Revolution in Thought

[peacegirl]

What prevents someone from building a bomb and blowing up an airplane or hacking a bank and stealing millions of dollars is because he won't have the necessary justification to do so.

Do you think there's a RIGHT way for the world to be? And that it is WRONG now? How do you know? Might you have a limited scope of understanding for how and why things are the way they are... and if so, how do you know that you know what is needed and how to "fix" it? How many people try to "fix" it in endless various ways? How are you different, and why do you like to focus on that? Aren't you really just entertaining yourself on your own trip like everyone else is doing?

Come on Lacewing, why do most people hope and pray for our deliverance from evil (or hurt) between man and man if not because they want a world in which there is no killing? Are you going to tell me that if you had two choices, a world of peace and brotherhood or a world of war and conflict, you would choose the world with war and conflict? If you would choose the latter, then you can stay in the world you're living. There is no force.

[Logik]

Are you going to tell me that if you had two choices, a world of peace and brotherhood or a world of war and conflict, you would choose the world with war and conflict?

This is a false dichotomy.

I would like to introduce you to the concept of Iatrogenics.

Where intervention (trying to fix something you don't understand) can lead to even worse outcomes.

https://fs.blog/2013/10/iatrogenics/

Iatrogenics is when a treatment causes more harm than benefit. As iatros means healer in Greek, the word means “caused by the healer” or “brought by the healer.” Healer, in this sense, need not mean doctor, but anyone intervening to solve a problem. For example, it could be a thought leader, a CEO, a government, or a coalition of the willing. Nassim Taleb calls these people inventionistas. Often these people come armed with solutions to solve the first order consequences of a decision but create worse second and subsequent order consequences. Luckily, for them at least, they’re never around to see the train wreck they created.

[Lacewing]

Come on Lacewing, why do most people hope and pray for our deliverance from evil (or hurt) between man and man if not because they want a world in which there is no killing? Are you going to tell me that if you had two choices, a world of peace and brotherhood or a world of war and conflict, you would choose the world with war and conflict? If you would choose the latter, then you can stay in the world you're living. There is no force.

Do you think it is not possible to prefer a peaceful world (which I certainly do)... WHILE seeing the divine/order in WHAT ALREADY IS? If you approach something thinking it needs to be "fixed", you are applying your own limited ideas/judgments/thinking onto it, and putting energy toward your epic addiction to that reality. Whereas, a shift/broadening in perspective can reveal completely new insights and capabilities, regardless of the lure of any particular drama/reality. We don't have to carry on limited traditions and awareness of our predecessors in a hypnotic and desperate state. They've already done that to death. How about if we think beyond what we habitually think?

[Eodnhoj7]

No. I am not asking you to explain the book.

All I am asking you to explain is this. What mechanisms will be in place to prevent ME from:
* building a bomb and blowing up an airplane (terrorism)
* hacking a bank and stealing millions of dollars (bank robbery)

You are trying to sell us utopia (like you and every snake oil salesman before you) but you can't give us any specifics as to HOW and WHY it would work.

All you are saying is "trust me - this is the way". Like every other failed visionary before you.

And the technocrats are not visionaries?

I am not saying "trust me, this is the way." And I'm not trying to sell you anything without proof. I'm trying to explain how this new world can actually take place. It's not pie in the sky wishful thinking. What prevents someone from building a bomb and blowing up an airplane or hacking a bank and stealing millions of dollars is because he won't have the necessary justification to do so. Only under certain conditions can a person desire to do these things in the direction of greater satisfaction. When it gives less satisfaction to do this rather than not to build bombs, then our problem is solved. Do you see what happens when you refuse to read what I offered? You can't know because you haven't understood the two-sided equation, or his proof of determinism. If will was free we could not achieve this new world because we could choose what is worse for ourselves when something is better is offered as an alternative, but this is impossible. Choosing what gives us greater satisfaction from moment to moment is an invariable law of our nature.

Is this to logik or me?

[peacegirl]

Are you going to tell me that if you had two choices, a world of peace and brotherhood or a world of war and conflict, you would choose the world with war and conflict?

This is a false dichotomy.

Not really. I was only asking what you would prefer IF there were only two options.

I would like to introduce you to the concept of Iatrogenics.

Where intervention (trying to fix something you don't understand) can lead to even worse outcomes.

