There are a number of problems that I face whenever I think about the idea and a discussion I had earlier today led me to think about the harsh edge of collaboration. Having diverse cultures, philosophies and ideals how would it survive. I thought up the simplest thought experiment that I could and tried to look at all the questions it raised, considering there to be 2 diverse peoples in a world with only one resource, one that may not be enough to sustain them both. The content of this may sound absurd to anyone reading but it raises questions that may need to be answered to define the exact structure or system of thought that would be needed to tackle it. Right now they remain mostly loosely connected questions and thoughts but I hope either I or someone better skilled can make sense of.
OK – Consider 2 peoples existing in a finite world and in this world exist a limited resource required by both.
The peoples may or may not be aware of each other and may both think that they own the resource exclusively. Of course, the assumed ownership and use of the resource would impact the other people.
Awareness is a key – if they are unaware of the others existence then the changes and disappearance of the resource will be given a reason, possibly inaccurately as to why any changes should take place. If they are aware then the importance of that resource will justify competition between the 2 peoples to own it outright. Before awareness then the ownership of the resource would be assumed as it was not under the control of any other.
Will both peoples have the ability, intelligence, power to control or own the resource? Will they have the philosophy to fight, share or hand over the resource.
Let’s assume this resource is of life importance to both, without it they would cease to be. Lets also assume that the resource is not enough to sustain them both. The power of each would be a factor, so will their number (population).
Who has the right to own and use the resource? Is it the stronger? Who will ultimately own it? The stronger and/or most aggressive?
Which people should or would cease to be in the competition for the resource? Could it be shared fairly? By whose philosophy should the concept of fairness be considered? What if the competition would mean absolute extinction of one of them? Could this mean an irreconcilable loss?
If you were an outsider having the power over both of these peoples (god) – what criteria would you use to decide who should have it? Nature itself prefers the stronger etc. Would you do the same? Or would you choose using subjective criteria, the most interesting, the prettier etc. Would you have any reason to remove both? How would you decide on who should live or die? What would be the concepts you would use to do the ‘right’ thing?