Friday, May 08, 2009

State Controlled Consciousness: Fathers Love for Justice

Chicken, or the Egg?

“The aim of public education is not to fill the young of the species with knowledge and awaken their intelligence. ... Nothing could be further from the truth. The aim ... is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality.”
-- H.L. Mencken, The American Mercury



“Perhaps school's greatest danger is that it may convince you life is nothing more than an institutionalized rat race”
-- Grace Llewellyn, The Teenage Liberation Handbook: How to Quit School & Get a Real Life and Education




State Indoctrication and the Destruction of the Family

I've noticed a fascinating phenomenon in my 27 years of teaching: schools and schooling are increasingly irrelevant to the great enterprises of the planet. No one believes any more that scientists are made in science classes, or politicians in civics classes, or poets in English classes. The truth is that schools don't really teach anything except how to obey orders. This is a great mystery because thousands of humane, caring people work in schools as teachers and aides, and even as administrators. But the abstract logic of the institution overwhelms their individual contributions. Although teachers do care, and do work very hard, the institution is psychopathic - by which I mean it has no conscience.
-- John Taylor Gatto, The Exhausted School




Scenario A: Jeffrey will not be still in class, he disrupts other students.

1957 - Jeffrey sent to the Principal’s office and given a good paddling by the Principal. He then returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again.

2009 - Jeffrey is given huge doses of Ritalin. He becomes a zombie. He is then tested for ADD. The school gets extra money from the state because Jeffrey has a disability.



Scenario B: Billy breaks a window in his neighbor’s car and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt.

1957 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college and becomes a successful businessman.

2009 - Billy’s dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy is removed to foster care and joins a gang. The state psychologist is told by Billy’s sister that she remembers being abused herself and their dad goes to prison. Billy’s mom has an affair with the psychologist.



Scenario C: Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his knee. He is found crying by his teacher, Mary. Mary hugs him to comfort him.

1957 - In a short time, Johnny feels better and goes on playing.

2009 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces 3 years in State Prison. Johnny undergoes 5 years of therapy.




Brief Dot Connectors on the Road to the Destruction of the Family:

“Communism and Socialism all know that they can not survive with strong families. Strong families make strong communities, and strong communities keep government power in check. Break down the families, and the door is wide open to centralizing power in government. Once families break down through divorce, welfare, cohabitation, etc. Government gets more and more involved in everyday life. More and more centralized government control.”
--- Red Squirrel’s ‘Nut Cracking’ Nationalism’: Why I am a Nationalist....



The real purpose of modern schooling was announced by the legendary sociologist Edward Roth in his manifesto of 1906, Social Control:

“Plans are underway to replace family, community and church with propaganda, mass-media and education .... people are only little plastic lumps of dough”.



Lump of Dough Children are accordingly in need of an education system that is deliberately designed to produce mediocre intellects, to hamstring their inner lives, to deny them appreciable leadership skills, and to ensure docile and incomplete citizens in order to render the populace “manageable.”


The Socialist “Father of American Education,” John Dewey, stated his beliefs about how schools should be instrumental in developing a socialist society in America, in My Pedagogic Creed (1897) and The School and Society (1899). He suggested a system of ‘progressive education’ that should use psychology to deemphasize academics:


“Our schools … are performing an infinite significant religious work. They are promoting the social unity out of which in the end genuine religious unity must grow.”





Obstacles to the Central Socialist Planned Society:

The biggest obstacle to a planned society are parents. Parents have their own plans for their own kids; most often they love their kids. Parents motivations are self-reinforcing, unlike those of ‘educators’ who are motivated predominantly by their pay-check. Accordingly parents need to be manipulated, for a few unhappy parents could disrupt the efficiency of the Dumbing Down Educational Experiment being conducted on their guineapig 'lump of dough' children.

The second biggest obstacle to a planned society are religious ‘cults’, all of which have their own ideas as to ‘Gods’ plan for all human beings, including and particularly children.

The third significant obstacle being local values and strong family ethnic cultures; which provide children with socially useful socio-cultural navigation maps for growing up.

