Revolution in Thought

[peacegirl]

Socialism and the progressive agenda is clearly falsifiable and doesn't work yet people keep swallowing it hook line and sinker. I wonder why that is?

And you are arguing this "revolution in thought" is socialistic and progressive?

You can’t look at this in a vacuum. The economic system presented would work because people would not have to save for a rainy day and trillions of dollars would be available for growth. When war and crime come to an end even more money will be available for all kinds of new businesses. I know how this must sound because our world is 180 degrees opposite from this new world.

[Nick_A]

Atla wrote: ↑Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:09 pm

Or you could post how you would deal with the problem that most people get more satisfaction from power than from altruism.

I think you will appreciate this old Armenian fable. The hard part is finding a New Age wolf

“Once there lived a wolf who slaughtered a great many sheep and reduced many people to tears. At length, I do not know why, he suddenly felt qualms of conscience and begun to repent his life; so he decided to reform and to slaughter no more sheep. In order to do this seriously he went to a priest and asked him to hold a thanksgiving service.

“The priest began the service and the wolf stood weeping and praying in the church. The service was long. The wolf had slaughtered many of the priests sheep, therefore the priest prayed earnestly that the wolf would indeed reform. Suddenly the wolf looked through a window and saw that sheep were being driven home. He began to fidget but the priest went on and on without end.

“At last the wolf could contain himself no longer and he shouted: ‘Finish it priest! Or all the sheep will be driven home and I shall be left without supper!

First maintain the power to get dinner. It is far easier to discuss altruism on a full stomach.

[Logik]

And how do you "count" the act of "counting"?

Cardinals.

1, 2, 3.

Different people use different techniques in their heads.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj4y0EUlU-Y&t

[peacegirl]

Socialism and the progressive agenda is clearly falsifiable and doesn't work yet people keep swallowing it hook line and sinker. I wonder why that is?

Because it has not been thoroughly investigated.

[Nick_A]

Socialism and the progressive agenda is clearly falsifiable and doesn't work yet people keep swallowing it hook line and sinker. I wonder why that is?

And you are arguing this "revolution in thought" is socialistic and progressive?

I don't know the premise of the book but do know that the change you seem to favor doesn't come from a revolution in thought but from becoming able to experience objective conscience. It remains dormant in our being and most eventually become closed to it so live by indoctrinated habits. Yet there is a minority who have opened to the experience so the reality of war is seen for what it is. Like the Christ they have acquired the ability to experience the value of Jesus' suggestion to "forgive them for they know not what they do."

[Nick_A]

Socialism and the progressive agenda is clearly falsifiable and doesn't work yet people keep swallowing it hook line and sinker. I wonder why that is?

Because it has not been thoroughly investigated.

It isn't that it hasn't been investigated but rather we lack the ability for it.

For communism to work it must be governed by what Plato called philosopher kings. As we are those who come into power are the exact opposite of philosopher kings. This cannot change. It is the nature of our fallen being. Consequently we are better off without supporting an impossible illusion created by indoctrination and support what makes freedom possible.

[Eodnhoj7]

Socialism and the progressive agenda is clearly falsifiable and doesn't work yet people keep swallowing it hook line and sinker. I wonder why that is?

And you are arguing this "revolution in thought" is socialistic and progressive?

You can’t look at this in a vacuum. The economic system presented would work because people would not have to save for a rainy day and trillions of dollars would be available for growth. When war and crime come to an end even more money will be available for all kinds of new businesses. I know how this must sound because our world is 180 degrees opposite from this new world.

I am not saying you are arguing socialism or progressiveness, I want to see if Nick is painting the world in his fears again.

[Eodnhoj7]

And how do you "count" the act of "counting"?

Cardinals.

1, 2, 3.

Different people use different techniques in their heads.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj4y0EUlU-Y&t

Not really if it is all premised in infinite variations of convergence/divergence as synthesis...all rationality and free will exists as an extension of common deterministic laws.

[Eodnhoj7]

Socialism and the progressive agenda is clearly falsifiable and doesn't work yet people keep swallowing it hook line and sinker. I wonder why that is?

