Please choose the statement which most closely models your own point of view, or provide a response in the space provided.


How do you feel wisdom is acheived?

    I believe humans knew a natural idyllic condition at some point in the past, from which we fell because of bad, inappropriate or sinful choices, thus reducing our net wisdom. (The Look Back View.)
    I consider such tales mythological. Wisdom is cumulative and anything resembling a human utopia can only be achieved in the future, through incremental improvements in knowledge or merit. (The Look Forward View.)

Can you provide convincing evidence to support your point of view?


Are members of our present culture subjected to propaganda? What kind?

What are the principal propaganda messages circulated today, and how are they disseminated? How effective has this propaganda been?

Name 5 popular modern films in which these propaganda messages have been promoted?


Which of the following best describes how and why you arrived at your present set of political opinions and political agenda?

    Logical appraisal of the evidence.
    Inherent qualities of my nature, character or intelligence.
    The effects of propaganda or upbringing.
    Pursuit of my agenda may result in personal advantage.

Now answer the same question about why your political opponents hold the opinions/agendas they do.

    Logical appraisal of the evidence.
    Inherent qualities of their nature, character or intelligence.
    The effects of propaganda or upbringing.
    Pursuit of their agenda may result in personal advantage.

Do you think your opponents would agree with the way you answered just now? How do you think they would respond, if asked the very same questions about their own beliefs... and yours?


Please choose between the following:

    I think ideas are inherently dangerous or toxic. People are easily deceived. An elite should guide or protect gullible masses toward correct thinking (Memic Frailty).
    I believe children can be raised with a mixture of openness and skepticism to evaluate concepts on their own merits. Citizens can pluck useful bits wherever they may be found, even from bad images or ideologies (Memic Maturity).

If your answer to the preceding question was Memic Frailty, do you believe you should be selected as one of the elite who help encourage correct thinking?

    Yes No

If your answer to the preceding question was Memic Maturity, do you hold "the masses" in contempt for not always agreeing with you?

    Yes No


With whom would you ally? Which of the following persons would you listen to?

    Person A, who agrees with my long-range dreams and goals, but disagrees profoundly with my program for getting there.
    Person B, who agrees with my near-term political agenda and despises the same opponents, but has a very different image of what kind of society we should eventually arrive at.

How often have your political or other discussions with your allies actually focused on the distant goal? What is that goal?

Do you have a clear image of the future society all your efforts are aimed at achieving? Describe your program for getting there.

How have you verified that your "allies" have the same destination in mind?


What are the attributes of these four social innovations -- Democracy, Science, the Justice System, Free Markets?

How are the four social attributes listed above similar?

How are the four social attributes listed above different?

Now consider Secrecy, a commonly prescribed social remedy. Discuss whether each of the four dynamic social systems named above (Democracy, Science, the Justice System and Free Markets) will function better if:

    Most participants know MORE than they presently do about each other and whatever is going on.
    Most participants know LESS than they presently do about each other and whatever is going on.

Is your safety enhanced more by:

    denying knowledge to my enemies.
    increasing my own knowledge.

Which is easier to verify:

    that my foes don't know something.
    that I do know something.

Which would you choose for yourself:


Which would you choose for the group you consider freedom's worst enemy:



Are we wise or knowledgeable enough to prescribe ideologies for our descendants? How should we transmit these ideologies to our descendants?

    Focus all efforts on achieving total victory for one's particular political agenda and then leave the transformed world to them.
    Concentrate on achieving pragmatic solutions, raise a new generation that is appreciably wiser and more aware than ours, and then leave the rest of the details to them.


Do you believe in evolution? Are humans still at least somewhat part of the animal kingdom?

What politically relevant things, if any, can we learn from fields like mammalian ethology, psychopharmacology, anthropology, and the historical behavior of real human tribes?

If discrepancies appear between these sciences and our idealization of human nature, should ideology be revised? If information appears that shows an intrinsic difference between basic human nature and the ideal way we "ought to be", what is your response?

    The so-called information about our basic nature must be wrong.
    Society must adapt and conform to information about our basic nature, letting us be ourselves, since people are what they are.
    The more we learn about 'basic human nature,' the more clearly we need vigorous guidance to encourage behavior more appropriate than we would 'naturally' engage in. This can be achieved by hewing to standards that have been known for generations.
    Information about our basic nature helps us understand the raw material from which a new/better humanity might emerge.