Accordingly a Planned Centralized Social Society needs to seriously suppress, if not attempt to entirely extinguish: individuality, cultural identity, a individual relationships with God, and close-knit family's.

Few people are aware that the concept of Forced Schooling, was a recent invention, subsequent to the industrial revolution. Even fewer are conscious of how forced schooling has served the dual function of: l) The creation of a mindless proletariat stripped of its traditions of liberty, independence, fidelity to God, loyalty to family and land; and 2) The creation of a professional proletariat, suitably dumbed down and obedience specialized to serve functionally in a highly centralized corporate/bureaucratic economy.





The Path of Least Resistance: Debt Slave Consumers

“A man in debt is so far a slave.”
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson



“Debt, n. An ingenious substitute for the chain and whip of the slavedriver.”
-- Ambrose Bierce



“Debt is the slavery of the free.”
-- Publilius Syrus



“Debt is the fatal disease of republics, the first thing and the mightiest to undermine governments and corrupt the people.”
-- Wendell Phillips



“Live within your means, never be in debt, and by husbanding your money you can always lay it out well. But when you get in debt you become a slave. Therefore I say to you never involve yourself in debt, and become no man's surety. If your friend is in distress, aid him if you have the means to spare. If he fails to be able to return it, it is only so much lost.”
-- President Andrew Jackson



Free Goverment Grants
“You can explain the model in a few simple sentences: Encourage people to spend. When they run out of money, encourage them to borrow. When they tire of borrowing and spending, lend them more at lower rates.”

“As a way for people to build wealth, this economic model of the Bubble Period was as ineffective as a bad banker. It was a ‘have your cake and eat it too’ school of financial success with an obvious flaw.”

“In the Bubble Epoque people tried to get something for nothing… Imagine, they thought they could get rich by borrowing money and spending it. Have you ever heard of something so ridiculous? Ha ha! Now, they think they can get rich by spending money that doesn’t even exist.”
-- Bill Bonner, Daily Reckoning



The old mature ethics and values of 'no free lunch' and 'the path less travelled', honour and integrity, a man's word is his honour, etc... were replaced with new Highway to Hedonism and a Consumer Paradise Superficiality: Easy divorce laws removed the need for commitment to work at relationships; easy credit removed the need for fiscal self-control; easy entertainment removed the need to learn to entertain oneself; easy answers removed the need to ask questions.



Unschooling: Road to a Meaningful Life Adventure

“Where did we ever get the grotesque idea that the State has a right to educate our kids? Where did we ever get the notion there is only one right way to grow up instead of hundreds? How did we lose our way and come to believe that human value and human quality can be reduced to numbers derived from paper/pencil tests?”
-- John Taylor Gatto, The Exhausted School



Now for the good news. Once you capiche the lump of dough conspiracy of modern schooling, avoiding its tricks and traps are easy:

State propaganda trains children to be employees and consumers; teach yours to be leaders and adventurers.

Socialist indoctrination trains children to obey reflexively; teach yours to think critically and independently.

State zombies have a low threshold for boredom and being alone, addicted to external 'entertainment stimulus'; help your own to develop an inner life of adventure and wonder, into history, literature, philosophy, so that they'll never be bored.

Challenge your kids with nature and solitude so that they can learn to enjoy their own company, and appreciate conducting their own inner dialogues.

Sociliazed Sheeple prefer shallow and superficial friendships and relationships, quickly acquired and quickly abandoned; do your children deserve more?

Your children can have a more meaningful life, and so can you.





Disobedient Adventurers for Love: Fathers for Justice:


Fathers 4 Justice
“…when historians look back on British Society at the start of the third millennium they will accord a small but important chapter to the men in tights.”
-- The Times Newspaper, January 2006


“…fiercely intelligent, charmingly foul-mouthed and a fantastic turn of phrase…few could equal O'Connor when it comes to taking a conversational thread,yanking, unravelling and generally running with it.”
-- Will Self, Author, GQ Magazine, June 2006



Fathers 4 Justice“No comment.”
-- PR Office, Scotland Yard



“Fathers 4 Justice? The worst campaign group I have ever heard of.”
-- Downing Street Press Spokesman



The civil rights group Fathers 4 Justice (F4J) was founded in December 2002 by Matt O'Connor after he experienced first hand the injustices of the secret family courts as he struggled to see his two boys Daniel and Alexander after a traumatic divorce. Started as a vehicle for social change, F4J quickly became the high-wire act of protest groups, whether powder-bombing the Prime Minister in the House of Commons, scaling the balcony at Buckingham Palace in a Batman Costume, invading the Pulpit at York Minster during a General Synod Service or taking the National Lottery Draw live off air on BBC1 in front of ten million viewers.

