(Part 3/3) Universe 25 / Mouse Utopia : My conclusion

Posted on Posted in Thoughts

Having both read and analysed much of John Calhoun’s Universe 25 / Mouse Utopia experiment I feel compelled to have shared my thoughts as previously published in part 2:

  1. …That “Religion” is merely a scripted paternalism of orderly yet coercion. Sociological conformity expectations, handed down from one generation to the next.
  2. …Irrespective if you are a”Man” or a “woman” or inbetween – nobody is benign. Irrespective through direct (physical / aggression) and/or indirect(structural / coercion) forms of violence. There is no innocence in human instincts.
  3. Lastly, our confusion over what a “meaningful life” or “meaningful work” I believe can be addressed by reconciling a symbiotic relationship between Meanings & Rewards. Meanings – the why and how – the biology and physicalities). And rewards (the “product/s” and “outcomes”).

Now we are arriving into this third (and final) part of this write up – as an attempt to address the biggest question of all that remains anxiously silenced. Before we proceed, here is my disclaimer.

With all due respect to dieticians, nutritionists, doctors, psychologists, professors, politicians, sociologists, data-scientists, lawyers, economists, engineers, chemists, physicists, philosophers, and scholars of the world wide web of various institutions – I hereby apologises for the sheer difficulties at potentially digesting this article. For I humbly carry absolutely none of similar profession credentials within my career taglines or in my curriculum vitaes. I simply assert the need to both discuss and address the turbulences of today in a whollistical, connected symbiotic manners. By highlighting all parallel concern/s of nutrition, psychology, biology, philosophy, and sociology.  AW™ / andrewwiguna.com
Biquette @ tookapic.com

Where to go from here /
What can we do?

Richard Buckminster Fuller once said;

“There is no energy crisis. Only a crisis in ignorance.”

Let’s put that quote into perspective from what we’ve learned from Universe 25. The holding capacity was 4,000 mice. Yet population only peaked at 2,200. Food was infinite. Climate was eternally ideal. No external predators.

There must be something we’ve either overlooked, or underlooked. Perhaps how we’ve managed the potentials of ourselves, as factors of “ignorance”. One clue we could “start” looking “from”, would be our prior history, wouldn’t it? Can we perhaps then, take a trip back to memory lane?

Interestingly, no other point of civilisation since dawn of of human inventions. First as ideological to instrumental; both advanced us so quickly in a space of no more than few hundred years. Petroleum, then Agriculture (for food production). The invention of “money” (instrument of exchange) then the banking system, and Marketing. From Abacus, then to light bulbs, automobiles, the Internet and the Blockchain. From willow tree bark to then aspirin, and low-dose naltrexones.

An impressive advance for mankind, indeed. However beneath this pursuit; we continued to DIVERT such a Progress to something else far more destructive. Effectively reversing our meaningful interpretation of what Life “is”.

We are at a “stand-still”.

What I genuinely fear; is that we are inching closer towards a global consensus so difficult to comprehend it’d be likely petrifying.

That “stand-still” point I refer to is similar to the critique aimed against Calhoun’s Behavioural Sink. That is – it is the excessive, totalitarian attempt for universal in-clusivity that contributes to our declines. Leading to losses of individual liberties at reclaiming what is conducively individual. As pragmatically so to “the self”. Yet now – our age of modernity is increasingly leaving us both disenfranchised. And Marginalised.

Why is this so? I can only thus speculate our excess totalitarian attempt for in-clusivity of pedestrian “norms”. For structural “correctness”. First stemming as ideological concepts like “Religion” and/or “Faith”. Then structurally enforced as “Laws” and “Institutionalisations”. Through marriages, mortgages, divorces, then debt-collectors. To “withstand side effects of it all, from metabolic syndromes and suicides we comply to painkillers, statins, proton-pump inhibitor, and zanax, to name a few.

We fail to find a time asking ourselves a question. Is this life a “dream”; made to serve everyone else OTHER than one’s own “self”? 

Universe 25 / Mouse Utopia
Neo8iam @ Pexels.com

So There IS an underlooked aspect. A failure for reclaiming our own “selves”.

