Bevry, which means to liberate in Afrikaans, is an initiative to see everyone enabled to do what they love, share it with the world, and live well.
This is noble, however, it is not without its challenges. What to do about someone who wishes to harm others without consent? What about the trolly problem? What about tribes (be them conceptual; such as identity, or tangible; such as geographical) that face grave scarcity and conflicting ideals that prevent them from sharing?
To overcome these challenges, three pillars are critical:
- Philosophy: We must pursue things that are real, substantial, and meaningful. Too often people cling to axioms that are only superficially real, despite how comfortable they may be.
- Projects: We must not only solve problems, but must also realise their solutions. Too often people only talk about solutions, and not build them.
- Praxis: We must operate day to day as humans that are capable of revision. Too often people know what to do, however fail to enact the routines and practices to achieve their self-actualisation .
These pillars have led us to conclude, that the self-actualisation of the individual is the highest ideal , and that its manifestation is only possible when aggression is constrained to a proportional level of defence, such that consent is reasonably upheld . Otherwise power is sustained by “might makes right”, and not by reason. For power to reflect reason and not might, power must reside solely in each individual, as otherwise its delegation increases the distance between responsibility and accountability, with the restrictor and restricted becoming different entities. Power must exist in those capable of enforcing reason, which are individuals, without violating the rights of another; the delicacy of how to do this is the development of wisdom. Wisdom is what allows us to grow beyond the fear of vulnerability through the development the strength to survive exploitation and overcome.
So what happens when two people’s reasoning or current wisdom are at odds?
- Imposition: where either party can impose their worldview on the other, disregarding consent.
Revision: where both parties talk it out, and either reach:
- Reconciliation: where flaws in reasoning or application are spotted, and humility is deployed to adapt.
- Acceptance: where validation of reasoning may show that both approaches are valid, or indeterminate, in which case, they can go their own ways with acceptance where peace is possible, or with imposition where protection of one’s consent and from scarcity is necessary.
So how can we optimise for revision while reducing the risk of imposition ? We must get people talking and learning from each other, with the safety and inclination to do so. This progress is threefold:
- Alienated Wisdom: Initially, individuals often start by struggling alone and learning in isolation, often by novel experiences or with knowledge that risks ejecting them further from their existing social suspension systems, which cause individuals to retract their contributions from the world. These occasions require a superficial conformance to a group identity, of which the individual is of the group’s concern as far as the individual benefits the group - leaving the individual to believe the group is everything, and that they without the group, would be nothing, leading them to become a ghost in another’s shell.
- Cultic Wisdom: Eventually, the individual may find an outlet, where for the first time in their life, they can discuss openly the novel thoughts that have been repressing them for so long. This emboldens the individual, and allows them to function as part of a social unit, with the benefits of perceived protection, cohesion, and harmony which the group offers. They feel now as if they finally belong to a tribe. However, the ease of conformance manifests itself as a delegation of agency, capability, and independence. This leads lead to the group radicalising itself against different groups, which may be operating on the same or different, albeit equally real data sets that are merely interpreted differently due to the different sacred ideals of each group. Under this mode of wisdom, individuals become a cog in a tribal machine that creates shells for conforming ghosts, while alienating those who differ from the tribal ideology/worldview.
- Collaborative Wisdom: Finally, spaces arise in which the ideals are no longer sacred, instead they are demonstrable, questionable, and revisable. Harboured doubts find resolution, through a harmonious endeavour for truth (be it universal, or relative), and where actualisation is rewarded and not retributed.
Bevry as such, has become focused on building tools (such as software) and processes (such as communities and discussions) that grow the market share of collaborative wisdom.
This is a manifesto for Bevry to set its distinction and direction, and not for its members.
Bevry is a cooperative dedicated to seeing everyone enabled to do what they love, share it with the world, and live well.
We identified three pillars that are necessary to achieve that goal, they are:
#philosophy to identify the best rules that life can be played by.
#build to sustain ourselves through products (product = sustainable project) that improve on the rules that we play life by.
#praxis to assist each member in accomplishing their own self-actualisation.
Add your voice to this discussion forum, on an existing topic or make your own!
Introduce yourself to the forum:
Participate in our weekly study group!
Watch our previous meetings!
Join our discord server for realtime text and audio chat with fellow members!
Learn about the projects Bevry is working on!