PR
Monjoronson Conversation #58 - The Foreseeable Future - Aug 24, 2012 - Daniel Raphael, Colorado

Topics:

• The Foreseeable Future
• Ingraining Ideas into Genetic Code
• Micro-financing Loans to Women in Developing Countries
• Exploring Concept of Sustainable Capitalism
• Fixing a Broken World
• Sustainable and Healthy Agriculture
• Genetically Modified Seeds and Plants
• Maintaining the Chi in Foods
• Raising the Collective Consciousness of Humanity
• Intellectual Property and Patent Protection
• Developing Artificial Intelligence with Morals and Ethics?
• Developing a Sustainable Spiritual Career

TR:  Daniel Raphael
Moderator:  Michael McCray
August 24, 2012

Prayer:  Dear Heavenly Father, Michael, Nebadonia, we gather again for another session with our Avonal Son and his staff.  We sincerely thank you all for everything you’ve done, do, and will do on our behalf.  It is our hope that our efforts co-creatively with you in this venue can further the work of the Correcting Time.  Thank you.  Amen.

MONJORONSON:  This is Monjoronson with my companions and team.

MMc:  Good morning.  It is wonderful to have you here again.


The foreseeable future

MONJORONSON:  Thank you.  Anticipating your question, I will make an opening statement.  The events around you—in all the events, whether they are social, economic, political, military, or otherwise—are increasing in their vibration, which means for you that change is occurring more rapidly, that situations that were static for years are now moving past their glacial state into a much more rapid movement.  You are seeing as well, greater and greater disruption politically and militarily across the world, particularly in those areas which are volatile in nature anyway.

There will occur before too long—meaning in the next three years or so—that this continued behavior will snap the strands of netting that hold the political and economic together, that holds the nations together in a workable whole.  Those spontaneous disruptions will occur more often, making it more difficult for nations to maintain their relationships.  When this becomes more and more known, then there is less and less control and fewer inhibitions to take action against enemies whether they are recent or traditional.  This will endanger the world to a great degree.   Withholding national power from entering into the fray will be essential to saving their security.  Offering to take sides gives the opportunity for greater conflict and wider fronts of that conflict, making it more and more difficult for nations that would otherwise be indifferent, to stay apart.  We advise the perspective of wait and watch and see:  Always work towards the good of the whole; and make contributions of a positive and constructive nature wherever you can and withhold your power and authority to express in violent ways, which are contrary to the good order of the world.

Lastly, these confrontations and these spontaneous and spurious military conflicts will be one more reminder to the world that it needs to see itself as “one,” as one civilization, one society, where the sovereign boundaries of nations are simply political configurations on pieces of paper, rather than reflecting the reality of the oneness of all humanity.  World War I did not achieve that; World War II did not achieve that; and the only influence that has achieved that is international business, which has seen the world as its field to work in and make profits regardless of national sovereign boundaries.  This type of thinking is what will engender the survival of nations, knowing that these are simply artificial boundaries much like the boundaries of cities in a large nation where you can travel easily from one city to another, not having to hail your allegiance to any one of them, but simply appreciate and enjoy this difference that those locales present.  Thank you.

MMc:  Thank you.  So you are suggesting that we show restraint as individuals and collectively during this time of upheaval.

MONJORONSON:  Yes, restraint is essential.  Just because one is powerful does not mean that it is wise to express that power at every opportunity.

Let us proceed with today’s questions, if you have any.

MMc:  If you would, please, how is memory imprinted?

MONJORONSON:  It is not relevant to our discussion to understand the “how,” but simply that it is.

MMc:  I see.  Is it in any way similar to the way ideas are ingrained in the genetic code?


Ingraining ideas into genetic code

MONJORONSON:  Not exactly.  Ideas are not rapidly ingrained in the genetic code unless they are ingrained with emotional energy.  You use this energy that comes to you and exists in you to imprint that code.  How it is done is not relevant; it is simply the fact that it is.  When you speak of ingraining ideas into the genetic code, yes, this is possible as well, but it is usually done as a mantra, as a vow, as a statement of obligation that is repeated over, and over, and over again so that it is much like the ancients who carved the great stones on Easter Island out of that very hard material.  It is done with one little tap at a time.  So too, the imprinting of the genetic code with ideas is done repeatedly with an almost monotonous tapping of repetition of those statements of belief.  That is why erroneous statements of belief are so difficult to remove from an individual and so readily reveal themselves in following generations.


