The observation that this book is deeper than might be expected for a book on common sense is consistent with my initial decision in the late 1990’s to make On-the-Level available to everyone “online” and at no charge. Indeed, one of the 12 elements of Technidigm (bolded throughout this book as a teaching tool) is the need to take time to do things right. The need for this book was just not as evident 13 years ago as it is today.

How much would you pay for a book that was written over a decade ahead of its time and can form the basis needed to solve all the world’s problems (well, maybe not all of them)? A thousand dollars might be too much, and 10 bucks might be too little, so “nothing” is probably really not enough. Indeed, we tend not to appreciate anything we get for free. You do not even have to read the rest of this book to reach that common sense conclusion.

With the continuing economic and political issues at play and worsening, it would be good for all the nice people in the world to band together and try to fix a few things. Technidigm would enable that, but it takes a lot of money to spread the word (advertise) in a world that is already full of clamor. Thus, all donations would be used to increase Technidigm awareness everywhere. Since it is naïve to think that anyone wants to donate to something they don’t understand, obviously I don’t really expect anyone to help in that area. It is enough to just read this book and try to benefit from it, both of these tasks being challenging.

On-the-Level has enjoyed all these years of waiting for the right time. Thousands of Internet surfers have stumbled upon this book as a result of Googling and other such searches. I now believe that the thoughts (perhaps deep but increasingly relevant) in this book are needed by our country and the world, but that is made possible only be intelligent people doing it. I think these thoughts and teachings are more relevant to modern issues and conflicts; and many more people are likely to benefit from these thoughts and the associated problem-solving paradigm simply because more people are aware of and trying to save themselves and the members of their families from our many modern financial and social issues.

While this may be the right time for this book, the reader is cautioned that understanding the 12 elements of Technidigm requires some effort and practice. The reader must take the time to consider Technidigm’s relevance to many (if not most) issues, large and small, and learn to use Technidigm as the framework within which to consider and deal with them.

Charlie Jones
Technidigm 2010

Dedication

To Ginny

In 1966, I married Virginia Jane Wheeler, a 1966 Hood College graduate who grew up in Baltimore, Maryland. After quite a few military service related moves, we settled in Germantown, Maryland, where we have lived since 1981. We have two daughters, Susan and Jennifer. Ginny, besides being my main source of encouragement over the years, is a cancer survivor and also an elementary school teacher, a reading specialist in Montgomery County Public Schools.

This book is dedicated to Ginny for many reasons, one of which is that she read this book when it was in draft form and only offered one comment, that “it sure is more deep and complicated” than she thought it would be. Since then I have tried to uncomplicate the presentation. Nevertheless, I suppose it will always be a bit complex since it was written by an engineer, and it will always be in draft form since it must change constantly to keep pace with our complex, constantly changing world and its many problems and issues.

Preface

In this book I provide a relatively concise “technical paradigm,” coining the new word “technidigm.” This technical paradigm consists of the 12 elements of Technidigm, a framework for dealing with issues in our new millennium. While I could have established a more complex paradigm with many more elements, I decided to bow to the popular notion that 12 of anything is an upper limit for many people, and it is intended that this book should reach many people. Thus, the 12 elements discussed in this book represent those that I consider to be the most powerful and most useful across the broadest range of issues, concerns, and problems in general.

This book, titled On-the-Level, is subtitled Common Sense, Technically Speaking. In this increasingly complex world, our notions of common sense may not be as lucid as we would like. By the time we understand intuitively how things should work, technology moves on and produces a new world with new frames of reference, diminishing as well our confidence in the validity of basic social and moral principles that we once considered to be “self-evident.” Thus, this book is more about dealing with social and political problems that seem to constantly plague us even in this advanced world of technology and, possibly, as a result of this advanced world of technology. It is intended to be extremely useful in dealing with all such problems.

On the social side, it used to be that society and its basic principles changed little over many decades or even centuries. Now they seem to change (or become corrupted) a great deal even in only one decade. Change is driven by technology and is accelerated by the catalyst of “commercialism” (“greed” might be more accurate), and not all of this change is for the good of society. For example, television ratings (the number of people watching a given program) improve when crude or oversexed programming is provided, whether or not the program’s level of decadence outpaces the ability of society to recognize and to counteract its negative cultural consequences. We are momentarily amused by men and women behaving badly, while the constant portrayal of misbehavior gradually erodes society’s standards of behavior to lower and lower levels. Many of our young people do not even realize that the world was ever much different.

"Living together" before marriage has become the norm. Casual attitudes toward family cohesiveness and problem-solving responsibilities are particularly troublesome when accidental parents struggle with their “feel good” level of commitment and, later, to maintain basic connections with their own young-adult children. Failing to apply the wisdom of their ancestors as codified in the rituals of courtship and matrimony, they become increasingly unable to apply common sense to either avoiding or dealing with life’s expected problems.

While a few informal unions manage to succeed and result in the formal commitments of marriage, an increasing number of offspring cycle between divorced or never-married parents in search of stability, while finding chaos and further instability. Stable families seem to be more of a rarity, unstable children more common, and school shootings by students confusingly common. Yet, we somehow continue to reject the lessons of life passed to us from generation to generation, lessons based in common sense.

On the political side, there are probably fewer real changes in actual behavior than on the social side. We do have better access to what is going on in the political arena as a result of technology. You can probably find a political discussion 24/7 somewhere either on television or on the Internet. Every politician has a web site. Anyone interested in what politicians are doing in Washington, DC or even locally can find out almost immediately and from a variety of perspectives. On top of that, the news media are constantly looking for a “good story” to boost their ratings, and they may even make something up or, at least, strongly exaggerate or hype an otherwise uninteresting issue or event.

Of course, such social, political, and media deficiencies are a problem primarily because they are not “on the level” and present a range of modern disconnects with common sense. This book is titled On-the-Level and is intended to inject its readers with a modern version of Thomas Paine’s Common Sense, relying heavily on Technidigm’s 12 elements. In addition to the many readily apparent family and social issues, there are now many governmental and political disconnects, constitutional issues, and a whole range of media issues that need a strong injection of common sense.

Thomas Paine’s pamphlet helped spur the 1776 American patriots to take decisive actions toward independence from Great Britain, removing an oppressive government from the colonies in part due to “taxation without representation.” Today, we suffer from various levels of taxation frustrations that are uncontrollable even with representation. The single subject of taxes is enough for a new paradigm to undertake, so it would be an extraordinary achievement to put together a paradigm that addresses taxation as just one more application, something that Technidigm undertakes without any particular effort.

