outrage monkeys spitting about one political story or another, but absolutely no systematic means of overseeing government on our phones. Someone needs to get on this. In most cases, voters are better people than politicians, and now we're technologically in a good place, I think more democracy is a good idea. (However there are some things, like climate change, which should not be in the hands of voters.)
4. Integrated recruitment: Get rid of redundancy payouts and jobseekers' allowances, instead make recruitment the joint responsibility of the individual, their employer, and the state. When you leave school/college/university, the state would have a duty to find you good employment and, if it cannot do so in the private sector, it should do so in the public sector. For people with disabilities, or carers or parents, or people close to retirement age, this should be entirely optional on the individual's part. Once in employment, if the individual wishes to leave for something other than e.g. parenthood or caregiving, they have to have another job to go to to revert back to UBI. If an employer wishes to let someone go, they have to pay their wages until they, along with the state, have found the employee equivalent employment elsewhere. Education should be considered as good as employment.
5. Scientific justice: The current system, wherein two people tell contradicting, misleading stories to a bunch of randomers who then, on the basis of those stories being backed up by contradictory, misleading witnesses and experts picked by the two storytellers, have to decide which story is true, is rubbish. We need to excise outdated practices and embrace scientific approaches.
6. Therapeutic custodial sentences: Prisons don't work. Most of the people in them have mental health problems. Throw it away and replace it with a system designed around therapy, with the inmate's access to society dictated by their ability to cope with it, not by their crime or a sentence.

That's enough to be getting along with.

I normally have a blanket ban on 'I agree' type posts (I'm a stingy bastard when it comes to praise), but have to say you've selected an excellent set of principles and reasons for them.

Money equal to a living wage is therefore an essential, not a perk, and all because of nothing less than a historic great theft of lands from the people who lived on them to a minority of (let's be honest) slave owners. — Kenosha Kid

and...

Prisons don't work. Most of the people in them have mental health problems. Throw it away and replace it with a system designed around therapy, with the inmate's access to society dictated by their ability to cope with it, not by their crime or a sentence. — Kenosha Kid

...particularly.

In most cases, voters are better people than politicians, and now we're technologically in a good place, I think more democracy is a good idea. — Kenosha Kid

One idea I floated once was continual mandate requirements. There's no elections anymore, the government in power remains in power until any time its mandate drops below 50%. We each have an app by which we can remove our mandate at any time. The idea is to both increase democratic involvement, but avoid the lack of long-term strategic policymaking that regular elections promote. Governments would also be more wary of doing unpopular stuff mid-term. Possibly might bring about daily changes in government and be an absolute disaster, of course.

Integrated recruitment — Kenosha Kid

Brilliant idea, like UBI but for livelihoods.

---

So, to complete the set (for me), I'm going to add my own number 1, but a really contentious one.

1. Stop treating children like second class citizens. Children should have the same rights as adults. That means neither parents, teachers nor anyone else gets to tell them what they can and can't do any more than they would with an adult. Children are neither pets, nor dolls, nor slaves and should not be treated as such. Nor are they idiots who'll jump off a cliff if they're not told not to (Yes, I raised my own children this way, and yes, they're fine). At the risk of inciting the hatred of every parent here, if you think your kids are likely to do something monumentally stupid if left without instruction you should ask yourself where they got the idea from.

There. That should do.

So I thought I would ask here and see if anyone has any thoughts on what rules or attributes you would like to see in the civilization you participate in. — RoadWarrior9

Good food.


Think on it for a bit. Access to fresh and wholesome food is indicative of environmental health. A varied menu indicates not just wealth, but also social cohesion as those many national dishes get mixed and matched. Good food need slow cooking, which in turn means time for talking with friends and building relationships. A healthy diet means a healthy populace. The list goes on.

Judge the quality of a civilisation by it's kitchen.

This can be a complicated subject to fully define as it applies to beings but the basic idea is: You can do any thing you want as long as you do not interfere with someone else's freedom.

Unfortunately there are people who interfere with my freedom by undermining the authority of the party on whose stable and firm government all our freedoms depend. Eliminating opponents of the governing party will be good for civilisation and promote true freedom. Special camps could be introduced for this purpose. Ta-da!

Among the best attributes a hypothetical human civilisation could exhibit is respect for science as an understanding of reality. If technology were applied as suggested by a scientific understanding of reality, the world could be a paradise. Assuming only sustainability as a value, a scientific understanding of reality implies a rational series of measures one could take that would allow for a prosperous long term future.

