The pairwise relationships between the five insights provide context for understanding and handling age-old challenges, in entirely new ways.

Governance

Cybernetics of Democracy

This is a play on words, because "cybernetics" means roughly "science of governance" or "science of governability". The basic point that cybernetics has in store for us is that to be viable (or "sustainable"; Wiener uses the technical keyword "homeostasis", which is elegant and more to the point), a system must have some requisite structure ("communication and control" or "feedback and control")—which our governance systems as a rule don't have. Various subtleties or 'spices' are added by placing this conversation in the context of the power structure insight (where the issue of systemic structure is linked with the issue of power) and the collective mind insight (where we see that our communication is profoundly dysfunctional—even though the new media were created to give us the kind of communication we need.

The springboard story here might be about Jørgen Randers and his observation, after 40 years of frontier experience, that "we need a paradigm shift in governance". The Wiener–Jantsch–Reagan thread from the The Paradigm Strategy poster will provide both the big picture and the nuances.

Yes, we really need new 'headlights'!

Culture

Ludens: A Brief History of Modernity

While we may be biologically equipped to evolve as the homo sapiens, we have in recent decades devolved to become the homo ludens—who instead of seeking knowledge to understand the world, shuns understanding and adapts by simply learning the rules of the 'game' and 'playing' competitively. By placing this conversation in the context of the collective mind insight (which tells us that we cannot really see through the complexities of our world, when we look at it 'in the light of a candle') and the socialized reality insight (which tells us that while renegade socialization has always been a core cultural issues, we have for interesting reasons surrendered our cultural defenses to the power structure), we provide both for simple understanding of the homo ludens phenomenon, and for all the colorful subtleties.

The Nietzsche–Ehrlich–Giddens thread provides a good entry point into this theme (see it discussed briefly here).

Science

Transdisciplinarity—Future Science

<p>The Transdisciplinarity and the Future of Science conversation combines the socialized reality insight and the narrow frame insight.

This is where the academic self-reflective dialog in front of the mirror takes place. Can science step through the mirror—and guide our society along a new evolutionary course?

Future education

The Zero to One—The Future of Education conversation is in the context of the narrow frame insight and the convenience paradox insight.

In that context we may see why, as Ken Robinson pointed out, "education kills creativity": Education has evolved as a way to socialize people to think and act within the narrow frame.

The title of this conversation is borrowed from Peter Thiel's book, where it's intended to point to a certain kind of creativity. We know all about taking things that already exist from one to two, and to three and up to one hundred and beyond. What we need is the capability to conceive of and create things that do not yet exist.

Can we free education from its role of socializing people into a worldview, and re-conceive it to have "human development" as goal?

Future business

The Co-opt Wall Street—the Future of Business conversation takes place in the context provided by the Convenience Paradox insight and the Power Structure insight.

How can the holotopia overcome the existing power structure? No conflict is needed; we can co-opt the powerful!

The key is to see that the power of the powerful is an illusory one—only borrowed from the power structure, as compensation for services. The price paid is of course wholeness—both personal and systemic. It is the prerogative of power structure to make us pursue "power" against our interests.

The Adbusters left us a useful keyword, "decooling"; a decooling of our popular notions of success and power that is ready to take shape, in the context of those mentioned two insights.

Future politics

The Collaboration—the Future of Politics conversation takes place in the context of the power structure insight and the socialized reality insight.

Alfred Nobel had the right idea: Empower the creative people, and the humanity's problems will naturally be solved. But when applied to the cause of peace, our creativity has largely been restricted to palliative approaches (resolving specific conflicts and improving specific situations).

What would it take to really put an end to war—once and for all? And to turn political strife into collaboration?

Future knowledge

What might be the largest possible contribution to human knowledge? We converse about this theme in the context of the collective mind insight and the narrow frame insight.

An academic researcher may require uncommon courage to even consider the possibility that the great work she has published may have no social impact whatsoever—because the structure of our collective mind prevents impact. In what way will our knowledge and our knowledge work need to change?

It is not difficult to see why, in such circumstances, the systemic contributions to knowledge (improvements of the processes and systems by which knowledge is handled in our society) are likely to be distinctly larger than any specific ones. And that an even larger contributions will be the ones that innovate the systems and processes by which those systemic solutions are updated, and allowed to evolve further.

This conversation is about our knowledge federation proposal.

Future religion

The Liberation—The Future of Religion conversation has the Socialized Reality insight and the Convenience Paradox insight as context.

In traditional cultures, religion served to connect each person to a purpose, and people together into a community. Can a completely different idea of religion play a similar role in this time?

Can we put an end to religion-inspired hatred, terrorism and conflict—by evolving religion further?

Future art

The Future Art conversation takes place in the context of the Narrow Frame insight and the Power Structure insight.

Art has always been an instrument of cultural reproduction; and on the forefront of change. When Duchamp exhibited the urinal, he challenged the traditional conception of art. What comes next? What will art need to be like, in a world where our task is no longer to challenge the tradition—but to create an order of things that makes us whole?

Future happiness

The One to Infinity—The Future of Happiness conversation combines the Convenience Paradox insight and the Collective Mind insight.

All we know about happiness is in the interval between zero (complete misery) and one ("normal" happiness); but what about the rest?

This conversation is about the humanity's best kept secret: There are realms of thriving and fulfillment, beyond what we've experienced, or know about.

But the opportunity to develop them comes with a challenge—we must develop ways to federate the missing knowledge.

Could this be an answer to Peccei's call to action— to "find a way to change course"?