Perhaps this addendum on the subject of common sense is timely, will ring true to many people, and will spur modern patriots (perhaps a subgroup of the silent majority) to finally unite and take steps to gain better control of their own lives and, hopefully, of their country. There is no better time than the present to force political parties together in the straight jacket of common sense, and to force the news media to report just the facts without the hype. Technidigm can do that.

Our Colonial Frame of Reference

Two centuries ago, Thomas Paine taught the colonists about common sense by writing a short book with that name. What he had to say was sufficient to have an impact on solving the problems of the day, encouraging a dramatic shift in the political paradigm and leading to the independence of the American Colonies from Great Britain. It is the goal of this new book on Common Sense, Technically Speaking to have a similar impact on our modern problems.

The principles that formed the foundation for Paine’s Common Sense were primarily government related. Paine’s central theme was that government is a necessary evil, but a government that is not close to the people it serves should be discarded. Fortunately for Paine, the big question of the day was regarding independence from Great Britain. The arguments were easy to make, and the actions needed to achieve that independence were obvious. Modern notions of common sense are far more obscure and require effort to develop them properly, an effort that is made much easier when one understands and applies the twelve common sense elements explained in this book.

While what Paine taught about government in his book Common Sense is still valid today, it does not provide us with enough insights to address our many, more complex problems without some additional help. This is where this online book comes in. In addition to common sense problems with government, there is often a lack of modern versions of common sense in complex social issues, which are increasingly impacted by rapid changes in technology. Indeed, there is even a lack of common sense applied in modern technical fields such as the space program and in the nuclear energy field, arenas in which we might think that the application of common sense "is a given."

Some of the complexity involved with applying common sense today is a result of so many of our leaders and special-interest people not being On-the-Level, thus the name of this book. One must first be On-the-Level to become part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

It Includes Everybody!

After you learn about Technidigm, you become more aware of what is going on and how to deal more effectively with problems in our complex world, with its increasingly technological society. It is a condensed version of how to deal with complex issues. It is condensed in the sense that I have avoided the hundred shades of gray that would make it impossible to convey and understand. Thus, I have settled on the 12 most significant, critical elements of all issues.

These 12 elements are seldom all understood and satisfied in our modern society, resulting in the unfortunately high level of technical and social problems that we see today. Even those of us who fully understand Technidigm find it difficult to bring them to bear in discussions with the uninitiated. Most people are simply not accustomed to discussing issues in 12 parts, but everyone will be helped if we require this of government leaders, politicians, the news media, and anyone else involved with identifying and fixing major-impact problems or divisive issues, such as how to “improve” health care.

Still, even 12 elements are a challenge. Amazingly, Technidigm accommodates this fundamental human limitation or difficulty by making it unnecessary to invoke more than one or two of its elements to make progress or to win an argument (with the non-Technidigm crowd, of course) on almost any topic. Once studied, the applicable elements will likely pop into your head as soon as you start thinking about an issue or problem that you have. You are immediately armed with 12 points that need to be considered.

For example, using just a couple of the elements, Technidigm practitioners can dismiss most social or technical arguments as "level one" (opinions) and concurrently propose several approaches to reaching a more valid “level four” (solution) understanding. Technidigm is just in time for each of us to be able to deal more effectively with the modern social dysfunctions that we now consider to be rather normal. Perhaps soon you will hear an On-the-Level politician describe his level four solution to an issue, and also share his personal self-assessment score, a graded evaluation that emphasizes integrity. At the end of this book, after addressing the 12 elements, I provide a simple approach to comparing the credentials of those who would lead us in the application of the 12 Technidigm elements.

Common Sense Revisited

As already alluded to above, few of us can pursue "profound thinking" about common sense (a contradiction in terms) without at some point visiting Thomas Paine's original work, Common Sense. His 200 year old, revolutionary-period pamphlet is well-known but not widely-read. It is also a bit out-of-date when we consider the profound impacts of modern technology on whatever it is that we mean by wisdom and common sense. Yet it provides a starting point as well as a counterpoint for any modern effort on the subject of common sense. His focus was on common sense in government, which is addressed here as well.

Since I graduated from high school in 1962 (when I was sure I already knew everything!), I have witnessed the gradual demise of common sense and the counter-parallel rise of nonsense. Each of us has some notion of what I am talking about here, but in this online book I state my version of that notion. With the 12 elements of Technidigm, we can start to push back at some of the nonsense.

Unfortunately, as an engineer I am without the necessary skills to be so convincing and articulate that I can hold your attention throughout the presentation of On-the-Level. I am no Tom Clancy, but I think I have something here that needs to be said, something that will be understood, appreciated, and applied by a growing number of us modern citizens.

It's a Paradigm, Not a Paradox

While I can not grant you an increased portion of common sense, I can provide a "framework" or "paradigm" within which you can organize and exercise your own common sense. More importantly, once we all understand the framework, we will better understand each other and better communicate with each other. I offer only a framework, supplemented by a few level one opinions to get you thinking, but it is up to you to identify trusted practitioners who can manage to apply the 12 elements appropriately and come up with the plans and processes needed to achieve “level four” solutions.

At this point, please assume that I have managed to capture your attention and have motivated you to read, understand, and apply this online book. The level of motivation is, of course, very limited, especially when compared with the many other interests and distractions available in our modern society. It is my hope that there is enough interesting stuff in this online book to provide insights and to change your approach to dealing with common and uncommon issues.

A Bold Claim

Now for the boldest claim that I can make for this entire effort: Those people who understand and apply the 12 common sense Technidigm elements will quickly become much more effective members of our technical society.

Whether the issue is nuclear power plant safety (my area of expertise, by the way) or political-campaign funding (I can only suggest a solution in this book), Technidigm provides you with an approach to achieving important insights that are readily communicated. Even when other people do not understand the ins-and-outs of Technidigm, what you say is concise, unambiguous, and easily understood. It can make the difference between success and failure in our sound-bite world.

To those who want to hurt you, Technidigm feels like a sharp sword. To those who want to help you, you can explain the 12 Technidigm concepts in about 10 minutes. After all, it is only common sense!

Part I

The 12 Elements of Technidigm

Could the straggling thoughts of individuals be collected,
they would frequently form materials for wise and able men
to improve into useful matter.

- Thomas Paine, Common Sense

Chapter 1
A Simple Paradigm for All

Today, everyone is supposed to be equally wise and able, or at least be treated as such even if it violates common sense. It is expected that some readers will be able to read about, understand, and apply the concepts presented in this book, using it much like a text book on modern applications of common sense. Others will not be able to make it past the front matter. Still others will skim through the many pages and, perhaps, keep On-the-Level on their bookshelf as a reference book in case someone brings up the subject of Technidigm’s 12 elements.

