No Common World

No Common World

I see the world as A and want A1, you see the world as B and want B1, so what is the world then "Objectively Speaking" ? What is the correct politics or the correct thing to desire or the correct way the "World Should Be" or how it should "Be Seen" ? None, there isn't any, it is all a simple tug of war, a fight amongst contrasting, but equally arbitrary and Subjective views and Politics of an imaginary Common World which doesn't exist at all, since the world is only a stage where contrasting will powers execute their fight and conflict according to contrasting "Imaginary Mental Models" of how the world should be according to any number of ideologies, designs, desires, subjective gains, simple egostical and selfish gains, or as opposed general "common good" gains, or gains according to what is right for everyone, when everyone is different and contrasting, nay, both contrasting and collabortaing in a complex, tangled web of incoherencies, etc. It is all Subjective and only Subjectivity exists.

Hence, there is no Common World, only Points of Views, only Points of Conflict, only Points of Interactions, of one shot interactions and events that are trying to extend more than a simple one shot point like event and world that has no extension, no generality, no common substrate, no reference system (not even any extension or Space and Time essentially).

Hence,if there is No Common World, but only a never ending set of different views and models and politics and social models and a desires and goals, etc. then any world can be, any world at all is just as good, anything at all, since nothing is based on a true Objective and universally valid truth and point of view.

Hence, many different worlds all constructed and designed through many different new Mental Circuits inventing and creating new worlds is just as good, any new Man Brain designed in any number of trillions of different ways is just as good, etc.

And then all the Economic and Political and Social debates are all based on Statistics, numbers, how many people are making how much money in a certain social system, or how long is the life expectancy to judge health care systems or how much unemployment is in a country to judge the country's economic system and policies and so forth and so on. But these numbers are so abstract, they are just counting a certain property of a population and assigning it a number and judging the corresponding system and property accordingly, according to how the numbers should subjectively be (either high or low, but assigned arbitrarly as better according to some arbitrary mental model: case in point, a rich society with many unemployed may be better so high unemployment may be better and mean a more efficient economic system, since it can generate the same amount of wealth with fewer people working, etc. or a huge amount of consumption may be better as that signals ever more wealth as opposed to the green environmentalists who use these statistics as opposed to economists, etc.).