I know what iatrogenics is. I also know that this knowledge would not create worse outcomes. If there are no more murders, if there are no more suicides, if no one desires to steal at the expense of another, if no one becomes mentally ill, if no one lives in poverty, where can this lead to even worse outcomes?

https://fs.blog/2013/10/iatrogenics/

Iatrogenics is when a treatment causes more harm than benefit. As iatros means healer in Greek, the word means “caused by the healer” or “brought by the healer.” Healer, in this sense, need not mean doctor, but anyone intervening to solve a problem. For example, it could be a thought leader, a CEO, a government, or a coalition of the willing. Nassim Taleb calls these people inventionistas. Often these people come armed with solutions to solve the first order consequences of a decision but create worse second and subsequent order consequences. Luckily, for them at least, they’re never around to see the train wreck they created.

Here is another excerpt. This could not happen in the new world because doctors will be compelled to be honest with themselves as well as their patients about what they know and what they don't know.

Another danger anytime one enters a hospital is the possibility of
a medical mistake. The number of people exposed to unnecessary
hospitalization annually is 8.9 million which may put them at risk for
death or disability. The iatrogenic death rate stands at 225,000, and
is defined as a disease induced in a patient by a physician’s activity,
manner, or therapy. These include infections, non-error negative
effects of drugs, unnecessary surgery, and medication errors. As few
as 6 percent and up to 20 percent of iatrogenic acts were ever
reported. This implies that if medical errors were completely and
accurately reported, we would have a much higher iatrogenic death
rate. It is evident that the American medical system is the leading
cause of death and injury in the United States. In Europe that
proportion is only one seventh, perhaps because medicine is socialized
in several European countries and there is less of a profit motive, as
some have speculated. Historically, when the doctors have gone on
strike the mortality rate has dropped.

[Eodnhoj7]

The test is pulled out of thin air, hence the corresponding results are made up data

So is your beef with empiricism or with people who lie about doing empiricism?

Empiricism and Idealism are both inevitable, my "beef" is when one takes place over the other...which in the case of modern "science" is the false idealization of the physicists.

I argue for both, but will argue against the idolizing of either.

For example, I already argued for a awhile that void cancels itself out into being. The physicists are just starting to observe particles spontaneously come out of a "vacuum".

How did I do it? Abstraction and empirical sense...pure humanity, not a dependence on "tools".

Abstraction: I cannot observe zero/void without observing some sense of quantity/quality. It always is observes under a dualism. Void/zero as nothing effectively cancels itself out as "no-nothing" resulting in a self negating "something".

Empirical: All I have to do is stair at a point in space, I observe the point because of the movements through it as I move towards/away from the point, but in stairing at the point itself...there is nothing there.

Both, as all change is a constant boundary of change for some other phenomena. Even change is relativistically constant.

So you are heading towards renouncing all structure (logic).

No, because all change is a constant boundary to another change, hence if infinite change is a boundary in and of itself.

Relativity is an approximation of a constant if infinite state through multiple infinities.

Actually you can because it fails to take into account the dual nature of negentropy.[/color]

OK. Now you have crossed over into the realm of philosophical masturbation and interpretation.

Negentropy is only observed in sub-systems.

A sub system is composed of further sub systems, hence is a system in itself. Your "contextuality" is used under a masturbatory nature that is self pleasing but sterile.

I prefer to throw my intellectual seed into the womb of void and watch it grow into it's own entity.

That is where neitzche went wrong, he staired into the void and the void stair back into him...and he became like a whining woman with a temper tantrum complaining about everything because it became a "look but don't touch." His fascination with the sterile whoredom he practiced is just an physicialziation of his failure as a man to create because of his addiction to "want".

As a philosophical father, he is a let down and should be killed and put out of his misery.

...I am metaphorically saying "fuck the void" and reproduce.

And isn't that what void fundamentally is?...."entropy?".



The super-system of a negentropic sub-system is still entropic.

Yeah and dually entropy is a subsystem of negentropy when you invert it.

What type of half assed relativism are you arguing? Go all the way or go home.

This is precisely the conception of civilization/society!

Society is just another way of saying "I feel alone...will someone please hold my hand and tell me it will be alright?"

Society is the negentropic system we are trying to build while stuck in an entropic universe.

Negentropy requires work/energy. Humans...

Not really because I, as a "human", I can apply deductivity and use entropy to my will as well. What so you think infinite "regress" is? "As above...so below"...entropy and negentropy are duals and approximations of "the all". color]

[Eodnhoj7]

The how and why is "acceptance".

Yes. It is.

Because we have no better tools/methods. We are apes on a flying rock.

Last time I checked apes cannot turn space into an abstraction.

[Eodnhoj7]

Come on Lacewing, why do most people hope and pray for our deliverance from evil (or hurt) between man and man if not because they want a world in which there is no killing? Are you going to tell me that if you had two choices, a world of peace and brotherhood or a world of war and conflict, you would choose the world with war and conflict? If you would choose the latter, then you can stay in the world you're living. There is no force.