The key is harnessing vast heat energy from the interior of the planet to produce limitless clean electricity, to meet energy demand carbon free, and power hydrogen fuel production, carbon capture and storage, desalination and irrigation, and recycling. These would be globe spanning technologies applied on a monolithic scale powered by a virtually limitless source of energy, drawn upon lavishly to balance human welfare and environmental sustainability.

Hypothetically speaking, totally possible!

Judge the quality of a civilisation by it's kitchen. — Banno

Have you been to Italy? ;)

Judge the quality of a civilisation by it's kitchen.
— Banno

Have you been to Italy? ;) — Kenosha Kid

I live in Italy, and can confirm that they are better than the rest of us...

Sorry you've probably told me that and I've forgotten. I love Italy but it's madness!

It is different and thus appears chaotic, but an Italian in London may find it rather weird as well... A matter of perspective.

In terms of civilization and sophistication, I tend to agree with Banno that food is a good indicator. By that indicator, my own nation France has gone down the drain, with supermarkets now offering the same no-taste shit everywhere. Italy remains true to its agrarian roots; you can still find amazingly diverse and tasty vegetables and fruits everywhere here.

FORZA ITALIA!
(for this Sunday's euro final :-) )

French food was always overrated :P

I was in Venice recently and tourism has made it not a great place at all. I love Rome but honestly first time I'd be stuck in traffic I'd be attacking someone's windshield with a golf club. And every time I go to Napoli it's full of uncollected garbage and kind of stinks, though not as much as Berlin. Oh and the Mafia. And Berlusconi.

Always wanted to retire to Florence though. If the place was permanently on fire, it'd be worth it to walk past the Duomo campanile every day.

Where are you btw?

Mass tourism is the plague of beautiful places. But it tends to be confined to specific highlights of the city, typically representing about 10 % of any decently attractive place, what I call le pays des touristes. These places of high tourist density within a city are to be avoided, especially restaurants. The food in restaurants on Piazza Navona or near the Colliseo in Rome is disgusting. Why should they make any effort anyway? Their typical clients are only coming once in any case.

In Venice, it's very hard to find good food, you need to look for it in guides etc. because tourists are nearly everywhere and make up most of the actual population. Still, some popular neighborhoods in Venice still have traditional joints serving predominantly locals. Or you can spend a little more in the restaurant of a luxury hotel, where they have some incentive for serving good quality food.

My point about Italian food is broader, about the culture and economic structures, eg the strength of local farmers markets, short value chains with much produce diversity. The slow food movement is primarily Italian, and it's a whole philosophy of life, an economic and societal vision for a more sustainable agriculture and more equitable food markets.

In the culture, food is everywhere. People speak about it all the time, what produces they brought back from a passagiata, what they cooked yesterday, what their Mama used to cook. Said Mama is frequently checking on her grown up kids diet; some call daily to ask what their adult sons and daughters ate today. You cannot visit a medical doctor without her telling you, usually while writing your drug prescription, what sort of food you should avoid given the ailment you have.

My ideal civilization:

1. Limited Population!!!!!

2. Everyone invests part of their income to health care.

3. A nature based Religion (Non-Abrahamic!)
>>. I personally don’t feel we can function with everyone worshipping different gods (total secularism is better but tuff).

4. Everyone invests in RESEARCH (Science).

5. Limits on how much people can economically exploit others (Capitalism with reigns).

6. Euthanasia!! We are intelligent enough to die gracefully.. wink wink, nudge - Abrahamics would have someone suffer indefinitely because taking your own life puts you in Hell!! And Christians don’t understand how scary it is to live under Christian laws)

7.

@Trey

So how would you implement this civilisation?

What would be the case with people who disagreed with your laws?

Since there’s no uncharted/unclaimed frontiers to go claim, this would unfortunately be accomplished thru WAR (it’s no big deal relative to history).

As far as enforcement of this doctrine: well, individuals who fight for this new society would have a lot invested and probably would want to keep it. But they would be totally free to leave the society anytime

@Trey

And you say abrahamics are savage,yet you suggest war!

How many people did Christianity (Islam) kill? What are u saying Christianity isn’t war like?! Come on dude. I’m open to non-violence. Maybe some remote area could be claimed for this society. Whatever - the end result is same