I leave it to the reader to decide whether he or she is “wise and able” enough to comprehend and apply this book effectively. Even if the reader gives up early, the reader needs to consider whether it is appropriate for our national leaders and others (such as those in the news media and other professional critics) to be able to say that they were able to comprehend the book and can communicate effectively using the 12 elements of Technidigm. That is, would you vote for a senatorial or a presidential candidate who was simply unable to read and use a book on common sense?

Let us now jump right in, starting with something most people have already figured out for themselves.

Computers Can Not Do Everything

A computer can randomly write words forever and will eventually state everything. Now if we could just read it all and ignore the nonsense, we would not have to think for ourselves! While not quite that effective, the 12 elements of Technidigm will from now on help us to ignore all the gibberish and organize our thoughts and make it obvious when those around us have not yet done so.

More notable than the computer's ability to generate mountains of random gibberish is that even a "straggling thought" by a human being is likely to contain some elements of what we humans refer to as wisdom. As far as I know, no computer has ever been accused of having the slightest amount of wisdom. Nor are computers blessed with what we refer to as common sense. Only humans can have common sense, so only humans can have an unexpected shortage of it.

In pointing toward wisdom and ability as elements necessary to produce something useful, Thomas Paine lays out the basis of common sense. That is, common sense presumes the presence of at least some wisdom and, thus, common sense lies beyond purely mechanistic actions such as produced by computers, however powerful they may be. If common sense were available from computers, we would have more common sense in institutions such as our government. While we can program common sense behaviors into computerized gadgets, such programming is based on the past and can not be relied on for emergent situations not previously experienced by mankind.

Although computer technology is rapidly advancing, it remains a tool and not an end in itself. The skilled technicians and programmers who are improving our high-tech computer environment are doing little (if anything) that would enhance common sense. Indeed, it is more likely that rapid changes in technology are facilitating misguided cultural changes, changes that are outpacing our ability to learn from our mistakes and anticipate consequences. Likewise, rapid societal changes also frustrate our ability to develop a modern version for humanity’s basis for common sense.

Television, movie theaters, and the Internet provide communications vehicles for whatever perversion and titillation society has to offer. Technology promotes negative societal factors by making them more available to all age groups and more intense. For example, automatic weapons, bomb-laden trucks, portable nuclear weapons, and surface-to-air missiles provide the means for terrorism. Terrorism created and portrayed by modern media provides elements of suggestion, self-fulfillment, and false apprehensions that further complicate the social landscape.

Nothing prepares us adequately in advance to deal with the impacts of technology, so countervailing social structures are often developed reactively. Even if they could be developed more rapidly, perhaps also using technology, such countervailing social structures are still easily outpaced by the power of commercialism and profit seeking. Moreover, the inexperience of our youth makes them easy targets for degenerative lifestyles, especially when human wisdom and maturity, culturally positive religious dictums, and respect for laws and lawmakers are all undermined as part of a supposedly enlightened culture. If youthful friends obsessed by shallow interpersonal foolishness are portrayed favorably on television as a means of attracting an audience, we can expect shallow youth to become commonplace.

Exacerbating our misguided culture and its common sense foundations is that many of our brightest young people are caught up in computers rather than community. They are focused on developing what we can do rather than what we should do. Our government is also caught up in what it can do rather than what it should do. Our youth and our government require wise guidance from somewhere if they are to avoid failure. With the help of Technidigm, we can each contribute to providing that guidance, even using advanced technology to communicate that guidance.

The meaning of "high-tech" is redefined annually. However, if we presume that high-tech equates to high-wisdom, we are already disconnected from common sense. The dominance of youth in the high-tech arena reduces the probability that experience-based wisdom will be applied to important issues in a timely manner. We are increasingly entering into an era of social and technical trial and error, driven by the enhanced risk resulting from youthful approaches to life’s demands. Technidigm provides us with a universal framework within which we can catch up with and manage these risks and better avoid adverse changes.

Common Sense Is Wisdom, Not a Gut Reaction

Assuming the participants are "On-the-Level," Technidigm focuses us further on common sense and on our notions of applied wisdom. One cannot apply a useful amount of wisdom without periodically invoking common sense. It follows that one cannot make wise decisions without being consistent with common sense. We would all like to think that we have this thing called common sense, but our common sense is often confused with our gut reactions.

There is a difference between gut reactions (does not require thinking) and common sense (requires thinking). The lazy substitution of our gut reactions for common sense is a natural result of the confusion created by modern conveniences. For example, global communications require the compression of our daily news into one minute "in-depth" stories and strings of 10-second sound bites. We barely get enough information to have any reaction at all, but the news media that titillate the most while appearing to be sincere get the biggest audience and, thus, give us more of the same false analysis. They appeal to our gut reactions rather than to our intellect and common sense.

Technidigm addresses these gut wrenching, rapid, and superficial communication modes, creating an environment in which common sense and even wisdom once more thrive and can be communicated almost instantly. If you already know the 12 Technidigm elements, you know that in the case of the news media, everything must be presumed (at best) to be level one opinions until proven otherwise. We would be hesitant to make any conclusions at levels two and three, and most decisions will be made at level four. If you do not yet understand these levels, you soon will.

With Technidigm in place, in the rush to claim level four validity, some news sources will simply demonstrate that they are not “On-the-Level.” Nevertheless, our emotions are often stronger influences on our behavior than our intellect. Thus, even when we know something is not accurate or proper, we are likely to go along with it because it feels better. Even for those of us who are intent on making progress toward reason and wisdom, emotions will often overwhelm common sense and even logical proof on most subjects. Technidigm simply makes our errors in judgment more apparent, enabling us to make personal progress and, also, to promote clear thinking by others.

Technidigm reaches back more than 200 years to the common-sense thinking of the U. S. founding fathers, particularly as reflected in Thomas Paine's detailed essay on Common Sense. Under Technidigm, Thomas Paine's colonial notions of common sense are updated in terms of our modern technical culture. In particular, Technidigm restores our confidence in our modern notions of common sense, overcoming the confusion introduced in part by technology.

This modern lack of understanding regarding common sense is real. We have no basis for applying common sense to issues that we do not understand. Professional specialization and advances in technology cause much of this uncertainty. Ironically, these advances in technology, although rapid, have been just gradual enough that many people sense the problem but are not sure what it is. They certainly are not eager to admit to personal defects such as a lack of common sense. Saving everyone from this defect, Technidigm clarifies the arena of modern common sense and concurrently provides a shorthand language for communicating common sense even when we are dealing with issues that we do not fully understand. Thus, Technidigm is a powerful and unprecedented tool that all of us can use at any time to deal with any issue, fully understood or not.