Do you think it is not possible to prefer a peaceful world (which I certainly do)... WHILE seeing the divine/order in WHAT ALREADY IS? If you approach something thinking it needs to be "fixed", you are applying your own limited ideas/judgments/thinking onto it, and putting energy toward your epic addiction to that reality. Whereas, a shift/broadening in perspective can reveal completely new insights and capabilities, regardless of the lure of any particular drama/reality. We don't have to carry on limited traditions and awareness of our predecessors in a hypnotic and desperate state. They've already done that to death. How about if we think beyond what we habitually think?

Those limits and traditions are a counter median to a strict materialism. With the rise of one comes another to meet it.

The question is less one of if dogma should or should not exist, but rather what is its nature?

[peacegirl]

Come on Lacewing, why do most people hope and pray for our deliverance from evil (or hurt) between man and man if not because they want a world in which there is no killing? Are you going to tell me that if you had two choices, a world of peace and brotherhood or a world of war and conflict, you would choose the world with war and conflict? If you would choose the latter, then you can stay in the world you're living. There is no force.

Do you think it is not possible to prefer a peaceful world (which I certainly do)... WHILE seeing the divine/order in WHAT ALREADY IS? If you approach something thinking it needs to be "fixed", you are applying your own limited ideas/judgments/thinking onto it, and putting energy toward your epic addiction to that reality. Whereas, a shift/broadening in perspective can reveal completely new insights and capabilities, regardless of the lure of any particular drama/reality. We don't have to carry on limited traditions and awareness of our predecessors in a hypnotic and desperate state. They've already done that to death. How about if we think beyond what we habitually think?

Those limits and traditions are a counter median to a strict materialism. With the rise of one comes another to meet it.

The question is less one of if dogma should or should not exist, but rather what is its nature?

I have to say that I’m at a loss to respond. You are definitely more informed by your philosophy than I am , so I am not in the position to speak to it. I can only offer what I believe to be true. I hope we can come together in truth to make this world a better place in which to live. My neighbor who I didn’t know very well lost her 15 year old son to suicide. He was a 9th grader and was on the football team. Everything looked fine from the outside but he was suffering inside. Sadly his choice to commit suicide (according to determinism) could not have been otherwise, but that doesn’t mean the environment cannot change to produce a different outcome for many kids who are silently suffering. This is real, and this is preventable.

[Eodnhoj7]

Do you think it is not possible to prefer a peaceful world (which I certainly do)... WHILE seeing the divine/order in WHAT ALREADY IS? If you approach something thinking it needs to be "fixed", you are applying your own limited ideas/judgments/thinking onto it, and putting energy toward your epic addiction to that reality. Whereas, a shift/broadening in perspective can reveal completely new insights and capabilities, regardless of the lure of any particular drama/reality. We don't have to carry on limited traditions and awareness of our predecessors in a hypnotic and desperate state. They've already done that to death. How about if we think beyond what we habitually think?

Those limits and traditions are a counter median to a strict materialism. With the rise of one comes another to meet it.

The question is less one of if dogma should or should not exist, but rather what is its nature?

I have to say that I’m at a loss to respond. You are definitely more informed by your philosophy than I am , so I am not in the position to speak to it. I can only offer what I believe to be true. I hope we can come together in truth to make this world a better place in which to live. My neighbor who I didn’t know very well lost her 15 year old son to suicide. He was a 9th grader and was on the football team. Everything looked fine from the outside but he was suffering inside. Sadly his choice to commit suicide (according to determinism) could not have been otherwise, but that doesn’t mean the environment cannot change to produce a different outcome for many kids who are silently suffering. This is real, and this is preventable.

Yeah, been there back in 2016.

A housing factory I worked for about a few minutes from my house, had people who knew a suicide left and right. Worked with guys in there thirties, heavy labor, full blown arthritis everywhere, one guy worked heavy labor with a broken arm because he couldn't afford the risk of losing his job, another bulging disks (which is common), another just had a kid with his girlfriend but she was cheating and his mother died recently, High pedophilia in the area, drugs/heroine, lost an old classmate (old junior high crush) to heroine and prostitution....blah, blah, blah...I heard or seen so many stories that I feel "corny" just saying all of it because it is borderline stereotypical.

I actually saw a happily married couple in there early twenties and was full blown in shock. One time I saw some young man praying on his own in a chapel...and was completely surprised.