Micro-financing loans to women in developing countries

MMc:  Micro-financing, making small loans, generally to women in developing countries, is an economic strategy that has met with some success.  Is the principle of micro-financing a good way to promote a sustainable and equitable global society?

MONJORONSON:  That would actually be a second or third step involved in developing local social sustainability practices.  The first step would be to reveal that sustainability—both material sustainability and social sustainability—exist and are possible.  The aspect of material sustainability has already been developed and applied and implemented at local levels in indigenous populations, with some good success.  The idea of social sustainability is another matter, as it requires much open-mindedness by individuals who are exploring that, as the principles of social sustainability work contrary to many of the belief systems of individuals, whether they are indigenous populations or whether they are highly educated populations.  There are some belief systems that are not sustainable for the ongoing social existence of that belief system.  This is where there will be great difficulty in the future with populations that choose to explore social sustainability.  It will become evident quite rapidly that if a population chooses social sustainability, then there will be certain cultural groups which must forgo their beliefs that they have held for generations and perhaps centuries.  This will be the difficult decision-making process.

This has not been openly discussed among large groups of people, as the whole idea or concept, principles and tenets of social sustainability are not widely known, past just a few hundred people in the world.  Social sustainability is a concept which most people connect to material sustainability, and that is a connection that is partially or mostly erroneous.  To your question, however, once a woman sees how a micro-financing process occurs, she could be easily approached to begin to understand the benefits of social sustainability.  This will, as I said, will be most difficult particularly in indigenous populations because social sustainability acknowledges the equality in all regards of women to men, that the genders are equal, that children are equal to adults, and that there is no pre-eminence of individuals by gender.  This is contrary to many cultural and ethnic beliefs, as well as some religious beliefs.  I hope you are beginning to see the area of conflict that will arise in the future regarding social sustainability.  As we have said, the implementation of social sustainability will not only take decades, but centuries to implement thoroughly.

As populations adopt and adapt their cultures to the principles of social sustainability, they will thrive.  I am not talking about thriving as a continuous process of growth, as “sustainable growth,” as I said many years ago, is an oxymoron.  Sustainable growth is contrary to sustainability.  These cultures and groups and nations and communities will thrive because they have adopted the principles of social sustainability, which increases the value to society of each individual, by increasing the quality of the individual’s participation in their own life, their family’s life and their community’s life.  Through these collective contributions, their whole society is assisted to improve its own quality.  Whereas, those societies and groups which adhere to unsustainable belief systems will become more and more impoverished in more than just material ways.  Does this help?

MMc:  Yes, it does.  It certainly answers the larger question for me of how I might look at this.  I believe that they grant these loans to women in these developing countries, because they are the most stable individuals.  So, the predominant thinking within those countries is one where there is a definite inequality between sexes, and so women get the loans because they are the more stable individuals, and tend to repay the loans, more so than the men would.  I appreciate your answer, which was much more in depth than my question.  Thank you very much.  (Monjoronson:  You are most welcome.)


Exploring concept of sustainable capitalism

Historically capitalism has been involved with the next quarter’s bottom line, but some business leaders are beginning to speak of the necessity of truly sustainable business and sustainable capitalism, do you see it as advantageous for leaders in business and government to explore this concept of sustainable capitalism to promote a sustainable society?

MONJORONSON:  Yes, it is vital to have a sustainable commercial enterprise, whether you call it capitalism or something else.  This will not come into being successfully or effectively until those entrepreneurs, those capitalists as you may call them, and corporate leaders thoroughly have ingrained an understanding of social sustainability.  The adherence to the quarterly bottom line is highly competitive and competition has in many ways a very harsh edge to it in that it does not express compassion or caring, or appreciation, or understanding for the host society.  The difference between contemporary business and sustainable business in the future is the difference between a parasitic capitalism and a symbiotic capitalism.  We prefer not to use the word “capitalism,” as it has too many negative overtones and connotations to it.  This word’s popularity stems from Karl Marx and before, and has been used in ways that are contrary to a spiritually infused, socially sustainable society.  You can pick another word if you wish, but please do so.  The difference between contemporary business and sustainable business in the future is tremendous.