And you are arguing this "revolution in thought" is socialistic and progressive?

I don't know the premise of the book but do know that the change you seem to favor doesn't come from a revolution in thought but from becoming able to experience objective conscience. It remains dormant in our being and most eventually become closed to it so live by indoctrinated habits. Yet there is a minority who have opened to the experience so the reality of war is seen for what it is. Like the Christ they have acquired the ability to experience the value of Jesus' suggestion to "forgive them for they know not what they do."

If you don't know the premise of the book....or the thread....uhh...why are you here?

[Logik]

Not really if it is all premised in infinite variations of convergence/divergence as synthesis...all rationality and free will exists as an extension of common deterministic laws.

What is that which synthesises and how does it work?
Describe its behaviour in a framework of your choosing.

[henry quirk]

So, I decided to put the notion to the test.

I believe beatin' the High Holy Hell outta my 12 year would be most satisfying. Since I just wanna beat the High Holy Hell outta him (not mangle, malform, cripple, retard, or kill him), I did a google search for 'child beating techniques'. The results were disappointing. I was about to call it quits and just take my chances when I ran across this essay by a fella named Maddox.

-----

How come everyone today is too much of a pussy to smack their kids around? That's what I want to know: why are parents afraid to beat their kids? When I was a kid and I screwed up, my parents beat my ass. We didn't have a conversation about it. I didn't have a "time out." In fact, I've never even once been grounded in my life. What's the point? Send your kid to his room and make him play video games and read comic books all day? Great idea, why don't you take him to a psychiatrist while you're at it so she can pull some disorder out of her ass to hide the fact that you're a bad parent?

Kids today need a good beating every now and then. If you don't beat your kids when they fall out of line, the next thing you know your son will go off and bang some dude in the ass just out of spite. You tell them to clean their room, they say "no," you smack them. It's simple; it works. Don't listen to these assholes on TV with their bullshit hippy psycho babble; if they had it their way, every child would be raised in a pastel colored room with Philip Glass pumped through the speakers 24 hours a day. Then again, it might not be all that bad because it will make your kids complacent, so it won't be as hard for them to swallow when they realize that they'll be spending the rest of their lives chained to a desk in a cubicle writing reports to make someone else rich.

The problem is that kids today think their opinions matter. By not beating your kids, they get a skewed perspective of reality where they start thinking that they have it rough and that they can get away with dying their hair and listening to Insane Clown Posse. That's where you need to come in and put the law down. To help you, the negligent parent, I've put together a guide to smacking your kids for your convenience (hint: you may want to even print this guide up and hang it on your fridge as a reminder to both you and your kids). Here are some useful techniques:

Five across the eyes. This is a very basic maneuver and usually enough to cover most situations when your child is out of line. Simply put four fingers tightly together and either leave the thumb off to the side or fold it behind the other four fingers. Then smack your kid across the face with the back of your hand. Now this is the tricky part: make sure to snap your wrist just before contact otherwise you won't get a stinging effect. Very important because you don't want to risk letting your kid think you're a pussy.

The sucker punch. Just ask the question "hey, what's that on your shirt?" and when they look down, bust their lip. You need to do this every now and then to keep them guessing. Don't ever let them off the hook. Just because they're not doing anything wrong doesn't mean that they didn't do something wrong earlier that you weren't aware of.

The yard stick. Or for those of you who don't use the arbitrary American system, this is also known as "the meter stick." This is a good general purpose beating because the stick usually doesn't last beyond three or four good whacks--usually enough to send the message.

The one-two shut-the-hell-up. This is priceless when you're shopping and your kid won't shut the hell up: "I'm hungry, I want toys, I need my Insulin..." etc. First smack your kid (the 5 across the eyes technique works). Wait a few seconds for your kid to start crying, then smack your kid again to let him know that you mean business. This usually shuts them up because they see that the amount of crying is proportional to the amount of beatings.