Fathers 4 JusticeBut behind the headlines and dramatic protests is a new creed for family law enshrined in our documents “Family Justice On Trial ­ Opening The Door On Closed Courts” and "Blueprint For Family Law In The 21st Century." These pioneering, ideas-led documents set out radical and visionary frameworks for a fair, just, open and equitable system of family law. Both documents are essential reading and available on this web site for the first time.

F4J campaigns not just in the name of the father, but in the name of all parents, grandparents and children seeking equality in family law. The achievements of F4J to date are best described by the Times Newspaper who in January 2006 wrote:

Fathers 4 Justice“F4J caught the spirit of the times: they reflected the zeitgeist, and they changed it...for all the flaws within F4J, the issue of fatherhood has a currency that would have been unimaginable three years ago...when historians look back on British Society at the start of the third millennium, they will accord a small but important chapter to the men in tights.”

In just a few years Fathers 4 Justice has not only effected “climate change”, but it has also succeeded in discrediting the secret courts and undermining public confidence in them. The result has been to force the government to advance proposals to open up the secret family courts to greater scrutiny and propose tougher enforcement of contact orders.

Fathers 4 JusticeRidicule, satire and subversion are integral elements of the Fathers 4 Justice campaign. Naturally politicians, judges and the family law industry are targets for protests that are one part Monty Python, one part Pantomime and one part high-wire Circus act.

Over the last four years, F4J has produced an ideas bank of creative work for campaigns, protest and demonstrations. Some ideas have yet to be realised and many never made it to their intended destination. Others though, like the infamous “In The Name Of The Father” banner graced a crane at Tower Bridge, the roof at York Minster and St Paul's Cathedral.




Fathers for Justice





John Taylor Gatto: State Controlled Consciousness

">



Sources: Fathers 4 Justice :: Red Squirrel's 'Nut Cracking' Nationalism :: Fathers for Life: Communist Manifesto :: InfoWars: High School: 1957 v 2009 :: JT Gatto: The Exhausted School (PDF)

38 Opinion(s):

Vanilla Ice said...

@Andrea. I am only half way through your article but I had an epiphany. That explains the difference between my education and that which I experience in Canada. My new countrymen are well educated, to say the least. They are book learned and disciplined, but fuck me they cannot critically think, rarely do they search for truth and they daren't stray from the indoctrinated norm. I opine that white South Africans are educated under a system that they know to be corrupt and therefore develop an ability to question everything. Your thoughts?

Andrea Murrhteyn said...

Vanilla. My thoughts. When I read your comment, my first thought was to Journalism as a Weapon of War, by John Pilger:

During the Cold War, a group of Russian journalists toured the United States. On the final day of their visit, they were asked by their hosts for their impressions. "I have to tell you," said their spokesman, 'that we were astonished to find, after reading all the newspapers and watching TV, that all the opinions on all the vital issues were, by and large, the same. To get that result in our country, we imprison people, we tear out their fingernails. Here, you don't have that. What's the secret? How do you do it?"

What is the secret? It's a question now urgently asked of those whose job is to keep the record straight: who in this country have extraordinary constitutional freedom. I refer to journalists, of course, a small group who hold privileged sway over the way we think, even the way we use language.

I have been a journalist for more than 40 years. Although I am based in London, I have worked all over the world, including the United States, and I have reported America's wars. My experience is that what the Russian journalists were referring to is censorship by omission, the product of a parallel world of unspoken truth and public myths and lies: in other words, censorship by journalism, which today has
become war by journalism.