The Technidigm user reflects on principles, objectives, and solutions to issues in terms of the 12 elements of Technidigm, creating a powerful modern version of common sense. Technidigm applications include all of the major categories of human interest and activities involving decision making and conflicts. For example, the Technidigm approach is effective in addressing issues of politics, religion, social programs, the military, crime prevention, and even the news media. More importantly, Technidigm often points directly at the best solutions to problems while quickly overwhelming opinions and out-of-context facts.

A good example of modern solutions is found in the arena of nuclear safety, my area of expertise. While I have spent most of the past 44 years working on many and varied nuclear-related level four solutions, there is no point in me reminiscing about them here. Less than one percent of my readers would be fascinated with any of that, but the 12 elements of Technidigm apply there as well.

It applies to all issues and problems because Technidigm is to a technical society what a hammer is to a house -- an indispensable tool for construction and maintenance! Yet, before the tool can be used, it must be picked up. You will learn the basics of Technidigm here, and then you will be able to discuss almost any issue in terms of those basics, especially after reviewing some of my level one application verbiage, discussions that are admittedly limited to the lowest level of Technidigm.

The level one discussions contained in this book merely point out that, even without knowing much about an issue, anyone can understand its basis and start to understand what others are saying (or not saying) about a problem, and some even create a common sense solution on their own. The only prerequisite is being On-the-Level! If you have a pre-established agenda that you are advocating at the expense of all else, you are simply off-the-level and can not perform effectively even at level one. Moreover, using Technidigm, others will readily perceive and challenge your slanted agenda.

Only the Serious Need Apply

Thus, Technidigm supports those On-the-Level, serious people who want to be effective in dealing with the complexities of modern professionalism and the problems of our modern society. As you will discover, those people who are On-the-Level do well in dealing with others in the unofficial community of Technidigm users. Those who are off-the-level are exposed as such and, thus, become motivated to upgrade their integrity.

Initially, not everyone out there will know about or want to take the time to understand Technidigm. Those who do understand Technidigm will simply talk over the heads of others as may be needed to get the job done, including constituting an informal political party wherein every candidate is assessed relative to all others.

Care must be taken not to be arrogant or otherwise offensive when doing this, but people who have common sense also have a surplus of integrity and have good manners anyway. Once you have communicated using Technidigm terminology, you will be a bit annoyed by people who cannot do so. Nevertheless, your Technidigm communications will be unambiguous, concise, and defensible even if your listeners have no clue about Technidigm.

Most importantly, Technidigm places integrity at the center of everything. For example, integrity is a key focal point of the Technidigm self assessment, as discussed at the end of this book in the appendices. After completing the ten-minute self assessment, you can even use your score on your résumé and in correspondence. Professionals who understand, subscribe to, and use Technidigm methods can work more reliably and effectively on any task. Thus, a continuing application of Technidigm thinking is a commitment to the pursuit of excellence.

Anyone can learn about Technidigm basics, but applying those basics indicates that the user is serious about understanding and dealing with modern issues and, just as important, has achieved a mature level of integrity. Technidigm is about integrity as much as common sense!

Why Technidigm?

Have you ever put a 1,000-piece jigsaw puzzle together? You can spend days, weeks, and even months trying to fit all of the tiny and almost-identical pieces together. Each piece of the puzzle that you are able to place becomes a small, personal triumph. Yet, chances are you will not have the time or the patience to complete the puzzle. You just hope that whoever gave you the darn thing never finds out that you gave up in frustration!

But what if someone showed you how to identify the twelve most important puzzle pieces for every jigsaw puzzle? What if these twelve pieces are so important and central to solving the puzzle that once they are identified, placing all of the remaining pieces becomes trivial? Would you be impressed? Knowing immediately which twelve pieces are the keys to solving the puzzle would really cut down on your level of frustration!

Technidigm gives you the ability to simplify complex situations. You only have to understand and apply the 12 elements. Given the current state of the world economy and the increasing difficulties that government has in getting things done, it is appropriate for each of us to learn about Technidigm’s 12 elements, perhaps contributing our own thoughts and ideas about how to improve this solution facilitator for our own interests and applications.

The logical framework of Technidigm provides substance for what you have intuitively suspected all along but were too unsure of yourself or too confused to assert with any confidence. As you learn more about this logical framework for assessing problems and communicating your own highly perceptive views, you will actually enjoy identifying the key pieces of the complex problems that come your way! You will routinely apply one or more parts of Technidigm to put a problem into proper perspective quickly, or you may decide to apply all twelve parts, reaching a conclusion or solution. It is your choice. Nevertheless, Technidigm beginners should practice using or thinking about the 12 elements daily, even while not addressing major issues, perhaps gradually overcoming their dependence on the views of others, including the self serving hype produced by news media.

More important than solving the problems of an individual is the possibility of solving complex societal problems. Technidigm provides a common language and frame of reference within which each individual can communicate effectively on any complex issue regardless of his or her personal ability, education, or experience. An individual applying the 12 elements of Technidigm can easily produce results that exceed the products of study committees and consensus groups and in less time.

The older generations will have more difficulty understanding and applying the 12 elements than will the younger generations. Students naturally have more time to contemplate and reflect on such things, and they have less intellectual baggage to overcome. A high school student who thinks and learns in terms of these 12 elements will ask the best questions, reach the best conclusions, and develop a life-long skill that can be used everyday. This student will extract and separate opinions and facts, look for the rest of the facts (do the necessary research), and seek the best overall solution to each problem or issue. The student will recognize views that are polarized (off-the-level) and will seek a higher level and more circumspect understanding.

At the minimum, with almost no effort, the student will quickly recognize when this higher level of understanding has not yet been attained. For example, politicians will no longer be able to talk about their solutions to problems without addressing each of the 12 elements. Anything less would likely be viewed as a shallow approach compared with what the student wrote in a short essay as part of a routine homework assignment.

Those people who learn to communicate using Technidigm will be more interested, effective, and precise in sharing their thoughts with others who have also become conversant in Technidigm. In many cases, others will be forced to learn Technidigm simply to keep up. Politicians will be much more able to communicate with voters, and the news media will be able to provide a more efficient conduit for communicating news. Much less room is left for misunderstanding. Ambiguities and distortions are easily identified and eliminated, and everyone is tuned in on separating fact from opinion and whether the facts are all present.

The goal is to have everyone understanding and using Technidigm as soon as possible. This is why it is on the Internet. You can pick up the 12 elements of Technidigm rather quickly, allowing you to understand what others are saying. With this minimal knowledge, you will understand what is happening when a politician responds to news reporters' so-called tough questions, taking them head on and elevating (or limiting) the responses to the right levels of discussion. Moreover, there are dozens of ongoing problems that pop up in the news media daily, most of which you will be able to better understand yourself as you read them! You will become a more effective critic.