The 2 x 4 / PVC pipe. If you do your job as a parent, this should never have to be administered. This is for heavy duty jobs only (ie. any time your kid comes home and begins a sentence with "she might be pregnant..." or "I can _____ if I want to..." where the blank can be any of the following: smoke, have sex, experiment with drugs, watch Oprah, etc). Usually the threat of this beating is enough to keep your kid from screwing up.

The Dragon Kick. If you're interested in a permanent solution to your child giving you lip about washing the dishes, cleaning his or her room or filing your tax return, then the Dragon kick might be the technique for you. I guarantee that you will only have to ask once after the Dragon kick has been administered.

The skull thump. A quick blow usually dealt to the side or back of the head. Simply flick them in the head with your finger. An alternative is to smack your child up side the head with your palm. Very useful for teaching your child to read when he or she makes a mistake. Hitting your child when he or she is learning builds confidence, or undermines confidence--I can't remember which.

The one-handed chauffeur reach around. A quick reach around while you're driving to smack your kid and his friends too if they disrespect. Swerve the car back and forth for the full effect.

The cane intercept. If you're too old to chase your kid around the house, use the handle of your cane to trip him if he tries to get away. When he gets up, poke him in the head a few times to let him know who's boss.

There you have it. Use these basic techniques to discipline your child if you want him or her to turn out to be a success story like me.

Remember: never take shit from your kids. You make payments on the house, utilities, their clothes, school, and their food. You own them. If they don't like it, they can move out. If you love your kids, love them enough to beat them so that they don't grow up to be idiots.

-----

See, I was overthinkin' the whole 'beatin' the High Holy Hell outta him' angle. All the techniques listed above are simple, direct, and non-manglin', -malformin', -cripplin' -retardin', and -lethal. And if I fuck up and end him, well, the deep woods is just 'round the corner. 'Bury 'em deep in the deep.' So, I'm off to seek a lil greater satisfaction just like PG's dad said I should/must.

[peacegirl]

Socialism and the progressive agenda is clearly falsifiable and doesn't work yet people keep swallowing it hook line and sinker. I wonder why that is?

And you are arguing this "revolution in thought" is socialistic and progressive?

I don't know the premise of the book but do know that the change you seem to favor doesn't come from a revolution in thought but from becoming able to experience objective conscience. It remains dormant in our being and most eventually become closed to it so live by indoctrinated habits. Yet there is a minority who have opened to the experience so the reality of war is seen for what it is. Like the Christ they have acquired the ability to experience the value of Jesus' suggestion to "forgive them for they know not what they do."

When Jesus Christ told the rabbis that
God commanded man to turn the other cheek, they threw him out
because the Bible told them that God said — “An eye for an eye and
a tooth for a tooth.” When his enemies nailed him to the cross he
was heard to say — “They know not what they do.” “Turn the other
cheek” he said. Because Christ exemplified in his behavior the
principle of forgiveness, and because he saw such suffering in the
world, he drew to himself those who needed help, and there were
many. However, the legacy he left for Christianity was never
reconciled. How was it possible to turn the other cheek in a world of
such evil? Why was the mind of man so confused and in spite of
every possible criticism how was religion able to convince the world to
be patient and have faith?

Where did these theologians receive their
inspiration since there was no way science could reconcile good and
evil with a God that caused everything. They solved this problem in
a very simple manner by dividing good and evil in half and God was
only responsible for the first. Then they reasoned that God endowed
man with freedom of the will to choose good over evil. To
theologians, God is the creator of all goodness and since man does
many things considered evil they were given no choice but to endow
him with freedom of the will so that God could be absolved of all
responsibility for evil, which was assigned to Satan. This is also the
reason why religion is so hostile towards any person who speaks
against free will. Is it any wonder that Christ and Spinoza plus
innumerable others pulled away from the synagogue? Is it any wonder
Spinoza became a heretic and was excommunicated? According to
the thinkers of that time how could any intelligent person believe in
Satan? Religion has never been able to reconcile the forces of good
and evil with a caring and loving God, therefore Satan was destined
to be born as the opposite of all good in the world.

[peacegirl]

So, I decided to put the notion to the test.