For me, this is the most virulent and powerful form of censorship, fuelling an indoctrination that runs deep in western societies, deeper than many journalists themselves understand or will admit to.

Then he goes on providing examples of journalists withholding the truth about atrocities of torture and mass murder in Vietnam, Iraq etc... And he ends with:


It is said the internet is an alternative; and what is wonderful about the rebellious spirits on the World Wide Web is that they often report as journalists should. They are mavericks in the tradition of the great muckrakers: those like the Irish journalist Claud Cockburn, who said: "Never believe anything until it is officially denied." But the internet is still a kind of samidzat, an underground, and most of humanity does not log on; just as most of humanity does not own a cell phone. And the right to know ought to be universal. That other great muckraker, Tom Paine, warned that if the majority of the people were denied the truth and ideas of truth, it was time to storm what he called the "Bastille of
words". That time is now."

Andrea Murrhteyn said...

Dr. Chimp!! ;-) (I love that pic!)

I thought more about your epiphany. So much there, we could dedicate an entire blog to the issue. But anyway..

Simplistically, is it possible to 'think critically', or 'search for teh truth', before you confront the reality, that (a) simply regurgitating 'thoughts' fed into your brain, is not 'critical thinking'; and (b) what you spent your life 'thinking' (read: obediently believing what you were told to believe) to be 'the truth' is not 'the truth', but lies and deceptions to manipulate you.

I think confronting these realities within ourselves, is based on many, many factors, emotional, cultural, academic, social, familial, etc. Each of us, has to -- before we can ever really do any critical thinking, or search for the truth -- confront the aforementioned realities. Some, perhaps many, if not most, may go through our entire lives, never confronting those realities, again for many reasons.

Its a fascinating subject of discussion, with various dimensions, from:

1. The socio-cultural peer pressure, financial et al, factors that inhibit 'awakening to reality';

2. The inner emotional, psychological ego coward, et al, factors....

3. Basically, the stuff of philosophy, theology and much else! ;-)

I remember my own resistance to confronting reality; to wanting to believe 'the truth' was what i had been told, and so naively had believed, without any enquiry on myown part to be 'the truth'. I remember feeling insulted to think that anyone could think that I don't 'think critically'. How rude!! How insulting! What a mean person they were! All the rationalisations, to avoid confronting issues, that rocked my little status quo ego-boat. Anyway I eventually did manage to say 'enough is goddamn enough'...

And then i think about all the known unknowns and unknown unknowns.. and try to remember to not be too attached that those i think are 'known knowns', really are so.. cause just maybe i may someday need to re-examine them again!

Ain't a critically thinking life a journey of adventure? ;-)

Vanilla Ice said...

I had a debate recently. An otherwise educated Canadian was remonstrating about the lack of freedoms in China. I asked what the difference was between China and North America. He was visibly shocked. I then explained that North America are deliberately kept ignorant, and only fed the news that is necessary. I went on to explain how difficult it is to get impartial news. I have to specifically subscribe to BBC, I cannot get Al Jazeera or Sky news, I cannot get European or Russian news, but if I want US news, they are a dime a dozen. I then have to subject myself to some loud and crass female (usually) and swallow utter US garbage. I haven't experimented with Fox yet. It is quite unbelievable how difficult it is to remain connected to the rest of the world.

Vanilla Ice said...

@Andrea. No doubt it is a topic for a blog posting. I haven't ever really considered what defines a critical thinker. I love your term "awakening to reality". I especially like the thesis that it may take different people different lengths of time to confront reality, if they ever do. It would be interesting to explore why this is so. Are you kidding? I have enjoyed my journeys very much since I awakened to my reality. For me it is the essence of life.

Andrea Murrhteyn said...

Vanilla: Wow, you know things are really bad, when you can't get the mainstream bit of alternatives from Russia Today, AlJazeera and the BBC, et al! That's really cutting down even mainstream alterantives! Wow!

Poor Canadian, he has been told for so long, how 'free' he is and what a 'free' society he lives in; that he has swallowed it as an absolute truth.

As for a definition of 'critical thinking'. Hmmmm that would be interesting.... I'd have to do some critical thinking on that! ;-)...

