Frequently Asked Questions
„Have no fear of perfection; you'll never reach it.“
Marie Curie
Q: This book is incredibly lousy. How can you even dare to publish it?
A: I agree. Measured against the complexity and the importance of the questions discussed, my analysis must remain deeply inadequate. But I hope that it is interesting enough to make you at least consider the possibility that a far better world is possible. I don‘t want to give final answers, I want to start a process. And yes, I sure could have done better. And: it cost you nothing, so you have little reason to complain.
Q: What you are saying is trivial: if humans were good, they could live in peace together. What is new about your model?
A: It shows that cooperative behavior is actually in everybodys interest. We don‘t need to sacrifice ourselves, it is sufficient to be egoistic (but in a smart/conscious way!). Or put differently: the problem is not that we are immoral, but that we are unconscious.
As the proposed model requires no improvement of moral, it has maybe better chances to succeed.
Q: Why should I trust you? How can I be sure that what you say is true?
A: You should not and you cannot be! I hope that you find the flaws in my arguments, that you improve and extend this book or even write a far better one from scratch. I hope that you contribute many new ideas, concepts, theories or even research. My only wish is that you start to believe that the sketched goal is not completely unrealistic.
Q: You are trained as a scientist but you ignore all the rules of scientific publication. You don't cite your sources and the book is full of bold and unproven claims. Why?
A: True and I also feel a bit bad about this. But if I follow all these rules, my book will be published in a 1000 years. I felt that there is not so much time left (sure not for me and probably not even for humankind). Furthermore the individual claims are not that important: the book would not suffer much if 20% of them were wrong. Rather than many isolated facts, I want to convey a more general concept (which, I'm quite sure, is at least worth thinking about). It's a seeding effort, not more.
Q: You claim that many differences in behavior between the sexes have genetical reasons. This means they cannot be changed and we know that such theories were abused in the past to suppress women and homosexual/queer people. Don't you think we should consider the sexes to be equal or even ignore sex altogether?
A: I think we should rather stop competing (this is the central topic of the book). In this case differences would not lead to suppression anymore. If we steamroll differences we loose diversity and diversity is richness.
The demand that we should ignore differences between sexes or people is an attempt to save an obsolete and increasingly dangerous competitive system.
Q: Don't you think evil simply exists, because people are not moral enough? In this case we don't need all your detailed analysis, we simply stick to some obvious moral rules.
A: It is for most people very hard to behave morally. It is against our fundamental urges so we would have to force ourselves to behave in an unnatural way all the time. This didn't work in the past and it will never work in the future. The central thesis of this book is that we are currently trapped in a competitive mode of operation and that we all could live much better lifes if we became aware of this and stopped to compete. A cooperative society needs no moral, only insight and consciousness. Insight and consciousness are not easy to attain, but have the huge advantage that they, once attained, need no further efforts to maintain.
Q: I opened your book on page XY and found this horribly offensive sentence. Do you really mean what you write?
A: This book is very radical in many ways. It has to be to achieve its goal. You should read it from the beginning or better not at all. You will not be able to understand later concepts in the book without having read and understood the earlier parts. And for the same reason, please don‘t cite from this book on social media. And yes, I mean what I say, but I also know very well that I could be completely wrong.
Q: Your English sucks. Why didn‘t you have it proofread by a professional?
A: I did not want to force anybody to read my book. And it allowed me to save some money. I‘m not a native speaker, sorry for this.
Q: I‘m confused: are you politically left or right? Commie or fascist?
A: l‘m very clearly neither of the two. I’m not even in the political center. And I think this is a good thing. This book is about new ideas, not about old and stale institutions and ways of thinking.
My proposed new model for society admittedly shares a few ideas with communism, but there are many fundamental differences (the last chapter of part 2 contains an overview). It also suggests some changes which are more typical for right wing views (absence of social system, free speech etc.).
Q: Are you really naive enough to believe that your book will bring us paradise?
A: No, I'm not (but I'm known to be not very good at predicting the future). But I have good reasons to believe that it is an interesting read, even if it will not achieve its goals. That's enough reason to have it published.
Q: Are you sure your book is not dangerous for society?
A: Yes! In the end, it only asks you to try to understand yourself. No missionizing, crusading or class war is required. I assume that the process of people becoming conscious will happen anyway and cannot be stopped. If this is true, this book can only accelerate the process.
Q: I think I don‘t fully understand some parts of the book. I have many questions. Can I discuss them with you?
A: I do not intend to become a leader of a movement or a guru. Therefore I suggest you discuss your questions with a good friend who has read this book as well (or some other good books). Sorry for this, please don‘t take it personal.
Q: Are you not scared to publish such a radical text? Some strange people could make you troubles.
A: Yes, I am. In fact very much so. But I‘m even more scared from what will probably happen soon if nobody tries what I am trying with this book. I’m just doing my best. So, even if you disagree with me, please don‘t show up in front of my house with a baseball bat. Thank you.
Q: Do you suggest we should destroy the institution of the family?
A: No, the contrary is true. I rather suggest to increase the size of the family drastically. That we include many more people in this set of people which we care for and express our love to.
Q: You talk so much about sex. Are you a sex obsessed pervert?
A: Probably not more than you. But I accept that sexuality is a major driving force in our life.
Q: Are you saying that women enjoy to be raped?
A: No! I'm saying that the evolution of human sexuality happened in interactions between the sexes which has created a mirroring effect on our sexual desires. This means the sexual needs of men and women are surprisingly compatible (contrary to popular belief). If you want to understand how this works, you have to read the book.
Q: You are crazy!
A: Yes, probably I am. But have you considered the possibility that you are crazy and I'm one of the few who are not?