I believe beatin' the High Holy Hell outta my 12 year would be most satisfying. Since I just wanna beat the High Holy Hell outta him (not mangle, malform, cripple, retard, or kill him), I did a google search for 'child beating techniques'. The results were disappointing. I was about to call it quits and just take my chances when I ran across this essay by a fella named Maddox.

-----

How come everyone today is too much of a pussy to smack their kids around? That's what I want to know: why are parents afraid to beat their kids? When I was a kid and I screwed up, my parents beat my ass. We didn't have a conversation about it. I didn't have a "time out." In fact, I've never even once been grounded in my life. What's the point? Send your kid to his room and make him play video games and read comic books all day? Great idea, why don't you take him to a psychiatrist while you're at it so she can pull some disorder out of her ass to hide the fact that you're a bad parent?

Kids today need a good beating every now and then. If you don't beat your kids when they fall out of line, the next thing you know your son will go off and bang some dude in the ass just out of spite. You tell them to clean their room, they say "no," you smack them. It's simple; it works. Don't listen to these assholes on TV with their bullshit hippy psycho babble; if they had it their way, every child would be raised in a pastel colored room with Philip Glass pumped through the speakers 24 hours a day. Then again, it might not be all that bad because it will make your kids complacent, so it won't be as hard for them to swallow when they realize that they'll be spending the rest of their lives chained to a desk in a cubicle writing reports to make someone else rich.

The problem is that kids today think their opinions matter. By not beating your kids, they get a skewed perspective of reality where they start thinking that they have it rough and that they can get away with dying their hair and listening to Insane Clown Posse. That's where you need to come in and put the law down. To help you, the negligent parent, I've put together a guide to smacking your kids for your convenience (hint: you may want to even print this guide up and hang it on your fridge as a reminder to both you and your kids). Here are some useful techniques:

Five across the eyes. This is a very basic maneuver and usually enough to cover most situations when your child is out of line. Simply put four fingers tightly together and either leave the thumb off to the side or fold it behind the other four fingers. Then smack your kid across the face with the back of your hand. Now this is the tricky part: make sure to snap your wrist just before contact otherwise you won't get a stinging effect. Very important because you don't want to risk letting your kid think you're a pussy.

The sucker punch. Just ask the question "hey, what's that on your shirt?" and when they look down, bust their lip. You need to do this every now and then to keep them guessing. Don't ever let them off the hook. Just because they're not doing anything wrong doesn't mean that they didn't do something wrong earlier that you weren't aware of.

The yard stick. Or for those of you who don't use the arbitrary American system, this is also known as "the meter stick." This is a good general purpose beating because the stick usually doesn't last beyond three or four good whacks--usually enough to send the message.

The one-two shut-the-hell-up. This is priceless when you're shopping and your kid won't shut the hell up: "I'm hungry, I want toys, I need my Insulin..." etc. First smack your kid (the 5 across the eyes technique works). Wait a few seconds for your kid to start crying, then smack your kid again to let him know that you mean business. This usually shuts them up because they see that the amount of crying is proportional to the amount of beatings.

The 2 x 4 / PVC pipe. If you do your job as a parent, this should never have to be administered. This is for heavy duty jobs only (ie. any time your kid comes home and begins a sentence with "she might be pregnant..." or "I can _____ if I want to..." where the blank can be any of the following: smoke, have sex, experiment with drugs, watch Oprah, etc). Usually the threat of this beating is enough to keep your kid from screwing up.

The Dragon Kick. If you're interested in a permanent solution to your child giving you lip about washing the dishes, cleaning his or her room or filing your tax return, then the Dragon kick might be the technique for you. I guarantee that you will only have to ask once after the Dragon kick has been administered.

The skull thump. A quick blow usually dealt to the side or back of the head. Simply flick them in the head with your finger. An alternative is to smack your child up side the head with your palm. Very useful for teaching your child to read when he or she makes a mistake. Hitting your child when he or she is learning builds confidence, or undermines confidence--I can't remember which.

The one-handed chauffeur reach around. A quick reach around while you're driving to smack your kid and his friends too if they disrespect. Swerve the car back and forth for the full effect.

