Defining the world

Defining the world, not redefining the world, means opting for a model invented from scratch, not a system plastered all over the place.

Those who define the world are, in soul and action, leaders of accomplished intention. However, one is not born a leader, one becomes one, through the practice of designing, managing, and innovating things of Man. And true leaders do not so much seek to copy the compositions of others as to make the world according to an overflowing imagination. They are leaders of men and women, through ideas, of course, but above all through research, action, and the results achieved.

The natural world is what it has always been, but the world of Man only lives at the rhythm of a new world. If the days go by and look alike, it is not that time stands still, but that people forget to look back to assess more accurately the progress of the present world. However, the world's progress is not the result of chance, but of a willingness to act on the space and time of collective life. However, no decision is perfect. But our decisions are part of our own life trajectory, which influences collective life through our antecedents and our consequences. The progress that emerges from this is due to the awareness that we have, both before and after the application of our initiatives, of the need to regenerate the world.

To define the world, we must be part of it, in the sense that we must take its pulse and not live on the margins of it through our ideas, our projects and our associations. And the more we have felt the real world, because we ourselves have lived it more intensely, through experience but also through exchanges with others, the more we will know when, how and above all why the world must evolve and in what direction it should evolve. Things in the world, and therefore in the social organization, must move in the direction of an improvement of one's own experience as well as that of the group, so that evolution, and not regression, can emerge from it. However, in any group, men and women never share the same opinions on the same issues to the same degree. There are movements of opinion, which are at odds with the prospect of advancement that would normally benefit the group because individuals intend to mark their personal preference to the detriment of the majority. But the definition of the world requires, in the wake of the above, that things be approached, most often at least, as positively as possible. And this can only benefit the greatest number. The greatest number is the world as it must be defined so that it retains its overall value as a social system.

Thus, defining the world is not a simple matter, as soon as personal arbitrations risk derailing the project of collective accomplishment which is the improvement of the human condition. And if all men and women acted in the best interests of the group, no one would have to suffer from the preferences of others, each seeking nobly to serve others to be served in return.

To define the world is to define oneself through others so that the intelligence of the whole harmonizes with that of the one!

?