Technidigm is a powerful tool, but only those having good intentions should wield it. It can help us solve problems, or it can help us make them worse. Since it is a two-edged sword, the most important attribute for a Technidigm user is that user's integrity or intentions. With a premium placed on the user's integrity, it follows that each user will apply strict standards of integrity in as many situations as may be appropriate, which is to say all of them. Thus, Technidigm cuts a wide swath through the center of society, and its effects are most notable in arenas of relatively questionable integrity such as modern politics. Those who choose to wield this powerful tool inappropriately (radical elements, as usual) will soon be embarrassed by those who do it properly (the majority of users).

Thus, the two edges of the sword may be referred to as (1) On-the-Level and (2) off-the-level. It is far easier for young people than us older folks to be On-the-Level and to be perceived as such. It does not take much of an off-the-level "track record" to make it very difficult to be perceived as being On-the-Level. Political campaigns are notorious for resurrecting a candidate's failures to be upright, whether it be the usual media effort to tear down what is up and to build up what is down or an opponent's effort to create doubt regarding the other guy's character. Often, all political candidates are damaged during a political campaign (political warfare) by their own off-the-level behavior, often presented out of context and with little appreciation for elapsed time and possible character growth.

Young people are idealistic until bent by the realities of life. The bending forces are often imposed by their off-the-level seniors seeking to make a buck, get promoted, or get elected to some political or government position. Being off-the-level is frequently more effective than being On-the-Level, just as liars are more effective thieves than are honest people. Stealing an election by lying or pointing out the youthful indiscretions of one's opponent has become acceptable in that it generates little outrage among the general population. With Technidigm thinking and interactions available, everyone has an effective means of countering such intellectual thievery and deceptions.

You are already technically competent to some degree if you downloaded this book from the Internet. The wonder of Technidigm is that any intelligent person can understand it and use it effectively with very little time invested. If you know of any intelligent people out there, tell them about what you have learned here, and perhaps they too will want to be able to address issues effectively and to communicate in terms suitable for the Third Millennium!

Polarized Politicians

Many politicians are polarized, by definition, and polarized people are almost always not On-the-Level. Attempts by politicians to apply the 12 Technidigm elements inappropriately to social issues quickly expose their underlying principles and objectives to the glaring light of common sense. All we have to do is to ask about their level four report on an issue, a question that forces a detailed explanation or reveals that there is none. If you could look at the kind of level three research and level four solutions that are now commonplace in nuclear safety, then you would start to understand what I mean by a detailed explanation.

Asking for a level four report is easy, but the response to such a request is difficult. This rapid, inescapable Technidigm exposure makes it easier to discourage social anarchy and to encourage more thoughtful, experienced, and capable people to step forward into the political arena. Yet politics is merely a simple application for Technidigm, one that is so obvious that we will perhaps eventually wonder how politics ever existed without using Technidigm terminology!

But we will not be able to turn simple areas like politics around until a lot more people understand and use the 12 Technidigm elements. I would like to include you in the Technidigm community. To realize its power in politics and other areas of your life, you must first take the time to understand Technidigm!

Twelve Parts

The 12 puzzle pieces of the Technidigm solution system are shown below. When all 12 pieces are in place and understood, you are ready to solve the problem or establish a program to address the problem systematically over a period of time.

This puzzle-like picture of the key elements of Technidigm will become central to your problem solving for now on. You will be able to recall each of the 12 parts readily as you deal with any situation. The pieces are arranged in specific locations that help you learn and recall them.

The foundation piece of this puzzle, being On-the-Level, is probably the most important Technidigm concept. Personal integrity and honesty are required for those people who are On-the-Level, so the left side of the puzzle is held up by character and principles. Similar but different is the pillar on the right side, objectives. Most of us associate principles with honesty and integrity, but a person can have principles without being honorable. If they do not have honorable objectives, principles have no real meaning. Once an individual is On-the-Level, however, chances are that his or her principles are the right kind of principles, and they will naturally pursue honorable objectives.

The fourth most important part of Technidigm is found at the top of the 12-part solution picture. After we are sure we are On-the-Level and that we are using the right principles to pursue the right objectives, it is also important to be using the right context. Most people understand that facts taken out of context can cause more problems than they solve. Unless we are using the right context as we solve our problems, it does not matter much whether we are honest and have good intentions. Solving problems in the right context requires the application of knowledge, and knowledge is the cumulative result of education and experience. Thus, it is more likely that a problem is being resolved in context when leaders and decision makers are properly educated and experienced. A method for comparing people in these areas is included in the appendices.

The root cause of a problem (and thus the solution) will escape us unless we understand context. Even with the general context identified, part of the solution process is to ensure that we have identified the specific context needed for a more applicable solution. One of the primary defects in Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations is that generic rules are derived from one set of specific contexts and then applied to another set of specific contexts. OSHA inspectors are simply not prepared to assess the overall safety of diverse industrial plants, but they have no problem identifying hundreds or thousands of potential, safety-related defects. They can cause a safe factory or plant to be shut down unfairly because they are not able to assess the in-context impact of potential defects.

Keep in mind that context changes with time. Time is a central element of Technidigm since it impacts (1) context as well as (2) the achievement of solutions or programs through resources, components, and feedback. The cyclical social and progressive technical changes that have occurred over the past two centuries have been dramatic. Yet time's relationship to context is what created the need for this book on technical common sense in the first place. Technology changes during the past 50 years have occurred so quickly that we have had little time to evaluate their impact on society and to dampen society's constant cycles from good-and-heavenly to bad-and-devilish. But time seems to be running out, and we have to plan for the future, as did our own forefathers. The 12 Technidigm elements will play an important role in that future, but it is up to us to understand and apply them.

Chapter 2
The Four Paradigm Boundaries

The four border pieces of Technidigm are (1) being On-the-Level, (2) having principles, (3) pursuing objectives within the limits of those principles, and (4) keeping things in context. These boundaries are critical to understanding the remaining eight pieces that I have elected to place in the center of the paradigm diagram.

Most issues or problems should first be understood in terms of these four elements, and this basic understanding should be kept in mind as each of the other eight pieces is considered. As will be described in more detail on later pages, the eight internal pieces of the puzzle can be divided into two sets of four. The four pieces on the left are referred as levels (one through four), which culminate at level four in a solution, and the four pieces on the right are referred to as elements of that solution, the elements needed to execute the solution systematically.

Together, levels and systems allow us to develop a comprehensive and highly effective approach to addressing almost any problem or issue. Yet, we must take care to protect the four bounding elements and revisit them frequently to make sure we continue to be On-the-Level. As powerful as these key concepts are, levels and systems are useless unless the four bounding pieces are in place -- being On-the-Level, applying principles consistently in achieving objectives, and getting things into the proper context of time and place.

