An example of what "should" be happening is presented here, when it comes to developing technology gradually and expanding knowledge universally as
opposed to a series of documented or prescribed concepts.
Try to imagine this happening over hundreds of thousands of years, in perhaps an idealised world.
There is a big "jump" that we have not yet performed as a race, and that is to use our intuition to construct technology. At the moment all our
methodologies are regimented and spelled-out for us. I believe that this "next-level" technology is incomprehensible to us because it originated from
a creative process of trial-and-error. In that sense, it would be possible to construct machines far in advance of what we have with the technology
that is already available. To construct such items is to access the imagination and basically, take a large lump of parts and start to assemble
components without any real "direction" - eventually, as we learn to understand technology, and as this learning becomes innate, we develop a "second
nature" that allows us to transform our conceptual ideas, even our own thoughts into devices that operate.
For example, one might have mentally understood the distortion of time-space on their own terms, and if they have the capacity to experiment with
technology they might find a way to transpose their thoughts into a technological device that performs the desired function, where what we would call
"magic" and "science" meet together.
Such a device would be a "one-off" and impossible to duplicate, a "quantum leap" that really would make the device seemingly perform "magic".
To reverse-engineer such a device would be near impossible, and to ask its creator how it works would also be problematic because he would likely say
that it "just happened" after a lengthy process of experimentation and alteration.
This means doing nonsensical things at first, taking things in an unknown direction without a design already written down or transcribed, assembling
components together in ways that had not been attempted before.
This ability is the product of technology that emerged collectively through the application of experimental design, and also many failures, where many
members of society engage in the creative process they learn how to "think outside of the box" and think in their own terms without the commonly
understood conceptions and theories of science creating a road-block for them.
Why is it that we all do not possess this capacity to such an extent? The reason could be that our technology (if its conception was outside of this
planet) has progressed "too fast" for our evolutionary development to catch up with. Also, our science has become a form of indoctrination, preventing
an individual from being validated when he chooses to come up with his own "unproven" ideas.
A supportive society would seek to understand many points of view, and their knowledge would start to become non-linear, their brains able to think in
many different ways, multi-laterally.
When we are given our knowledge and we are taught not to challenge it, when we are given our concepts and made to believe that one needs a degree in
order to understand complex constructs of science, we stifle ourselves, we cease to create our own theories of the universe, and when we do try to
share them, they are usually squashed by those whom have been taught by scripted/prescribed education.
Could you imagine this, a school that had a project for one to make up their own theory of the universe, without having to be concerned about the
burden of proof - how much creativity could we tap into collectively if this were to occur?
What if in electronics we were given a project to simply construct a device that "works" as a complete circuit, even if it does not necessarily
perform a specific function?
What could one learn by applying their own ideas as opposed to copying ideas already designated by literature?
When the brain develops to handle multiple and conflicting concepts, when it can learn to come up with its own thoughts, original thoughts, it can
start to understand non-linear concepts such as the nature of time.
Thus, if we had been "given" knowledge and made to accept it, it prevents us from coming up with our own ideas independently, and also prevents us
from being able to successfully share them with other individuals whom want to see things from other perspectives.
It is something that we do not do, but I think it is something that we should be doing.
edit on 4-3-2015 by SystemResistor because: (no reason
edit on 4-3-2015 by SystemResistor because: (no reason given)