Historically, which prescription has best helped to maximize human achievement, minimized costly errors and ensured freedom/happiness etc.?

    Weak government
    Widespread and open criticism
    Strong leadership
    A cohesive shared value system

Can you think of historical examples to support your claim?

Can you cite counter-examples?


Consider the following two approaches that have been used for many generations by people and societies attempting to solve problems or change their world:

  • THE LEFT-HANDED APPROACH: concerted action by tribal or national units, organized by leaders who gather social resources (e.g., taxes or tithes) and apply them to attain goals in an organized manner.

  • THE RIGHT-HANDED APPROACH: create loosely regulated markets wherein free individuals compete and/or cooperate, making the best deals they can for their own self interest.

In 10,000 years we've seen countless left-handed projects (pyramids, canals, wars and universities) and countless right-handed projects (industry, medicine, slavery and bookstores). Radical socialists have long demonized the right-handed approach as inherently corrupt/exploitive, and prescribe its amputation. Radical libertarians and anarchists call the left-handed approach coercive and stifling, and prescribe its amputation.

Which approach do you prefer?

    the left-handed approach
    the right-handed approach

If you prefer one approach over another, would you:

    amputate the other entirely?
    severely limit it?
    try to discover which types of problem each approach is best at performing and utilize the best approach?

How does your preferred approach create abiding conditions for personal satisfaction or generation of wealth?

How would it deal with acute problems like natural disasters or Adolf Hitler?

Has democracy moderated the faults in the left-handed approach? If so, what other reforms might help make it work better?

Likewise, has democracy moderated the faults in the right-handed approach? If so, what other reforms might help make it work better?


Over the long run, what are the fundamental prerequisites for nurturing a growing state of freedom and wisdom for all human beings? (Please write a list.)

Can these prerequisites you just listed be achieved by:

    persuading people to behave differently than they presently do (Exhortation)?
    ensuring that actions have consequences (Accountability)?
    creating environmental preconditions (e.g., heightened health and/or wealth and/or education and/or low fear levels) then trusting people to make correct decisions (Changed Circumstance)?
    some combination of the above

Which of the above prerequisites (or lack thereof) are most responsible for our present state of civilization?

Which of the above prerequisites (or lack thereof) are most responsible for YOUR present beliefs?

How does your answer to this question corelate with your earlier answers regarding Propaganda, the Time Flow of Wisdom and Toxicity of Ideas?


In the short term, which of the following describes how you feel you are more likely to achieve immediate political goals:

    Consolidate your core supporters, demonize your opponents, and dismiss compromise as a form of ideological betrayal.
    Negotiate the best near-term deal you can through whatever political process works best, even if it means your opponents get part of their agenda accomplished, too.
    Learn as much as possible about the opposition, then offer the other side's moderate wing enough to split them off from their fanatics, destroying their coalition and building your own.
    Ignore your opponents because (a) they represent obsolete or decrepit worldviews doomed to inevitably fail anyway, or (b) because they are mere stalking horses or fronts for the real opposition -- power groups who operate inimically behind the scenes.
    Concentrate on perfecting your own position/behavior/soul, since that is all an individual can ever really be responsible for.


Do ends justify means? Can one justifiably squelch speech, behaviors or actions by repugnant parties/individuals if it serves a higher cause?

That's it so far.

Of course this is hardly a complete questionnaire! Many of you will find flaws or ways to improve these questions... or come up with additional ones that might beneficially be added. If so, please provide your suggestions in the space below. Again, the aim is to provoke new levels of discussion, not to promote a particular point of view.

OPTIONAL INFORMATION: If you wish, please provide the following information:

    Gender: M F                Age:

Meanwhile, let's open up our minds. The satisfactions of self-righteousness are very druglike, but in the long run human problems will not be solved by junkies. They will be negotiated by earnest and wise human beings.


David Brin is a scientist and best-selling author whose future-oriented novels include Earth, The Postman, and Hugo Award winners Startide Rising and The Uplift War. (The Postman inspired a major film in 1998.) Brin is also known as a leading commentator on modern technological trends. His nonfiction book -- The Transparent Society -- won the Freedom of Speech Award of the American Library Association. Brin's newest novel Kiln People explores a fictional near future when people use cheap copies of themselves to be in two places at once. The Life Eaters -- a graphic novel -- explores a chilling alternative outcome of World War II.