The parasitic business model is attached to the quarterly bottom line; it is attached to ongoing increased profits, which means continued ongoing expansion and exploitation and means of finding ways to cut costs to improve profit margins and return on investment.  The parasitic model seeks to have an investment and rapid returns for immediate benefits that are visible.  A sustainable business enterprise in the future, however, sees itself as a symbiotic partner to the sustainability of all society.  Even a monopolistic, dominating business enterprise that has a sustainable philosophy to it, which can be validated using the three core values in the schematic for social sustainability, is very possible and likely and even advantageous in many ways.  Monopolies are not always avaricious mechanisms for personal greed, power, authority and control.  In a socially sustainable society, monopolistic businesses will become the general mechanism for doing business.  How those benefits are distributed is another matter.  It is that business will see all of the clientele as business owners, as stockholders, who are mutually involved in the business of that enterprise.  The parasitic model is antiquarian because it seeks greater and greater accumulations of profits and dividends to only a few people, which in the long run, as you are now seeing in the one percent of your population.  This is highly detrimental to a socially sustainable society, and even global civilization.

There are individuals now who have formulated other business models that would be highly advantageous in a socially sustainable society, and which will and must come to the forefront of thinking in business.  These models, however, will also not be successful until the ideas, concepts and tenets of social sustainability are widely known and accepted in your culture and your global culture. That is why we are so uncompromising in the development of the three core values of social sustainability and the developments and applications from those values.  These would not contribute to our long-term project if they were compromised.  We have promoted them as irreducible and irrefutable as the core values of social sustainability for individuals and even for a global civilization.  How the smaller divisions of human activity accept and implement that will depend upon enlightened individuals who come to govern those enterprises of business, government, non-profit, and social.

MMc:  So a sustainable business model built with the core values of a sustainable society would be very beneficial.

MONJORONSON:  Highly beneficial!

MMc:  That’s what I’m hearing you say.


“Fixing a Broken World”

MONJORONSON:  You will see, now that the fundamental tenets have been formulated and have been invested in this new document, which you call, “Fixing a Broken World,” which will become published as an eBook in the next month or so, is an important milestone for our efforts.  It is the premier element that we will use to promote our integration of social sustainability into existing social and political models—and business models—and we will use that into the unknown and long-term future.  It is important that this come to public notice.  We believe that you of the core team, who has been involved in the development of this publication, will be quite surprised about how it becomes well known around the world.  It is our anticipation that it will become “viral,” as you call it—I am reaching for a benign word instead of “viral,”—and that it will be translated into many languages, even in the simplicity, as it exists now.

MMc:  We are all looking forward to that.

MONJORONSON:  Yes, it will be the “little tract” that we hand out on street corners, so to speak, as you have seen in decades past by religiously fervent individuals, who were promoting their religious beliefs.  We have a deep belief in social sustainability as the cornerstone, the capstone and the keystone of your future society that precedes the days of light and life.


Sustainable and healthy agriculture

MMc:  Wonderful.  Today’s agriculture relies heavily on pesticides, herbicides and chemical fertilizers.  These have a negative impact on the health of humans and our planet.  Can you suggest ways we can work towards more sustainable and healthy agriculture?

MONJORONSON:  Necessity will require that your scientists look for those means, which many are doing so now.  We have been deeply involved in the scientific community to develop evolutionary and revolutionary new sustainable methods for suppressing noxious weeds and insects.  We are deeply involved in that now and will continue to do so.

MMc:  I am thinking about how I should word the next question.

MONJORONSON:  Ask for assistance, please.


Genetically modified seeds and plants

MMc:  I’m interested in finding out your thoughts about genetically altered seeds and genetically altered plants.