Each of these four bounding pieces is addressed in much more detail below. The approach I have taken is to provide a lot of reinforcement so you can learn the 12 elements thoroughly, such that they will become a normal part of your thinking -- your native tongue rather than a foreign language!

Being "On-the-Level"

You have often heard the phrase "On-the-Level" used as a substitute for honesty. The personal quality of being On-the-Level is closely related to one's integrity. Being On-the-Level is probably derived from many centuries of using scales and weights to conduct trade.

With or without the use of scales to conduct transactions, a merchant is either On-the-Level or off-the-level. Once a buyer decides a merchant is off-the-level, future transactions with that merchant are not likely to occur. Likewise, if the buyer believes that the merchant is always On-the-Level, the use of the scales becomes a formality rather than a necessity.

Just as doctors practice their bedside manner, politicians practice being sincere. Politicians become experts at "looking good like a candidate should." Many news media personalities are also paid big salaries because they look good and appear to be sincere, conveying a sense of integrity that captures a bigger audience than that of the competition. Politicians and news media people have an advantage over doctors since they are just a little more detached from the focus or personal context of the individual citizen than are doctors from their patients. They also do not have to maintain detailed records, nor is it likely that anyone will file a malpractice suit against them, although they do worry a little about libel suits.

Likewise, people in the entertainment industry are largely unaccountable simply because they admit to being actors. They have instant emotional capital among their fans, so they can influence a large number of people. Once again, technology plays a significant role in enabling actors to attain such influence. Properly used, that influence can be positive. When used simply to support a narrow or polarized special interest agenda, an actor's influence can be problematic. Like politicians and news media people, popular entertainers are difficult to hold accountable, especially in the absence of a critical framework such as Technidigm.

In contrast to doctors, politicians, entertainers, and news media personalities, industrial plant managers are likely to be held strictly accountable. In particular, nuclear plant managers can not afford to just look good, at least not for very long. They must operate their nuclear plants under the scrutiny of independent inspectors (I used to be one of them) who get paid to make long lists of discrepancies. If a nuclear plant manager or worker is not On-the-Level, it is likely that they will be identified as contributing to the root causes of problems or potential problems.

In one instance, a nuclear department manager merely suggested that our inspection team should ease up a bit on the inspection. He was unemployed before the day was out. He was held accountable for his poor approach to nuclear power plant safety. There are many such stories that could be told about the strict standards and accountability in the nuclear industry, but off-the-level people are found much more frequently in areas of context more familiar to the reader. Indeed, most of you could write your own book on people who are not On-the-Level and not inclined to do the right things (objectives) for the right reasons (principles).

No Point Being Off-the-Level

You do not often hear the phrase "off-the-level," but you immediately recognize that this refers to dishonesty. Being "on"-the-level is important because there is no point in trying to conduct business or solve problems in the midst of dishonesty. Thus, Technidigm stresses personal integrity, making it a central litmus test for those who want to participate in Technidigm. How would you like to have dishonest people operating a nuclear power plant in your community? Fortunately, the nuclear industry has no tolerance at all for dishonest people. The same is true for the military. The tough part is identifying the individuals who should be removed.

The need for honesty and integrity in human relations was much more evident a couple of hundred years ago when people depended on each other more than they depended on government. Being On-the-Level was a litmus test for most situations, a test that quickly removed a lot of the confusion surrounding most problems. People were On-the-Level, and their handshake was enough to seal a deal.

A person's handshake was as important as a signature on a contract is today. Some would say that personal integrity was once more important than a signature. Integrity is just as important today as it ever was -- we have simply failed to recognize its importance and have failed to require it in a consistent manner.

Being On-the-Level: A Matter of Intent

Requiring integrity is not the same as requiring perfection. Perfection is merely enabled by the good intentions of honest people. Such people have good intentions, and they should be forgiven their honest errors more readily than people of questionable integrity.

Integrity is a key part of Technidigm and is closely related to the "fifth dimension" of context. Integrity is needed to keep things in context or to apply experience properly in new situations. Integrity is one of the most powerful tools that we have available to us as human beings. We associate integrity with truth and honor, so we award people of integrity an initial presumption of being correct. They do not have to prove that they are correct on an issue -- we take it for granted just like we assume that the captain of a ship will make correct decisions, or at least the best decision humanly possible in a given context. This does not mean that mistakes will not be made.

Most of us would say that it is foolish to fire people when they make honest mistakes. Who would have or could have taken better action, given the situation? Yet, if a captain takes the ship aground, the custom is, indeed, to hold that captain accountable. In the context of the Navy (where I spent many years), even honest mistakes can cause the loss of many lives, so captains are held strictly accountable for those lives as well as for the proper and efficient use of their ship and its assets. As compared with non-military leaders, military leaders are far more likely to be presumed to have integrity, and they are also the easiest leaders to replace, rightly or wrongly, fairly or unfairly.

We can also look at it from the opposite direction. People of integrity are often viewed as being natural leaders, but they are also presumed to be good leaders as well. Their intentions are noble, so they command respect rather than suspicion. They do not have to defend everything they do. Those people who understand, subscribe to, and practice Technidigm are also presumed to have good intentions, so their mistakes are honest and not intentional. Practicing Technidigm does not mean that they are going to make perfect decisions. It does mean that they are more likely to make the best and fairest decision available.

No Greater Love Intent…

We associate self sacrifice and integrity with military organizations simply because military people sometimes have to put their lives on the line in a way self-serving people would not. To the extent that military leaders rise to the top of a military organization due to their demonstrated integrity, especially in combat, we can easily sense that integrity. They have proven that they are willing to lose their lives for (at least) something.

We presume that such a military leader would make a fine government leader, even with no previous government experience. The first president of the United States, George Washington, was a professional military officer and was known for his integrity. Dwight Eisenhower served as president in the 1950's as a result of his 1940's World War II military leadership and his aura of professional integrity.

More recently, Colin Powell could have taken the same path with similar credentials, but he was reluctant to take on our modern political and media arena. Thus, we are stuck with professional politicians who place priority on getting elected rather than on the more noble aspirations of mankind. Not only do they not have the nobility needed to place their lives on the line like the pre-revolutionary colonial founding fathers, they actually shun the military.

Getting a noble military leader to participate in the modern political arena will be much easier under Technidigm. With enforcement by an increasingly significant segment of the voters, successful political candidates and political party campaigns will increasingly be based on integrity. While there will still be a significant portion of the voting public that makes foolish choices on election day, their numbers will continue to decrease as more people become aware of and apply Technidigm.

