Monday morning is the moment when most of the working world goes through the 'oh shit' rigamarole and gets started on the make work project of the week. Marching orders pass down amongst the ranks and people approach the work as gotta get it done. That there is no urgency never strikes us; if it takes more time than a week to do the work, so be it.
Generally by Wednesday, the work is all done. The middle of the day on Wednesday is the apex of the week - the target points for finishing are all laid out and suddenly next weekend is in sight. That the seven day treadmill is always five on and two off is a simple complexity that can always be counted on. The capitalist system does not allow change readily.
I tried to buck that system once. I was working at a zoo designing math and science programs for teenage youth. Since school covered my subjects on weekdays, i arranged to have weekend science at the zoo - monitoring water quality, animal health and getting to meet the kids. I had Monday and Tuesday scheduled off - but dang if the zoo management didn't keep scheduling mandatory meetings to keep me there on days off too. Their system did not work for me.
So the only thing to do is to leave the system and strike out toward a new system - that is the Weigh. The most difficult part to deal with, is that people in the system cannot see any other system and do not let you do your own thing. They keep pushing you back into their system by the inflexibility of getting anything done. The realization is - in their system, you are not supposed to get anything done. The system operates by churning itself. So in order to not conform, one must drop out (or drop acid). When i get told, the flow goes in one ear and out the other. No telling.
One of the problems with all systems is that work takes place upon the system, The people who work the system for their own benefit have a large advantage over the people who are worked by the system. Not having the group ethic means that they can parse niches to get what they want. That action here causes an effect there is completely lost - if it works for me, then it works and i do it. I believe that Ayn Rand saw this as the virtue of selfishness. All for one and one for one.
To some extent, that form works if everyone plays it as such. Unfortunately, the system wonks have embedded myths within that keep individuals separated from each other - by competition for limited resources. That all of everything was given freely originally is not a concern - ownership and payment are the capital of the system. Ooh the games they play to keep the wool in everyone's eyes. It requires multiple perspectives to sort it all out - monoculture leads to group-think leads to continuance of this failed system rather than the new weigh.
History is written in the short term by the people that won the last battle. The cost of getting the word out was limited to those who could afford to publish their work. The gatekeepers placed a huge barrier in front of the collective information source - the education system. In order to indoctrinate everybody to the same orientation, the schools controlled the access to information. Critical thinking was restricted to only certain quadrants and the answers to the questions were known to the teacher before the student was even in the information loop.
To break this pattern requires research directed learning. As a scientist, i use this train of thought to investigate whether the myth holds true or not. The myth is the collection of stories that we are told to keep us independent of each other - spinning our wheels alone rather than building to a scale that can have an effect. We are taught to play our hand close to the vest and to keep good information to ourselves for future advantage in working the system. It is time to question our pattern of questioning and belief. A teacher cannot validly teach, if not learning; while a learner is better formed in his weigh by teaching.
Let's start by asking, who am I? Where did i come from? We are the collection of our individual experiences, mitigated by interaction with other people and their experiences. When something happens to us alone as an individual, we can feel the experience for what it is and interpret it though our eyes and our past. We can selectively remember the parts we like, to embellish, and forget the parts that didn't make a note. We can sometimes even question whether it really happened.
When a second person shares our experience, then we can relate to each other and discuss what happened from the difference of perspectives. We come up with the story that consistently explains what we both saw and felt, in context to the happening with respect to each other. Have you ever had somebody deny an experience that you shared in common? The immediate feeling is betrayal. But there are some things that happen off-time - and two can share and keep a secret, so to speak.
When three or more people occupy the space to witness an event, the context that they take away is part of something that is beyond the individual to frame. The record of what happened is set in a different form, where the witnessing of the happening ensures that the happening did in fact happen. Yet just like the game of telephone, each person has a part of the whole but not the entire whole and little things didn't all get noticed by everyone along the way. The myth grows different from what actually happened.
Now consider this query - if things are not observed, do they happen? The Akashic Records, held in trust by the cetaceans, have a complete description of everything that has happened on this time line - via an independent observer. How is this possible? If we consider a holographic universe, where every decision that is made has a significance, then each choice that we make leads to a different outcome in the possibilities over time. Let's imagine that all the variables are set that the key decision comes down to one individual making a true decision.
What if - the decision gets made both ways and two universes are set off in different scales to where they can both run concurrently without ever having to bump into itself? If the decision turns out to be not critical, then the two timelines merge back later and nothing changes. If the change is key - the new pattern is birthed and both scenarios work themselves out on separate timelines in different dimensional universes.
At one point, i came up with a 13 concurrent world scenario within a grid of 64. My guess is that somebody digging thru the zone archives could find this information. Permutations of two and three lead to different segmentation of similar grids. It is all about simplification through symmetry. Small number ratios are a chemical phenomena. To reset a group to one changes the fractal scale of the order, and hence the fractal scale of the chaos. Order and chaos are yin and yang and neither can be absolute. Similar light and dark, black and white, strange and charmed.
Enough writing - to Unity Space to work this through. Namaste' ... doc