MONJORONSON:  But of course.  In our Life Carrier laboratories it is done all the time.  We do not see a problem with that, except where the genetic manipulations exclude the use by other people to use these seeds that can be generated normally, through normal fertilization methods in the natural setting of those plants, whether it is corn or wheat—the grains—or whether they are rooted plants or otherwise.  The criteria for genetic mutations is that they retain all of the genetically sustainable elements of continuation, meaning that one generation of plants can generate another generation of plants that are sustainable.  To generate plants that can only be used effectively through the application of products made by the same company is unethical, unethical as it transgresses the universe principles of genetic mutation and applications in that field of endeavor.

You are welcome to explore this topic further if you wish.

MMc:  There are companies and laws that are currently on the books, where some pieces of genetic material are able to be copyrighted and become the property of the company.  When these are incorporated into seed plants they are sometimes spread into the larger domain and in some cases the companies have brought suit with farmers utilizing the progeny of the next generation of volunteers.  I guess the question I have is:  Is it ethical to consider genetic alterations the private property of certain individuals or companies?

MONJORONSON:  They are most welcome to do that—and as they have.  However, I would like to side-step that discussion and speak to the injury that has occurred to those farmers and individuals where their natural crops have been infiltrated by the genetic code of those companies through the migration of pollen from those company owned fields, to those of the natural fields.  The farmers who grow natural grains from naturally reproducing seed stock have a cause for tremendous injury as a class action suit.  The only difficulty they have is that the “copyright,” so to speak, of the natural grains is held by us, which we let everyone use freely, to copy and use as they wish.  I am not being humorous; this is true, that you have a free privilege to use reproducible grain stocks for your use and your good, and you are most welcome to use those seed stocks and genetically adapt them to your use, providing that the original copyright for the use of those grains is in place.  This is both metaphorical and ironic in nature, yet it is something that the farmers of natural seed stocks have not considered, that there has been a tremendous widespread injury against them in their crops by the infiltration of their seed stocks by that of the companies.  The shoe needs to be put on the other foot and used in the same way.

MMc:  Very interesting.  I found it humorous that you said that you hold the copyright to the naturally occurring seed stocks, simply because I find that so ironic and so true, but nobody has considered that situation.  Perhaps we should interest some law firm to take up the case of the farmer who has had his natural stock infiltrated by Monsanto, or one of the other companies.

MONJORONSON:  Most definitely.  You would want to find who has the deepest pockets, as they say.  It is beyond irony; it is damnable that the companies have introduced seed stock infiltration, which are unsustainable and which will cause tremendous and horrendous difficulties and broader starvation due to those patent and those copyright applications.  These copyrighted seed stocks are unsustainable and you will see within fifty years that they will be wiped from the face of the earth at immense cost to human lives.

May I take my discussion a bit further?  (MMc:  Certainly, you may.)  You see, the argument for this case involves the application of the three core values of social sustainability.  One is that these non-reproducible grain stocks violate the first value of the quality of life in that they have caused a detrimental effect upon the global seed stocks of the world in that species.  Second, it is not equitable for these seed stocks to be introduced and protected against the far broader seed stocks of those species throughout the world.  This causes tremendous inequitable development of the use of better seed stocks, were they to be reproducible.  And thirdly, they do not allow for growth as these seed stocks with these genetic anomalies do not promote growth, but in fact are only good for one generation, which, when they infiltrate other seed stocks of the same species, will cause tremendous difficulty.

There is a positive side to this, and that through genetic manipulations of original seed stocks, they will become hardier, more productive, use less water and be resistant to fungi and to shade cover from weeds and so on.

MMc:  Seeds which are essential for maintaining bio-diversity, providing food and raw materials for human survival are currently being collected, stored and banked as “insurance” against the loss of these plants through some catastrophe, Are you aware of any current international policy for the dissemination of these seeds after the catastrophe is over?

MONJORONSON:  Only as a thought among those who hold those stocks.  Of course, you must realize that those countries and those individuals and societies which hold those seed stocks will be then in power and control later on after the populations are decimated due to widespread disease and famine and so on.  This can be a position of immense good, or it can be a position of immense evil by those who wish to be in control and dominate those fields, those endeavors.  By that time, there will be far more widespread awareness of the principles of social sustainability and business practices of social sustainability and in the general material sustainability necessary for those seed stocks.  Those seed stocks will be used to develop further genetic strains, which can thrive with less fertilizer, even on old ground.  Nonetheless they are primary in principle for everything that develops later.