Different Kinds of Integrity

Doctors are judged on what we might call absolute integrity. Politicians and the news media are expected to have at least some integrity, but they are judged primarily in relative terms. Also, politicians and the news media are often presenting us with information and decisions that are outside our personal knowledge and experience, so we may not realize what aspects are out-of-context or blown out of proportion.

We are seldom able to assess the true integrity and competence of politicians and news media personalities even in relative terms. They are also much more practiced at simply looking good than we are at assessing their integrity, much less their competence. We seldom have the opportunity to get to know these people personally, so our judgment is easily manipulated.

We hardly realize that most of the talking heads on television are simply reading words written by others on topics with which they themselves are unfamiliar and even totally ignorant. Yet, these people apply their good looks and credibility in a highly influential daily news context, with television viewers being swayed to believe that the commentary is accurate, circumspect, balanced, and complete. They can literally say just about anything and get away with it, as long as a gross violation of ethics is not evident.

In contrast, we deal with our doctors one-on-one and can more readily sense their true level of competence and forthrightness. It is also easier for us to find another doctor who is more competent and forthright than it is to find better politicians and news media personalities. We have more control. One Technidigm objective is to motivate politicians and the news media to act more like doctors when it comes to dealing with society's ills. While such a objective may be unattainable with regard to all politicians and all of the news media, we can hope to achieve an improvement trend across the political scene and in the media industry.

Medicine is also an industry. Doctors are increasingly expected to perform their services within a profit-and-loss organization, and they are more vulnerable than most professionals to legal actions. Some doctors and health management organizations take illegal advantage of public health programs sponsored by the government. Without inherent integrity, it is relatively easy for those in the medical industry to steal from the public coffers. Likewise, many government contractors have figured out how to extract undeserved profits from the government.

Indeed, the government seems to have established many avenues for off-the-level individuals and companies to thrive. When they are found out, we may have a scandal for the news media to talk about, and the attention thus given to such scandals ensures that those people who are defined as being responsible will be severely punished. Their careers are destroyed, and they may even go to jail and have to pay exorbitant fines. Such is the effect of public opinion as created by the media and as applied by judges and juries, sometimes at an emotional level rather than in proper context. In a technical society such as ours, it is increasingly difficult to find a qualified judge and a jury of one’s peers. Often, we can only claim such fairness out of habit rather than reality.

Thus, the importance of integrity is readily apparent, but a consistent and comprehensive approach to demanding integrity is needed. Technidigm's emphasis on being On-the-Level places a premium on integrity. The other 11 elements allow each of us to achieve high levels of integrity and concurrently discourage the kind of nonsense, special interest influence, and accidental unfairness that permeates much of our modern, complex society.

We mean well, but we can not do things very well simply because of a lack of the kind of integrity needed to actual realize that we probably do not have the correct answers to complex problems available to us in the news media or in the polls.

On-the-Level Integrity

Being human, we find it far less difficult to deal with issues of judgment when we are allowed to use simplifications, including the bad simplifications (out-of-context facts) as well as the good ones (trusting people based on their apparent integrity). Integrity is a virtue, so it becomes a valuable generalization or simplification that we can use to mold our opinions on issues that are well beyond our personal frame of reference or personal competence.

When we know that we can depend on someone else's integrity to help us make decisions, we feel comfortable dealing cooperatively with them on even the most complex and obscure issues. It is often just too hard for each of us to deal personally with issues within the context of the properly developed, comprehensive set of facts. We are in a constant search for persons of integrity who at least claim to know what is right to do in various circumstances. Under Technidigm it becomes easier to sort out such claims, and it also becomes easier to identify people of integrity. Moreover, levels and self-assessment scores provide dramatic competency sorters and filters. If someone claims a self-assessment score higher than what they deserve, their integrity is questioned. If it is calculated to be low relative to others, those others will be given an advantage in terms of public acceptance of their opinions and any facts that they may offer relative to solving a problem or addressing an issue.

The nuclear industry depends greatly on personal integrity and unreserved cooperation, as do the independent assessment teams that inspect nuclear plants and facilities. There are many different functional areas or departments at nuclear plants, and their interfaces with each other and with senior management are complex. An example of these interfaces is provided in the management assessment guidance that I helped to develop over a decade ago. Such assessments are applicable to many industries that have significant safety responsibilities and that must rely on individual integrity.

Importantly, it is of little or no value to poll the public as to the propriety of building new nuclear power plants, on how they should be managed, or whether they are really as safe as they should be. There are probably less than ten thousand people in the entire world who would be able to come close to the right answer, and their answer today might be wrong a year later or a decade later. Such matters are just too far beyond the ability of the average citizen and even the most highly respected news media personalities to comprehend. The same could be said of most modern technologies or industries.

It's Really All Relative

Due to specialization in the work force, no one knows everything (or even close), so we have to rely constantly on individual integrity to get things done properly. When neither side of an issue or in a political campaign can claim much personal integrity, then we often have to resort to assessing relative amounts of integrity. Professional politicians know what is required to get elected just like each of us knows what is required to be successful in our own professions. They know that (1) how they look on camera and (2) simple name recognition are usually more important than their ability or integrity. If a politician looks really good, many voters can be convinced that a politician has a lot of integrity even when surrounded by contrary evidence. This is especially easy when we consider that politicians only have to create an illusion of having more integrity than the most popular opposing candidate.

An appearance of integrity is a lot easier to develop than true integrity, so it should not surprise us that some of the most successful politicians merely appear to have integrity. Indeed, true integrity often gets in the way of developing an appearance of integrity. In our sound-bite society, the appearance of integrity has become more effective than true integrity, especially for successful politicians. Bill Clinton's raised eyebrows and ambiguous language convince us that he will always do the right thing regardless of the issue, setting the standard in some respects for all professional politicians. Yet, we suspect that such integrity is pretty shallow and self serving.

Yet, with the 12 elements of Technidigm being used by such politicians, they will have a lot of opportunities to demonstrate their leadership and integrity simply by using these elements routinely as part of their vocabulary and approach to solving problems. We seek to improve the fairness of our perceptions of the integrity to be found in others using Technidigm, motivating even politicians to do the right thing at the right time.

Successful politicians seeking re-election find it even easier to appear to be honest, capable, and knowledgeable simply by avoiding responsibility for what went wrong during their tenure. With incumbency-based name recognition, most politicians can get re-elected just by maintaining appearances and never admitting to any faults. Politicians having integrity are more easily defeated because they will admit their mistakes. Thus, without a direct emphasis on integrity and real substance, we are likely to have unscrupulous and unqualified politicians running things.