We can at least look at things pragmatically at present. We still have Resources; to begin with to distribute and to give. This is already reflective to us that these are all we have left to work WITH.

That also – we have some mutual degrees of self-incentivisations for self-authenticity for us to work FROM – each as contributing markers towards self-discipline.

We can solve problems. Perhaps not collectively, but we can start thinking about our own solutions individually. We may not be able to truly prevent metabolic syndromes or any crimes or violent behaviours collectively but we can understand that causal progress of this pathology is individually case specific.

I stress; therefore –  for us all to reconcile our own individual incentives. For rationalising our own existence. All incentives regardless; potentiates all contributing markers for discipline. At least, my book thus far revolves around one of such markers – that being Self-Authenticity.

All this of course, is just a “thought”. It is not mass-prescription. I never forget that one-line statement I read off an economics text-book amidst my failed (institutionalised) college years. “An Economic problem can never be solved.” It is futile pursuit, I believe. If we were to remain incessantly pursuing all realms Production to Distribution – to arrive at anEquilibrium”. Towards a singular, totalitarian, in-clusivity outcome of “efficiency”.

At least we have a starting a point WITH what we have as resources. Then on top of this – we have our ownselves to work FROM; enabling us to reconcile what we can and cannot do. And over time, what “enough” means. 

Universe 25 / Mouse Utopia
Mark Galer on Unsplash

My definition of “Utopia”.

An established (after much planning and transition steps) synchronised perceptions between incentives, rewards, and challenges. A world without excessive coercions yet progressively – liberal allowance of secular interests and privacy. A world thus; built out of resilience, pragmatism and realism.

I assert however that my definition of “Utopia” is not “infinite”. Once again – “if something gives, another must forgive”. Such an exchange is rooted within our biologies. That is, our reconciling of internal abilities….And in turn the understanding of our own limits of these to serve – our external liabilities

Here I present two (2) realms or notions which I believe should not belong under the definition of Utopia.


Firstly – no more “politics”.

I believe, the managing of our human household – our planet and that of our own “selves” – must be somehow facilitated out of two things. Firstly both uncoercive & unstructured – technological distribution / provision of resources. With Human-centric goals of all contextual needs. Automatic awareness.

Following from this, we must remove all Human titles of “Politicians”. These hierarchical structure must inevitably erodes. As the efficacy of technology replaces human cognitive ability at “management”.Politicians” absolutely have NO place in the rungs of every managing for every variable human needs and sensitivities.

An entire country (or several) today are overruled by elitism of (1) entity alone. Entities we decoratively label as “Rulers”, “Prime Ministers” or “Presidents”. Then orchestrated collectively through correctional “Institution/s”; to decide and make thus every structural implications.

Such paradigm is unthinkably limited and unempathetic to individual concerns. People will always look forth to overthrow kings and queens. Especially given that individual human variabilities grow exponentially incomprehensible.

I shall add one more realm that should be excluded. And this, is hard to swallow. 

davidluigioneail @ pixabay.com
davidluigioneail @ pixabay.com


“Religion”. This has to go.

For what little preparedness; for that I am likely to be disowned by those of my family. Blood or not blood related. I base all of my “morals” through two Physicalities of reasoning. Primal And Principal – tangible reasonings. Not by Faith via poetic “scriptures”.

I would not let any “Religion” or non-Physical codex subscription of “faith”; clouds over my primal Individuality and Authenticity. My first (and forced) subscription of such faith, “Baptism” – is merely a political passport to certify that life is thus granted under a given name. My name, printed nicely on a “certificate”. 

What else does “it” principally or primally offers me? 30, 40, 50, 80, 90 or 100 years later? Absolutely nothing.

This “concept” or “attempt” should I say; at unifying humanity as one interpretive “Faith” – has to go. What good is it establishing this concept as nothing more but a super-natural belief of “Faith”? Over real human beings with real implications? We’ve killed one another for far too long; stemming all from this basis. 

A sense of “belonging” is simply a matter of finding biological, hormonal, neurological affinity with another. What does that have to do with “Faith”? Nothing.  Does having a “Faith” have a say in all of this? No. Does one requires “Faith” to have a principal sense of belonging? Absolutely not. If one is principally or primally“nice” to me; then do I need to question his/her “sense of iconographic belonging”? No.