The cane intercept. If you're too old to chase your kid around the house, use the handle of your cane to trip him if he tries to get away. When he gets up, poke him in the head a few times to let him know who's boss.

There you have it. Use these basic techniques to discipline your child if you want him or her to turn out to be a success story like me.

Remember: never take shit from your kids. You make payments on the house, utilities, their clothes, school, and their food. You own them. If they don't like it, they can move out. If you love your kids, love them enough to beat them so that they don't grow up to be idiots.

-----

See, I was overthinkin' the whole 'beatin' the High Holy Hell outta him' angle. All the techniques listed above are simple, direct, and non-manglin', -malformin', -cripplin' -retardin', and -lethal. And if I fuck up and end him, well, the deep woods is just 'round the corner. 'Bury 'em deep in the deep.' So, I'm off to seek a lil greater satisfaction just like PG's dad said I should/must.

CHAPTER NINE
PARENTS AND CHILDREN

I will begin this chapter with a question, “Is there a way to
bring up a child in the new world so the parents will never
have a problem? We must first define the word problem as
we did earlier because, in reality, there are no problems unless
someone is being hurt in a concrete, not imaginary manner. As long
as we believe that man’s will is free and our only solution is blame and
punishment, we will not be able to raise our children in the best
possible environment. Nobody would think of blaming a baby for
being born but shortly, thereafter, the parents and society will blame
and punish this child for not acting as he should. Society judges what
is right and wrong and then holds man responsible to these standards.
Just as long as there is this safety valve of blame and punishment,
society is permitted to strike the first blow of injustice with impunity.
Many years ago the philosopher Plato dreamed of Utopia, but the
only manner in which he thought this could be accomplished was by
removing the children from their parents at birth to prevent the
passing along of ignorance from generation to generation.

He began
with a gigantic assumption that his men of Gold — he and others like
him who received the necessary education and had the ability to pass
through the necessary steps — had already possession of what the end
result should be and only needed the means to this end, such as a
system to develop these men of Gold, who would then remove the
children from their parents for the purpose of controlling the
environment, completely controlling what these little ones would
experience. It never dawned on Plato and other philosophers that it
was mathematically impossible for them to see the end result, for this
included the removal of themselves and their ideas which were
constantly judging what was right for others. But what made matters
still worse (not in reality of course, since everything was necessary),
what made matters more difficult to straighten out, was the fact these
men of Gold justified the veracity of their wisdom by calling
themselves men of Gold.

At every turn I have observed individuals (perhaps you are one)
who believe they are more qualified to teach what is right and wrong
because of some fallacious standard which justifies the thought by its
logic. The other day I happened to hear someone criticize a journalist
for his ridiculous column on the rearing of children. To justify the
criticism it was revealed that this writer never even had a college
education. What this means is that the worst kind of ignorance
imaginable, the kind that really doesn’t know but thinks it does, is
permitted to conceal itself in a logical relation which justifies its
existence by assuming that the end result, as perceived by someone
who has become a man of Gold, so to speak, is more valid.

But the
great humor lies in the fact that the end result where children are
concerned has long been established in today’s thinking and where it
differs is not in what a child should become or develop into, but the
best manner in which to accomplish this — which is exactly the
thinking of Plato. In other words, you do not question the necessity
of an education — but what is the best manner in which to get
children to want it. You do not question the necessity of teaching
your children the difference between right and wrong — but differ
quite a bit on how to get children to obey what you think is right.
What you know is better for your child is already taken for granted
right from birth, which thoughts are contained in the words and air
you breathe.

[Nick_A]

Socialism and the progressive agenda is clearly falsifiable and doesn't work yet people keep swallowing it hook line and sinker. I wonder why that is?

And you are arguing this "revolution in thought" is socialistic and progressive?

You can’t look at this in a vacuum. The economic system presented would work because people would not have to save for a rainy day and trillions of dollars would be available for growth. When war and crime come to an end even more money will be available for all kinds of new businesses. I know how this must sound because our world is 180 degrees opposite from this new world.