For those gardeners around your nation and wherever these transcripts are read, you would be wise to prepare for your own seed stock bank.  There are very definite known means of doing so, even for those seeds that you buy commercially at the seed store or at the hardware store, where you can take them home and prepare them in vacuum packs and [store them] in cool environments to preserve them almost indefinitely.  Some of you are aware that even dried grains, which had fallen into the crevices of the Great Pyramid, have been found and some of them have been productive, even after 3,000-5,000 years of laying dormant in an arid climate.  It is then necessary that you learn how to propagate seeds, how to do so wisely, and how to learn all the techniques of developing high quality seeds from your own garden that can be planted next year and the year after, and the year after.

Roxie:  I would like to ask a couple of questions, please, about genetically modified foods.  Are any of the modified foods detrimental in any way to a healthy lifestyle?

MONJORONSON:  No, they are not detrimental to a healthy lifestyle, as long as they do not contain overt poisonous compounds.

Roxie:  What about using radiation for preservation of foods.  Is that harmful to us in any way?

MONJORONSON:  No, it is not.

Roxie:  Thank you very much.  I think there will be a lot of people interested in those two answers.


Maintaining the chi in foods

MONJORONSON:  I will add an additional comment; it is not a qualifier, but you must differentiate between nutrition that satisfies the body mechanism and nutrition that feeds the ethereal aspect of your being.  The problem with commercial foods, as you have seen in the fast food market arena is that food that is processed repeatedly decreases its chi, the universe energy that assists your greater being to unfold and become.  It, however, does have the necessary nutrition to feed your physical body, which is another matter.  It is therefore best to immediately eat foods that have just been harvested, such as those ground plants and vegetables, seeds and so on.  The more that the food has been processed, the more that the chi is absent from those plants.  Do you understand?

Roxie:  Yes, that makes perfect sense.

MONJORONSON:  That has not been differentiated or qualified in the literature or in the litigation.

Roxie:  Thank you very much.


Raising the collective consciousness of humanity

MMc:  A “Charter for Compassion” is a global movement aimed at unifying and reinforcing the underlying compassionate message found in the world’s religious and traditional ancient wisdoms.  Do you anticipate this “Charter for Compassion” will be adopted by governments, educators and the international community and therefore grow in its influence?

MONJORONSON:  What time period are you speaking of?

MMc:  I understand that it is growing now.  Do you anticipate that there will be future growth from this?

MONJORONSON:  It will grow, but it will not dominate the philosophical orientations of national governments, even national governments now that are fully aware of detrimental practices, have not ratified those agreements and treaties that limit the use of deadly chemicals or cluster bombs, for example. This is one movement; this is one drop in the bucket of the new civilization that will make a contribution to what is to become.  What you are seeing by this movement and other similar movements, which number in the hundreds and even thousands, is that they are making a contribution of positive consciousness and of social awareness, and moral development.  These must eventually become part of the socializing and indoctrination process of children, for them to become applied and implemented in any society.  These are major contributions to a socially sustainable society and civilization, but as a dominating force, it will not [be] at the present time.

MMc:  So this is one of many movements that is to raise the collective consciousness of humanity?

MONJORONSON:  Yes, it is a very important one.  The important aspect of these movements, which is either lost or forgotten or not used out of ignorance or unawareness, is the process of consciously projecting the consciousness with that signature of compassion to other groups and to around the world.  This is highly powerful and has been proven to be effective, as anthropologists have demonstrated through their own studies of native species of animals.  It is even more powerful among those sentient beings on your planet, whether they are porpoise or humans.  There is capacity for individuals to project—much like an antenna, a parabolic mirror or parabolic antenna—their consciousness with a signature to another distant space or person, or organization, or to invade the whole earth—how do I say this—you do not have a word for the “bio-consciousness environment” of your world.  It is much like if your world occupies a space, which is surrounded by more space that can be affected, much as you would slap the water of a pond or pool, there is a compression wave that goes out from that and invades every square millimeter, even into the ground where the moisture is, from the impact of your slapping the water.  So too, does your consciousness have that effect when you have the awareness and the skills to effectively make a projection of your consciousness onto your world.

We continue to repeat this to you to remind you that it is useful, it is effective and that it can have permanent repercussions or results in your world on the psyche and the consciousness of other people.  You have aimed this in some ways [to] the human consciousness or consciousness of mass society, and it is real.  These groups need to be trained in how to do that, as it is a very trainable skill to teach.

MMc:  They need to be trained in how to project themselves, or how to project their consciousness to the rest of humanity?

MONJORONSON:  Yes.

MMc:  I think you are right.  We don’t have a word that adequately defines that characteristic for the biodiversity of consciousness, of the collective human consciousness.  Having heard you hundreds of times now describe it, my concept of it is still enlarging at this time.

[This is Daniel:  There is a word that keeps popping up when he was talking about that—the “Noösphere”. [1]

MMc:  Zoosphere?  It would be the animal sphere…

Daniel:  No it’s not the zoosphere.  He’s talking about the noösphere.  He just gave us the definition of it as a “bio-consciousness environment”.

Roxie:  I have heard that term before; I think it’s valid, although it’s not in my dictionary.]

This is Monjoronson.  Let us proceed, please.

MMc:  Okay.  An American activist waged a successful campaign on the Internet to inform the public and bring action against a notorious African criminal, Joseph Koni.  Is the Internet the best way to educate the global community about human rights violations and are there other better ways of doing this?

MONJORONSON:  The orientation of all spirit, of all the spiritual administration of Urantia, of earth, is to the positive.  The need to point out violations against humanity is one means of making that known, but a far more multi-generational means is to teach children and adults and grandparents the principles of correct and right human behavior that sustains the individual and the whole of civilization.  The Internet is one means of doing so, but it has not been fully applied to the positive constructive applications of human principles for living in a complex society, a global civilization.  We will be using, however, the Internet, personal computers and hand-held electronic devices to teach people positive social processes in the future, as it is necessitated by the developments and social revelations that we are making known now.  There will be a need before this decade is out to train millions of people simultaneously in processes that involve democracy and social sustainability living.

Decisions that your communities and nations have to make—will be forced to make in the future—will require that they be made by those people who will suffer those decisions and the benefits thereof.  These are too large of decisions that affect too many individuals, too many people personally and intimately, to be made by any leader or august body of legislators of any society.  Yes, the Internet is one means of doing so, but there is a two-fold necessity that must make this come into existence.  One is the necessity that people feel in their personal lives to take control of their environment, socially, materially, politically, and economically, and the other is that that need develops a positive means of guiding people to make those decisions.  You are unable to sell ice to Eskimos simply because they don’t see the need for it.  So too, with these hand-held devices and computers and the Internet, it is not seen as needed because there is no necessity for that.  But once the necessity arises, then you will need a means to develop those training simulations and training modules and training applications than can be downloaded freely and easily to hand-held devices, laptops and personal computers, so that people can train themselves how to participate in a society that is not only under rapid, but immediate social change.  Participation of all will be necessary for its survival.


Intellectual property and patent protection

MMc:  Thank you.  We use the legal rights to intellectual property and patent protection, to both protect and reward the efforts of individuals and companies who contribute to society through creativity and innovation.  However, this concept of intellectual property protection does not seem to be conductive to a higher concept of sharing discoveries for the greater benefit of mankind.  Can you help us understand a more advanced perspective of managing intellectual property that will aid us in developing a system, which can encourage and reward creativity and discovery, while supporting a culture of sustainability?

MONJORONSON:  This will be a development that will necessarily occur in your cultures in the future as social sustainability becomes well known and becomes a mandatory influence in all business decisions and humanitarian decisions.  Yes, there is a need to promote the ingenious development of processes that benefit all of humanity, so it is a need to generate that ingenuity.  Two, is to protect that idea, while also making it available to all of humanity.  The difficulty you are now having is that individuals, and their investors, see the development of these ingenious processes as a process of acquiring greater and greater financial accumulations for greater rewards and greater control and domination and market share of the fields that they are involved in.  This is competitive, it is selfish, and it is antiquarian.  We will not give you a formulation for developing that, but we are telling you that it will be amended in the future, so that all can benefit from these ingenious developments, while protecting the one who is ingenious.

This could mean that those individuals who develop these processes would receive a lifetime stipend as a reward for their efforts, and that the benefit of it would be that they could become the developer and implementer and a shareholder, so to speak, as others would be shareholders, to assist in the development and widespread application of their use.  This would serve all people involved, would it not?  To own and control totally an idea, which is of benefit to everyone, is an egregious violation of social sustainability.  It may, however, be that those individuals involved in the development of that idea, would have a superior benefit, compared to the average individual.  Rather than owning one hundred percent, they may own ten percent of its outcome, and that to be divided among the developmental teams involved.  There are various ways of this happening and it will of necessity occur in the future.

MMc:  The legal definition of plagiarism is when someone appropriates or steals someone else’s intellectual property.  Should individuals be challenged or penalized in some fashion for incorporating words, prophesies, ideas or discoveries into publications or research papers, that could have come co-incidentally to more than one individual.

MONJORONSON:  Again, this is an outcome of your competitive marketplace and is not sustainable as it exists.


Developing artificial intelligence with morals and ethics?

MMc:  Man’s imagination has wondered how far artificial intelligence in androids will be able to evolve.  Will it be possible for us one day to construct artificial intelligence helpers to be programmed with morals and ethics governing their actions and behaviors, so that they might assist humans, for example in policing duties, as emergency rescuers, air traffic controllers, or educational assistants?

MONJORONSON:  Ironically, this is already built into your computers, simply because it is not present.  It is not available for machines to make moral decisions; that is the greatest protection that you have against those machines, and this may sound like a convoluted answer, but it is truly a mere reflection of the question you are asking.  Those machines already do not have the capacity to make moral decisions that affect the outcome of individuals arbitrarily by the volition of that machine.  Your question should be rephrased to reflect the outcome that you anticipate.

MMc:  (Long pause.)   I’m thoroughly confused, or mightily confused.  You say that we are protected by the fact that the machines have not been programmed with morals and ethics to govern their actions and behaviors?

MONJORONSON:  Correct.  Is not your question really, “How do we design a machine to make moral decisions?”

MMc:  Actually, my question is:  Will one day a machine be designed that will make moral decisions?  Will humankind one day be able to create artificial life-forms with sentient self-awareness that could ask questions and learn and evolve from its programming?

MONJORONSON:  My dear friend, these are true speculative questions that have no value to our discussion of your spiritual ascension or social sustainability.  Could we move on?

MMc:  Thank you, sir.  That would end my questions for today.  Would you like to say some closing words for us, Monjoronson?


Developing a sustainable spiritual career

MONJORONSON:  Yes, surely.  You, as individuals, have been created in many ways to reflect some of the capabilities of your Creator Fathers, Christ Michael and the First Source and Center.  Were you more aware of this, you would act more like creators, to create good and positive and constructive change in your life, and to make decisions that contribute to those ends.  This is the beginning of developing a sustainable spiritual career when you make those decisions from a higher mind that contributes to the broad efforts of God the Supreme, and immediately to your fellow brothers and sisters on this planet.  You can augment your effectiveness also by opening yourself to our presence, to asking questions in our presence, and of our presence, and of our participation in your lives.  You can become even more effective when you ask us to participate in your thinking to allow you to expand and grow to the highest capacities of your mind and your consciousness.

You have much to contribute.  You have tremendous capabilities which you have not explored, and which very few of you have even begun to explore.  You are truly creators to initiate that process, and you can learn this more quickly when you empower yourself to co-creatively work with us in your life and to unfold your life plan in ways which would seem to be miraculous to you were you to know about them ahead of time.  Ask questions and truly anticipate answers.  Not to speculate about the future, but to ask in real terms about your life now that you can make decisions to affect real outcomes in the immediate and distant future, both for your life and for your civilization and your societies.  Know that you are surrounded by light and love, that when you accept this and you open your consciousness to flood yourself inside with this light and this consciousness of love, that you will be infiltrated in ways which surpass your awareness.  We thank you for your voluntary co-creative participation in this work.  Without your participation with us in it, your world would be doomed to darkness.  Thank you.

MMc:  Thank you, Monjoronson.

END