This is the ad:

​

            "Those coincidences? That's the intelligent multiverse.

             It doesn't love you, but it has a mission for us.

             Churchoftheintelligentmultiverse.org"

​

It's called synchronicity, and this website does address it.  I have a "theory" to offer.  But primarily what I'm doing here is proposing a "new" form of human organization.  If you want to skip straight to the response to the ad, please report to the Epistles page for processing and further assignment.  

 

But to stay true to part of what I will say (behavior follows organizational structure rather than slogans), I should start with this.  I propose that the way we organize to interact has much more impact than what we believe or say we believe.  Function follows form.  The medium is the message.  People do what works, so the way you set up what works will guide what people do much more than what you ask them to pay lip service to.   This is despite the effects of cognitive dissonance sometimes causing people to change their characters to match their facades.   That will function when it does,  but you can't rely on it alone.  

​

I present a way of organizing and interacting that is designed to keep a group of people true to a purported doctrine or set of values: any doctrine or set of values.  The "Church of the Intelligent Multiverse" (the COTIM) is an example of how an organization might apply that system of organization.  I incline to believe the doctrine I provide for the COTIM, and I sincerely mean to found the COTIM and use this website as its "headquarters" but at a different level of magnification you could use the COTIM system for anything else.  My theory is that it doesn't matter what doctrine you use if for, the use of the organizational system will produce beneficial results, and that puts into effect the values of the COTIM doctrine.   When people hold each other to account in an open and systematic way, against clear standards, it doesn't matter what those standards are because the average human nature will shine through them.  Such a thing could help resist the dominion of rare wolves that happens in darkness and ambiguity and deception, especially the darkness and ambiguity and deception that claims to have good intentions.  Most people are sheep and they just follow, so the powerful really are responsible for most of what happens, and all too often they are uncommonly evil and social organization magnifies their power.   Design matters.  

​

People in this world are organized into nations (which you find yourself part of without voluntary action--you're born into them usually) and smaller voluntary organizations (which you can join of your own free will or part ways from).  Conventional democracy is a very effective form of organization for nations, but a modified form of it is necessary for voluntary organizations. 

​

According to democratic thinking, a national government should derive its purpose and values from the free will of those it governs.  They didn't all consent to be part of the nation and it's very difficult for them to leave. 

​

But a voluntary organization is made up only of people who consented to take part, and they can easily leave.   It exists in a larger environment: a nation and a bunch of much larger voluntary organizations.  A voluntary organization may and must have its own values, its own doctrine (foundational narrative or orientation to outer reality) and goals, and to keep and promote its purpose a voluntary organization cannot give an equal vote to anyone who walks in off the street.    It must be designed to simultaneously inculcate its values and test for those values, with an eye to giving greater power to those who demonstrate sincere commitment.  And as long as you're doing all that, why not use the influence of the power structure for more mundane tasks, such as creating a pleasant and effective social environment.  And in turn, if you can make a social set in which all are cooperative contributors to the common good  then you have made something people will want to be a part of.  And if doing such a thing happens to line up with your values, then function follows form and the medium is the message.  

​

If I'm saying that's true, then how could I not start by talking about organization before I get into metanarrative?

​

In simple outline it works like this:  an "order" is made up of small groups of members called "councils."  At any time, one member of each council is the "leader," and the councils are organized in a hierarchy so that higher level councils are made up of the leaders of lower level councils.   Members of councils meet regularly for something called an "evaluation meeting" where they each "confess" to the group, answering this prompt (or whatever other prompt the order uses): 

 

"Tell us, how have you made the world better lately?

And what have you learned?"

 

After everyone confesses, members award each other "merits" and "demerits" which respectively add to or subtract from that member's "seniority."  Seniority determines who will become leader of each council.  Leaders have  more power to give merits and demerits.  

​

Sounds judgmental and pointless, right?  A granfaloon.  Are  you kidding?  People love to talk about themselves and they love to judge each other.  

​

As I said, function follows form, and such an organization will produce an internal environment better than the outside environment.  That will bootstrap itself for improvement rather than decay.  This is true regardless of its original purpose.  It could be a tiddlywinks society for all it matters if it's structured right.  But the process will go faster if it also has a good doctrine.  

 

​

Here's the complete manual.

​

​

​

​

​