Why? It’s redundant for me to ask anyway. There is no need for this added criteria to conduct a humane exchange.

If we can dissect this very word “Religion” itself; we will one day realise their frivolous (or perhaps violent) redundancy to human progress.

“Re” = A repeat; A pattern. And “- Legion” = of soldiers as legionnaire to influence, dominate and conquer to preserve “faith” for the “supernatural”…. This vision is not rationally compassionate. I just cannot see it. I am sorry.

Nathan Dumlao @ Unsplash.com

The fallacy of Humility – as unlimited charity.

Another reason I assert to Religion’s redundancy – is that of its sheer ignorance assuming that all human nature (and all of fauna) are forever self-compensatory. Amidst all events of dangers, threats and scarcities. 

I must admit that likewise similar assumption of “faith” is also apparent in my book. Since it is largely based more or less the Ketogenic nutritional principles. Which mimics to Fasting.

Although mine is Cyclically respectful to that of my contexts of needs. Does that mean I should Fast forever, as my codex of living? Absolutely not. I can be very selective of “food” because my concern on their use is based on context/s. Be it metabolic (digestibility / readiness / sensitivities) and sociological (degrees of accessibility).

The same questioning must be expressed likewise on how Religion and/or Faith can easily blurs/colours our interpretation of “Charity” into “Humility”. Religion assumes that charity is a force of compassion. Backed by unlimited contingencies. Should one thing depletes to keep all symbiosis of such act of charity or of servitude – alive, enabled and going.

Sadly – this is absurd and hardly representative to the sacrificial biological, metabolical, chemical however you wish to call it – “cycles” of Nature.

As disclaimer I bear no frowns against those dedicating their lives and efforts to charity “work”. Indeed more than what I can praise in a single line – they are martyrdoms for the greater many. However sadly they are indoctrinated behind this “unconditionality” servitude. Unbeknownst for believing that their very own lives are owned or claimed by an entity so illustriously, majestically, ethereally “super-natural”. That they cannot help but succumb to hear voices other than their authentic own.

I could deadlift for however as long as I want, by “faith”. But what if I become addicted to Tylenol? Or resistant to it? What if I am unable to afford surgeries, all for earning my next entry at a weightlifting champion event – under the so called moral motivation of “God”? 

Is it my fault that I can no longer afford my monthly Oxfam® charity donation? If affording my petrol remains at jeopardy for that next job interview? Or appropriate interview clothing required sacrificing my own meals for the week?

Well, according to the divine virtuosity judgment of Religion – their answer is resounding “yes”. I am condemned for being not “good” enough. For that I am unable to simultaneously accomodate all circumstances.

Timothy Meinberg @ Unsplash.com

Wrapping it up.

The Mouse Utopia Experiment reminds us all that abundance can indeed be defiled, misused and abused. The underlying reason to this is from the interpretation between what is “use” and what is “abuse”. Which remains yet to be individually reconciled at a biological level at interpreting what “enough” means.

If you are an institutionalised conforming pedestrian, you will have no idea what I have just written. If you are already living comfortably within your means, then none of this project including my book; appeals any relevance to you. But I shall let time be the merciful judge at determining when and/or how – the waves will turn against you. Beyond consent. 

My definition or such element/s of “Utopia” admittedly naive. It is far from “perfect”. It may not even be pragmatically feasible. But it is at least what I envision to be logisticallyrational. If I am however further and further institutionally coerced to merge with anything of same oneness to that of “societal normalcy” – then I shall likely refuse. 

Whether I, as a man, do feel at times “retarded” (with symptoms similarly to Calhoun’s description) – should this remains as a demonised semantic of guilt? No. Because it is irrelevant to my Qualitative valuing of life. For as long as I do not incite violence upon others; then that is all that matters. 

I know within my biological authenticities at interpreting what “enough” means. And I thus implore you to think and live the same. To your own Authenticities.

One “Life” after all, is only “One more” – either gentle or eventually rational – suicide. 


So it ends my thoughts on the Mouse Utopia. Please leave your comments below.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *