Pyramid Model Quotes

Or powerful objects, such as statues, amulets, monuments, certain models of cars. But they prefer human form. You see gods have great power, but only humans have creativity, the power to change history rather than simply repeat it. Humans can...how do you moderns say it...think outside the cup.” “The box,” I suggested.

The Greeks had the greatest architectonic gifts. Every art has its climax at some point, and here architecture had its high point. Modeling and painting reached their climax elsewhere. Despite the gigantic pyramids, the most wonderful architecture appears in the Greek temple.

turning the traditional hierarchical pyramid upside down to emphasize that everyone is responsible—able to respond— for living the constitution and getting the desired results while modeling the organization's valued behaviors.

(Conventional economics is a pyramid scheme, predicated on a model of unlimited growth in a resource-limited environment; if it was a physics model, it would be perpetual motion. It’s bound to break sometime.)

She called it the Change Conversation Pyramid, modeled as a hierarchy in which each motivation must be met before moving on to the next, with change at the top. At the bottom is comfort. Next is connection. Then comprehension, compassion, and finally change.

I sat at a lunch table with a professor of premonotheistic spirituality, plus several women from some of the tribes in this state that has more Native Americans than any other. All agreed that the paradigm of human organization had been the circle, not the pyramid or hierarchy—and it could be again. I’d never known there was a paradigm that linked instead of ranked. It was as if I’d been assuming opposition—and suddenly found myself in a welcoming world; like putting one’s foot down for a steep stair and discovering level ground. Still, when a Laguna law student from New Mexico complained that her courses didn’t cite the Iroquois Confederacy as the model for the U.S. Constitution—or explain that this still existing Confederacy was the oldest continuing democracy in the world—I thought she was being romantic. But I read about the Constitutional Convention and discovered that Benjamin Franklin had indeed cited the Iroquois Confederacy as a model. He was well aware of its success in unifying vast areas of the United States and Canada by bringing together Native nations for mutual decisions but also allowing autonomy in local ones. He hoped the Constitution could do the same for the thirteen states. That’s why he invited two Iroquois men to Philadelphia as advisers. Among their first questions was said to be: Where are the women?

The social pyramid established during the Pyramid Age in the Fertile Crescent continued to be the model for every civilized society, long after the building of these geometric tombs ceased to be fashionable. At the top stood a minority, swollen by pride and power, headed by the king and his supporting ministers, nobles, military leaders, and priests. This minority's main social obligation was control of the megamachine, in either its wealth-producing or its illth-producing form. Apart from this, their only burden was the 'duty to consume.' In this respect the oldest rulers were the prototypes of the style-setters and taste-makers of our own over-mechanized mass society.

What is a “pyramid?” I grew up in real estate my entire life. My father built one of the largest real estate brokerage companies on the East Coast in the 1970s, before selling it to Merrill Lynch. When my brother and I graduated from college, we both joined him in building a new real estate company. I went into sales and into opening a few offices, while my older brother went into management of the company. In sales, I was able to create a six-figure income. I worked 60+ hours a week in such pursuit. My brother worked hard too, but not in the same fashion. He focused on opening offices and recruiting others to become agents to sell houses for him. My brother never listed and sold a single house in his career, yet he out-earned me 10-to-1. He made millions because he earned a cut of every commission from all the houses his 1,000+ agents sold. He worked smarter, while I worked harder. I guess he was at the top of the “pyramid.” Is this legal? Should he be allowed to earn more than any of the agents who worked so hard selling homes? I imagine everyone will agree that being a real estate broker is totally legal. Those who are smart, willing to take the financial risk of overhead, and up for the challenge of recruiting good agents, are the ones who get to live a life benefitting from leveraged Income. So how is Network Marketing any different? I submit to you that I found it to be a step better. One day, a friend shared with me how he was earning the same income I was, but that he was doing so from home without the overhead, employees, insurance, stress, and being subject to market conditions. He was doing so in a network marketing business. At first I refuted him by denouncements that he was in a pyramid scheme. He asked me to explain why. I shared that he was earning money off the backs of others he recruited into his downline, not from his own efforts. He replied, “Do you mean like your family earns money off the backs of the real estate agents in your company?” I froze, and anyone who knows me knows how quick-witted I normally am. Then he said, “Who is working smarter, you or your dad and brother?” Now I was mad. Not at him, but at myself. That was my light bulb moment. I had been closed-minded and it was costing me. That was the birth of my enlightenment, and I began to enter and study this network marketing profession. Let me explain why I found it to be a step better. My research led me to learn why this business model made so much sense for a company that wanted a cost-effective way to bring a product to market. Instead of spending millions in traditional media ad buys, which has a declining effectiveness, companies are opting to employ the network marketing model. In doing so, the company only incurs marketing cost if and when a sale is made. They get an army of word-of-mouth salespeople using the most effective way of influencing buying decisions, who only get paid for performance. No salaries, only commissions. But what is also employed is a high sense of motivation, wherein these salespeople can be building a business of their own and not just be salespeople. If they choose to recruit others and teach them how to sell the product or service, they can earn override income just like the broker in a real estate company does. So now they see life through a different lens, as a business owner waking up each day excited about the future they are building for themselves. They are not salespeople; they are business owners.

The belief that order must be intentionally generated and imposed upon society by institutional authorities continues to prevail. This centrally-directed model is premised upon what F.A. Hayek called “the fatal conceit,” namely, the proposition “that man is able to shape the world according to his wishes,”3 or what David Ehrenfeld labeled “the arrogance of humanism.”4That such practices have usually failed to produce their anticipated results has generally led not to a questioning of the model itself, but to the conclusion that failed policies have suffered only from inadequate leadership, or a lack of sufficient information, or a failure to better articulate rules. Once such deficiencies have been remedied, it has been supposed, new programs can be implemented which, reflective of this mechanistic outlook, will permit government officials to “fine tune” or “jump start” the economy, or “grow” jobs, or produce a “quick fix” for the ailing government school system. Even as modern society manifests its collapse in the form of violent crime, economic dislocation, seemingly endless warfare, inter-group hostilities, the decay of cities, a growing disaffection with institutions, and a general sense that nothing “works right” anymore, faith in the traditional model continues to drive the pyramidal systems. Most people still cling to the belief that there is something that can be done by political institutions to change such conditions: a new piece of legislation can be enacted, a judicial ruling can be ordered, or a new agency regulation can be promulgated. When a government-run program ends in disaster, the mechanistic mantra is invariably invoked: “we will find out what went wrong and fix it so that this doesn’t happen again.” That the traditional model itself, which is grounded in the state’s power to control the lives and property of individuals to desired ends, may be the principal contributor to such social disorder goes largely unexplored.

We can prove that the Great Pyramid's base area (with a metric side of 440*0.5236) expresses a solar year through dividing it by the number of days per year, i.e. 365. As a result it delivers to us an area with a square side of 12 rendering such a square as a unit of measurement relevant to our model as John Michell anticipates throughout his work.

Half the area of the Great Pyramid's base corresponds with six months period that extends from the beginning/end of one Solstice (or an Equinox) event to the beginning/end of the other Solstice (or the Equinox) event; and precisely this model was the source for that of the New Jerusalem's as Michell has shown us.

Squaring the Circle was devised upon disbelief in Adam's heritage (which were granted to him by God) by the ancients to replace his tradition with that of the "Christ" whom was proclaimed anew in each age. The Egyptian Royal Cubit (according to Michell) equals to 1.728 feet; it was used in Squaring the Circle of the New Jerusalem which was based on the Great Pyramid's model. The Great Pyramid's base diagonal equals to one complete circular rotation of a Royal Cubit pace (622/360=1.728), and its structure is raised in an angle into the skies to project the Moon's rotation (622=51.85*12). We can link the meter as a unit of measurement to ancient Egypt -even though it was only recently devised- because it harmonizes with its decanic calendar which is still in use today by the Judeo-Christian heirs of Pharaoh's religion. The Royal Cubit angularly articulates the Primal Creation on yearly, monthly (0.5236*180/pi) and weekly (pi/6) basis and that is exactly why it was utilized; it served as a good tool for Squaring the Circle.

Plantation owners were at the top of the social pyramid. Their “semi feudal model required a vast and permanent underclass to play the role of serfs on whose toil the entire system depended.”12 When the number of white indentured servants dried up in the 1680s, slave traders offered a solution: an abundant supply of African slaves. Since slavery was not yet legalized, the colonies enacted laws limiting the rights of Blacks. Among the first was a 1639 decree that “‘all persons except Negroes’ were to get arms and ammunition— probably to fight off Indians.”13 Before the legalization of slavery, indentured whites and Blacks had similar rights, although Blacks tended to be punished more harshly.

Among all the feats of construction in which the megamachine excelled, the pyramid stands forth as an archetypal model. In its elemental geometric form, in the exquisite accuracy of its measurements, in the organization of the entire working force, in the sheer mass of construction involved, the final pyramids demonstrate to perfection the unique properties of this new technical complex. To exhibit the properties of this system, I shall concentrate upon the pyramid alone, the Great Pyramid at Giza.

When the Coupling Equation Cube CEC is introduced with an apex - having the double value of the GPG's angle - in the new pyramidal model, it automatically projects that measure onto its base width; and halving the angle of the apex produces a base width which also projects that same angle yet reduced by the 10.88 Solar/Lunar Calendar difference.

If Matthias Sindelar represented the cerebral central European ideal, it was Arsenal’s Ted Drake – strong, powerful, brave and almost entirely unthinking – who typified the English model.

Organizations know that they cannot wait until the right person with the right traits shows up. Increasingly there is doubt that even charisma and individual competences are enough

This book is really about the making of a great leader. In my own research and writings over many decades, I have concluded the following about leadership: You can neither manufacture nor can you buy leadership. You must earn it. Great leaders are great doers. They have a knack of organizing and inspiring the followers. Sometimes, they even generate cult-like loyalty. When the followers are ready, the leaders show up. Therefore, in times of crisis, uncertainty and chronic dissatisfaction, unexpected people become leaders. This was the case with Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi, and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. In short, ordinary people become extraordinary leaders. Great leaders are driven by purpose and passion. They derive boundless energy from their purpose and passion. To them, leadership is all about people. Management is all about grit and determination. Great leaders not only promise the future but deliver it. Great leaders are great architects. Like good architects, they imagine building something unique, enduring, and inspiring. Examples include the Pyramids, the ancient temples, churches and mosques; more recently, the Opera House in Sydney; the Olympic Stadium (Bird’s Nest) in Beijing; and Putrajaya, the new capital of Malaysia. There are three universal qualities of all great leaders: passion, caring, and capability. This is also true of great teachers.

The base sides of the Great Pyramid of Giza referred to the solar calendar while the backbone of the structure itself (manifested in the whole design emanating from the base diagonal figure) was modeled according to the measure of the lunar year.

The apex of the Great Pyramid of Giza has a solid angle that is smaller than the pyramid's base area by a ratio of x; this is the same amount of length which the Cube - inside the new pyramidal model - has for its side (based on the Coupling Equation between the dimensions of the GPG and its KC).

What apparently started as a loosening of semantic context, which allowed the patient to make a witty play with words about pyramids and 'extrapyramidal' disorders, completely lost its humorous character when the patient experienced the profound anxieties and cognitive impairments associated with a severe psychotic crisis. Experiencing the lack of precision of higher-order concepts, in this case clear distinction between pyramids in Egypt and pyramids in the brain, can thus be a curse and blessing at the same time: it allows us to detect the fundamental imprecision of language and the shaky metaphorical ground on which common concepts about ourselves and the world are based, and this experience can lead to a state of exhilaration about the fundamental nonsense of the world, the nonexistence of our assumed securities, and the shallowness of cherished beliefs, but it also confronts us with overwhelming complexity and threatening insecurity and throws us in deep anxious turmoil when confronted with the sheer chaos of being.

To summarize, the model I created was a revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Usually, in the 2000’s, it was common for people to use a pyramid to represent Bloom’s Taxonomy, with “remember” at the base, and “synthesize” at the shortest part, or the top. This was a good model for determining the attainability of each skill and the levels each skill is at, but I decided to use the umbrellas to add stronger emphasis on how each skill depended on and impacted one another. I did not think that the pyramid modeled this dependency and impact well, because it did not visually show how each skill overlapped one another; it merely showed the levels of each skill, not how each skill depended on and impacted one another.

The nutrition recommendations of the American Cancer Society (ACS) are formulated by registered dietitians trained in the food pyramid (read: Big Agriculture) model. Their corporate sponsors are the American Dairy Association, Abbott Nutrition (maker of seasonal vaccines and ibuprofen), and PepsiCo. The “quick and easy” snacks they recommend to people undergoing cancer treatment include angel food cake, cookies, doughnuts, ice cream, and microwavable snacks.16 (We are not kidding; visit their website and see for yourself.) These recommendations turn a blind eye to the many important studies (not to mention the suppressed work of Otto Warburg, PhD, MD, and Thomas Seyfried, PhD, in the field of the metabolic theory of cancer, which we detail in chapter 4; see “How Cancer Cells Gobble Glucose: The Warburg Effect”) that have proven that sugar causes—or, at the very least, can stimulate—cancer. Even a mainstream 2016 study from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center concluded that diets high in sugar are “a major risk factor” for certain types of cancers, especially breast cancer. We simply must reverse the dismissive attitude toward the role that diet and lifestyle play in cancer prevention or progression. Because it may very well be our only hope.

Wait . . . where's my e-key?' This again. A guy who can organise the stuff he does, fix computers and build scale model bridges and pyramids and simulation Mars bases in the backyard for our neighbourhood summer Coyote Camps, and he still misplaces his zap-key nearly every freaking day. I scan the room. 'Down there. Under the, the left boot of the, uh, R-Mer.' Yehat scoops it up, stands up, ready to go, but then: 'Ah, my, uh, wallet . . . .' I scan. 'Side of the couch.' He digs. He wins. 'Oh . . . and my glasses.' 'On your face.' 'Where would I be without you?' 'Locked outside of house, blind, without money.

The pyramid model defies logic once you examine the data. On average, only 17 percent of new donors giving $100 or less give again. Of that 17 percent, only 47 percent give a third time. Compare that to new donors whose first gift is between $1,000 and $5,000. Fifty-seven percent of them give again, and then give a third time at a rate of 87 percent. In other words, the first-time donors who give between $1,000 and $5,000 are more than three times more likely to give again compared with low-dollar donors and are almost twice as likely to give a third time compared to the same group.

Another fallacy that forms the foundation of the pyramid model is that low-dollar first-time givers will continue to give. However, data from the Fundraising Effectiveness Project shows that higher-dollar first-time givers retain at a higher rate and also repeat with larger donations.

Under the model of original monotheism we can draw three basic inferences. Figure 1.4. Decay of religions First, there is one decisive change—the move away from monotheism. This change has to be seen as a falling away, perhaps best understood as decay or corruption. Human beings turn away from God to something else: other gods, spirits, nature, even themselves. Apparently the God of the sky seemed too remote. In times of personal crises—a sick child, crop failure, marital problems—people believed that they needed more immediate help. Invoking the aid of fetishes or spirits seemed more potent. Thus God receded behind other spiritual powers. In biblical terms people worshiped the creation instead of the Creator. Second, there is no clear pattern in which this departure typically takes place. Monotheism could turn into henotheism, polytheism or animism. But one thing is certain: as monotheism was left behind, ritual and magic increased. This is not to say these elements do not occur within a fairly stable monotheistic context (of course they do!). However, once human beings abandon faith in one almighty, all-knowing God, the role that they play in attempting to find their own way in a world apparently dominated by spiritual forces becomes far more central, leading to an increase in spiritual manipulation techniques, such as magic and ritual. Third, once monotheism is abandoned, change usually continues to occur. Again, there is no mandatory sequence in which things rearrange themselves, but an increase in ritual and magic is most likely to be a part of it. Every once in a while throughout history, reform movements have called a culture back to a renewed awareness of God. Zoroastrianism and Islam are clear examples of such events. When they happen, even though there may be initial enthusiasm, chances are that there will also be an increase in tension between the idealists who are promoting the return to monotheism and those who do not feel free to give up their traditional faiths. This phenomenon may give rise to a serious tension between the ideal version of the religion and how its adherents actually practice it (they usually cling to rituals and veneration of spirits). In contrast to the neat pyramid associated with the evolutionary view (fig. 1.1), monotheism carries the liability of a tendency toward magic and ritual (fig. 1.3).

Multifaceted Base Pyramid Model

The power of this model comes from assuming that the market looks like a pyramid, with a few on top scalping the many at the bottom. The trouble is that agriculture doesn’t look like this. In agriculture, there are many at the top, and they are often substantially poorer than their customers.

For Jane Jacobs, and for Follett and Thomson and all the heroes we’ve met in this book, the Constellation is not an alternative model to be deployed in certain circumstances. The Pyramid is the alternative model—and it can be deadly dangerous. The Pyramid mindset—planning away uncertainty, extracting power from individuals for the purposes of simplification and single-mindedness, prizing stability above all else—can save us in an emergency, but it is also the mindset that leads to authoritarianism, patriarchy, and slavery. The Constellation, on the other hand, is not a “model” at all. It’s nature’s playbook. It’s life itself.

at age fifty-five, Hock left the company and became something of a philosopher. He had seen so much technical progress in his lifetime and knew that the pace of change was speeding up but also that we were stuck in outdated, static models (our Pyramid mindset). The result, he observed, is that “our expertise became the creation and control of constants, uniformity and efficiency, while the need has become the understanding and coordination of variability, complexity and effectiveness.

There is a ‘Maker’ or ‘Modeler’, a single process or intention, but which is many-sided, as though taking into account that different traditions will accord the dominant role to the Gods they privilege. Moreover the name ‘Heart of the Sky’, designating the divinity taking in certain respects the dominant role in this process, is immediately unpacked, in the execution of this creative intention, into three Thunderbolt Gods, Thunderbolt Hurricane, Newborn Thunderbolt and Sudden Thunderbolt in Tedlock’s translation, who seem to correspond to Gods of the Classic era to whom three pyramids are dedicated at the plaza at Palenque dating from the 7th c. CE, and who are also embodied in the three stones of a traditional Mayan hearth.28 The three Thunderbolt Gods of the Popol Vuh appear to represent an entire class of important formative powers. This collective power in turn approaches the Plumed (or Feathered) Serpent, Q’uq’umatz, who is in occultation, so to speak, as a glittering light within the primordial waters, and They conceive together the desire to make manifest the Plumed Serpent’s illumination in the form of a world, with the guiding intention to bring forth beings who are capable of recognizing the Gods. The demiurgic powers known collectively as the Heart of Sky and the Plumed Serpent arrive at an agreement, with the Plumed Serpent apparently providing the paradigm or model for the cosmogonic work, if we may venture a somewhat Platonizing hermeneutic.