Then go a few miles and it is just a bunch of self righteous middle class kids drinking starbucks.
I got more stories than I can count...and saying "I have more stories than I can count" is just corny and stupid after a while.

So there are a variety of extremes everywhere.

[peacegirl]

So what’s your point?

[Lacewing]

I hope we can come together in truth to make this world a better place in which to live.

I live in the same world that you do, peacegirl. I do not wish for people to suffer. I see the worst and the best that people are capable of and compelled by. I've learned that my ideas about "fixing" things are based on limited scope (my own or those passed around by others)...and, similar to what Logik pointed out, efforts to "fix" things we don't understand from a broader scope, can make them worse.

I think it's kind of arrogant for anyone to think that they have the answer for fixing what they think needs to be fixed in humankind. Such a position is too susceptible to ego... as they claim that they (usually ALONE) have some supreme answer and "truth" that others do not see. Such fanatics usually claim that they want to save humankind, while they themselves treat humankind with contempt.

I would have been willing to consider exploring something you titled "Revolution in Thought", but you were unable to provide a reasonable summary and describe what your agenda was. Instead, you've been vague and dismissive of the many comments you've received, while expecting a significant commitment from people to explore it. We've been through this before with a stream of people hawking their unique ideas. It's just so absurd to bombard people with something you claim is so significant, yet you do not do your own work to make it worth their interest and effort. Rather, like Gollum... sitting on a rock stroking your precious and hissing at people who question it. That's NOT being open-minded to creating and merging with a larger reality... it's limited, obsessed, and intoxicated, as I said earlier. Good intentions aren't enough... we have to continually question ourselves, knowing what we're capable of.

[peacegirl]

I hope we can come together in truth to make this world a better place in which to live.

I live in the same world that you do, peacegirl. I do not wish for people to suffer. I see the worst and the best that people are capable of and compelled by. I've learned that my ideas about "fixing" things are based on limited scope (my own or those passed around by others)...and, similar to what Logik pointed out, efforts to "fix" things we don't understand from a broader scope, can make them worse.

I think it's kind of arrogant for anyone to think that they have the answer for fixing what they think needs to be fixed in humankind. Such a position is too susceptible to ego... as they claim that they (usually ALONE) have some supreme answer and "truth" that others do not see. Such fanatics usually claim that they want to save humankind, while they themselves treat humankind with contempt.

I would have been willing to consider exploring something you titled "Revolution in Thought", but you were unable to provide a reasonable summary and describe what your agenda was. Instead, you've been vague and dismissive of the many comments you've received, while expecting a significant commitment from people to explore it. We've been through this before with a stream of people hawking their unique ideas. It's just so absurd to bombard people with something you claim is so significant, yet you do not do your own work to make it worth their interest and effort. Rather, like Gollum... sitting on a rock stroking your precious and hissing at people who question it. That's NOT being open-minded to creating and merging with a larger reality... it's limited, obsessed, and intoxicated, as I said earlier. Good intentions aren't enough... we have to continually question ourselves, knowing what we're capable of.

Your words fall flat. Until you understand what this discovery is about, you are talking from ignorance.

[Lacewing]

Your words ring flat. Until you understand what this discovery is about, you are talking from ignorance.

Preciousss.

[peacegirl]

Your words ring flat. Until you understand what this discovery is about, you are talking from ignorance.

Preciousss.

Obviously you didn’t read my posts. You’ve jumped to a false conclusion which causes you to scuff at me. I’ve been explaining what this knowledge is about. I haven’t just said “Trust me” therefore I have not done what you are accusing me of. You are a jaded individual who comes on like a bully with a bulldozer. You have asked nothing that I could answer yet you assume I haven’t tried to answer every and all questions. My answers may create more questions which is understandable when no one here has read the book. This is why a work is important to read, not just base their opinion on cliff notes. I hope you think about how difficult this has been considering the controversial nature of the topic and the fact that the author had no affiliation and had no funding. Everything he did to bring his knowledge to light was out of his own pocket.

It’s not surprising that people will listen to the bully who is usually the meanest and the the loudest and the most ignorant. There’s usually one or two in he crowd. This is the very mentality that prevented the knowledge that the earth was round from being recognized as true until 2000 years later.

Sadly, this may end my time here. If it is I want to leave the reader with the first three chapters that I have posted before. I hope it will be read without prejudgement which is the only way these principles can be understood. If anyone wants to join my fledgling grassroots movement (not much going on yet) to bring this knowledge to light, I hope you will subscribe to my Facebook page: www.facebook.com/SafeworldPublishingCompany.

http://www.declineandfallofallevil.com/ ... apters.pdf