War and crime IMO are the natural results of our collective inability to respect differences in human "being." This respect has devolved into the artificial need for prestige defined by secular values. No amount of money will nullify the need for this devolved need. How would your system nullify the need for prestige or the social pecking order?

You can have a dozen men sitting around a table discussing what they believe is essential to bring about world peace and mutual respect. Then the cute waitress walks by serving drinks and shaking her behind and all of a sudden it is every man for himself. The struggle for prestige necessary to win the lady begins again. If your system has figured out how to transcend the acquired need for social prestige, your book will succeed in answering a basic question that has stumped educated BS artists since the beginning of psychology.

[peacegirl]

And you are arguing this "revolution in thought" is socialistic and progressive?

You can’t look at this in a vacuum. The economic system presented would work because people would not have to save for a rainy day and trillions of dollars would be available for growth. When war and crime come to an end even more money will be available for all kinds of new businesses. I know how this must sound because our world is 180 degrees opposite from this new world.

War and crime IMO are the natural results of our collective inability to respect differences in human "being." This respect has devolved into the artificial need for prestige defined by secular values. No amount of money will nullify the need for this devolved need. How would your system nullify the need for prestige or the social pecking order?

It changes everything, how we see ourselves, how we react to others, how we respect each other, etc., because the need for this prestige (which comes from deep-seated feelings of inferiority) will no longer be a factor in human relations.

You can have a dozen men sitting around a table discussing what they believe is essential to bring about world peace and mutual respect. Then the cute waitress walks by serving drinks and shaking her behind and all of a sudden it is every man for himself. The struggle for prestige necessary to win the lady begins again. If your system has figured out how to transcend the acquired need for social prestige, your book will succeed in answering a basic question that has stumped educated BS artists since the beginning of psychology.

It actually does solve the problem of relationships where so many people are seriously hurt by unrequited love. This is just an extension of the basic principle, Thou Shall Not Blame.

As you begin this chapter, a key fact must constantly be
borne in mind: No problem exists in man’s relations with
each other unless someone is being hurt in a concrete, not
imaginary, manner and it is the genuine hurt in romantic
relationships that this chapter is addressing. The first real and
concrete blow of the sexes is struck when a boy and girl are
encouraged and then rejected by the person with whom they have
fallen in love enough to desire marriage. More people have had their
heart broken and cut out with the knife of unrequited love than is
imaginable, and those who lose in this game are very unhappy
individuals because they have lost the very person they wanted to win.
I must remind the reader that our basic principle cannot prevent the
impossible. For example, it cannot prevent a girl from rejecting a boy
no matter how much he is in love when not to do so makes matters
worse for herself as would be the case if this necessitated that she
reject the boy who she is in love and who loves her, or that she rejects
the possibility of meeting someone with whom she could fall in love,
as much as she is now being loved.

In other words, not blaming your
lover for breaking your heart by leaving cannot undo the rejection,
just as not blaming the truck driver after an accident cannot prevent
what has already happened. But it can prevent the desire to take risks
that could get a boy and girl into this kind of situation where it is
necessary to reject the person who is in love with them, just as it
prevents them from desiring to take risks that lead to automobile
accidents. Premarital relations will come to a permanent end as well
as all adultery and divorce not because this is morally wrong and man
has decided at last to obey the Ten Commandments, but only because
we will be shown how to prevent our children’s hearts from being
broken by love that is not returned. To have loved and lost may be
better than never to have loved at all, but this is the lesser of two evils
and presupposes that there must always be a contest wherein someone
loses and gets hurt.

“But doesn’t there have to be losers when two or more people want
the same thing? In a hundred yard dash there is one winner, and the
rest are losers, and in a contest for one person, somebody has to
lose...”

“Providing there is a contest, but supposing there is none?”

“No contest? There has to be some kind of test. A girl doesn’t
marry anybody, nor does a boy.”

In order for you to appreciate this great change and for God to
perform this miracle, it is absolutely necessary that you understand
what causes our present environment to be so unforgiving where love
is concerned, therefore let me begin by defining in a mathematical
undeniable manner what we mean exactly by the word love, otherwise
we will be unable to have a solid basis for communication.