On the other side of that coin, it is easy enough for the news media and pollsters to create an impression that an incumbent has made or is making mistakes. As described in more detail later in this book, the news media exist and thrive by being able to report change rather than reporting on the status quo. A prime example for 2006 is the notion that the U.S. should not have invaded Iraq since no weapons of mass destruction were found. The more elegant assessment that, if such weapons (especially nuclear weapons) had been found we would have failed to invade that country in time, is lost in the rush to find fault and to seek to replace all the leaders who are in place.

Indeed, even more elegant an argument could be made that the invasion of Iraq eliminated a nuclear weapons development program once and for all, a program started in the 1970s and which cost the Iraqi people hundreds of millions of dollars. The Iraqi nuclear program expenditures were mostly wasted on trying to build isotope separation facilities that they could not get to work, but with a continuing clandestine program that had perhaps only been delayed during the 1990s.

With regard to keeping the former Iraq regime from acquiring nuclear weapons, we could make the case that it was a great success, especially as compared with subsequent developments in Iran and in North Korea. Yet, the news media and the opposing politicians are eager to find fault with how all three of these countries were managed in terms of their nuclear weapons programs.

Under Technidigm, it is much more difficult to change principles and objectives to suit the special interests of the few, and more attention has to be paid to the differing context of each situation. With differing context, the level four solution could easily be totally different. It is just that we sometimes fail to articulate the solution or, as in the case of issues involving nuclear weapons, it is in the best interest of everyone to keep those solutions secret.

Within the realm of applying secrecy on behalf of the interests of a nation, those with the most integrity will keep the secrets better, and the same people will seek to find the best solution to these important issues on our behalf. Thus, we need to elect the best leaders that we can in a democracy, and give them the benefit of the doubt on issues and problems that require or depend on secrecy to be effective. Under Technidigm, this kind of election and reliance process is facilitated.

Insisting on Integrity and Ability

One Technidigm objective is to minimize the need for assessing relative amounts of integrity. This can be accomplished in part if we expand our insights by adding to integrity the relative levels of knowledge and experience -- that is, relative wisdom. Not only should politicians and government officials have good intentions to do the right thing, they should be able to do so. With this complementary need in mind, we can develop a simple quantitative framework within which to assess ability and integrity. As long as it is applied consistently, a comparative assessment process is almost as good as an absolute assessment process. It would be a great service to all of us if the news media expended more of their resources on generating objective assessments of political candidates rather than simply tearing down those who are up and building up those who are down.

In the nuclear industry, one goal is to improve each nuclear plant's safety record continuously. This requires positive recognition for good performance records and negative consequences for not-so-good performance records. Under Technidigm, time and feedback elements (discussed more in later sections of this book) are used to generate positive recognition and negative feedback quantitatively, making integrity a significant component of one's qualifications for any leadership role.

If we are able to assess integrity quantitatively, and two people are about the same, we must look at experience and education in identifying our most capable and deserving leaders. If the levels of integrity are significantly different, we may perhaps decide that, at least for the people being compared, education and experience do not need to be assessed. Unfortunately, it is far too difficult to assess integrity, so sometimes it is useful to assess everything else first.

We may give credit to some for military experience and credit to others for corporate experience, inferring some measure of integrity based on their actions that reflect integrity. We would give a medal of honor winner an edge on integrity based on military actions. We would give a corporate president a few points for initiating an expensive recall of a defective product that otherwise might not have been found out by the consumer. Each political candidate is already eager to release such information, and we only need a way of using it, a way provided by Technidigm thinking and assessments.

Each of the Four Directions symbolizes a certain power. In this circle, East is knowledge, South is life, West is the power of change, and North is wisdom.

Basic Integrity

Honesty used to be important and even critical to a person's social position and employment. Many view the simpler life before the explosion of technology as more honest. People did not even bother to lock their doors.

The modern era of technology brought us advanced communications and an awareness that not everyone is as good as we might have assumed in the past. With technology came a worldly awareness that made people a little more suspicious of others. It became easier to move to another town, state, or country, so our neighbors became strangers. In conjunction with this increased awareness of the world, we also somehow became less aware of our own neighbors and neighborhoods. Who knows whether a Frankenstein or serial killer is at the door or in the neighborhood? Maybe the people down the street bought their house and cars using drug money. Even more alarming is that it is now possible for a total stranger living in another country to steal from us over the Internet. Moreover, they are dedicated to doing so.

It used to be that people viewed their world more from the narrow confines of their own neighborhood, their schools, their local businesses, and their religious communities. Most of their experience was On-the-Level. Dishonesty and deception existed, but they were not of constant concern, even when dealing with strangers. If it was not totally natural to be honest, it was natural to be nonviolent and to participate positively in society. Whether or not this is true today seems to be obscured by our view of society, a view distorted by television, movie, and computer game violence. Perhaps it is a matter of innocence lost. Once lost, it may never be regained. What remains may perhaps be better managed and controlled, but we have to seek out ways to do so. Technidigm facilitates such principles and objectives.

Movies and Television

Yet the world is largely driven by other principles and objectives. People view their world from the broader social and emotional environment created in the profit-and-loss world of commercialized technology, particularly movies and television. From my own experience of over 60 years, I can note for the ready that I believe we started a steep decline in moral values (and thus integrity) in about 1975, if not somewhat before. We had to segregate entertainment into different moral categories, although it has never been quite proper to state this openly. Nevertheless, I doubt that many would argue that the best social values are found in G rated entertainment as compared with all the other ratings. Yet we as humans are not that eager to seek G rated movies out when we can find other entertainment that strikes us as being more entertaining, if less socially redeeming.

More modest societies around the world are even more shocked by our crudeness and our capitalistic bent on exporting our violence and immodest sexuality. Still other countries simply wish that they could keep up with the U.S. on generating profits from vulgarity, brutality, and sensuality in the entertainment arena. Still other countries are so bad that no one needs to go to the movies since they experience such things everyday in real life. Some radical elements in come countries use our relative level of decadence against us, even if we fail to acknowledge that we have such a problem. Some of them have declared war on us and intend to destroy us totally. We call them terrorists and they call us the Great Satan, mistaking us for those few among us who are without integrity and honor. Each is a cultural minority, perhaps, but the two minorities are making life miserable for the rest of us, and neither should be acceptable to us.

On-the-Level Common Sense, Technically Speaking by Charlie Jones

2010: Timeliness of This Book a note from the author

Preface

Chapter 1 A Simple Paradigm for All

Twelve Parts

Chapter 2 The Four Paradigm Boundaries

Being "On-the-Level"

Basic Integrity

On-the-Level
Common Sense, Technically Speaking

by Charlie Jones

2010: Timeliness of This Book
a note from the author

Chapter 1
A Simple Paradigm for All

Chapter 2
The Four Paradigm Boundaries