FishEagle said...

Some people can think and others can’t. Don’t think about it too much or you will drive yourself crazy.

Critical thinking is partly the ability to take care of one’s interests. The logical thought process is usually easy but the emotional part requires the ability to bridge the conflicting emotional needs between and within the social spheres of each individual. Many people just have the ability to look at the issues closest to them on an emotional level (personal issues, family and friends) and they are unable to expand the periphery of their vision to include broader issues in society. It’s not as easy as you might expect. But you guys are doing it!

The definition is provided in Wiki and starts like this: “Critical thinking is purposeful and reflective judgment about what to believe or what to do[1] in response to observations, experience, verbal or written expressions, or arguments…….”

Vanilla Ice said...

@Fish Eagle. Indeed, and it ties in with our earlier chats on truth. If the pursuit of truth consists of your epistemology, which it does, then logically your critical thinking will be impaired if your sense of observation is flawed, ceteris parabis. So as Andrea mentioned, if the concept of truth has not been challenged in the minds of many, and the mainstream dogma is accepted as factual, there will be a flawed observation process, leading to flawed conclusions. Kind of like North Korea, it is well known that they are a high IQ nation, yet they idolise their leader. I appreciate much of that is a survival mechanism, but the large majority truly believe in their cause. The same could be said of cults. As I ramble along here I get a sense of having discussed this before in a different guise, anyway I am sure you get the gist.

Andrea Murrhteyn said...

Fish Eagle,

Interesting. I agree, and as an exploratory exercise: what is 'thinking'?

Besides its biological definition, it's basically an abstract concept, and accordingly has various interpretations.

Your definition of critical thinking is also interesting. Critical thinking being another abstract concept, I won't even begin to attempt to say your defintion is incorrect. I am quite happy to explore it, as a working assumption.

So if: Critical thinking is partly the ability to take care of one’s interests.....

Would you not agree, that long before you got to the 'taking care' of your interests; it would behoove yourself to accurately define your interests, based upon what REALLY, AND I MEAN REALLY LIKE A BULLET TO TEH BRAIN INTERESTS you.... after much serious thought, even better after some serious experimentation and exploration... to determine for yourself EXACTLY WHAT YOUR INTERETS ARE AND THEIR PRIORITY.... ;-)

I say so... cause it is my opinion, that it is very plausible.. what most people 'think' are thier 'interests' are nothing less than what they have been brainwashed to 'believe/think' are their interests, by family/church/Fortune500 et al...

So, if the ultimate goal (their interets) are not their gut wrenching own... what does that say about their ability for critical thinking?

If, for example, Johnny is highly capable of taking care of himself, based upon the interests he has been brainwashed to accept as 'good' or 'successful' or whatever?

A shallow observation of his behaviour may draw the conclusion, he is capable of 'critical thinking'; but is he really, if he has never even bothered to ask himself whether all he does, towards the goal, he 'believes/thinks/is brainwashed' to believe is his; is REALLY REALLY WHAT GIVES HIM MEANING AND PURPOSE?

If you interested in any of aforementioned... happy to hear your thoughts.. prior to delving further into the wiki definition...

Anonymous said...

How about scepticism equals critical thinking?

Dachshund said...

You're terribly interesting. I'm so glad you're contributing.

FishEagle said...

Hi Andrea, I believe people ALWAYS know what is best for them. Difficulties arise with the implementation of one’s goals when there are conflicting interests within a person’s emotional spheres. I believe part of critical thinking is that ability of consistent conflict bridging and alignment of goals. These actions of bridging and alignment are universal but people’s interests will depend on individual needs.

Let me give you an example of the bridging of conflict and alignment of interests that I am familiar with.

I believe it is in my interest to have children one day.

Assuming you know my history, I was afraid of finding love with another person because I was not at peace with myself (on the personal level). I remembered the causes of my unhappiness that I was raped as a child. I began questioning my own motives so that I was eventually secure in the knowledge that I truly had my own interests at heart.

I was afraid of having children because my parents did not provide me with an example of a healthy family (the family level). I began to question their motives and by putting the pieces together of the circumstances that gave rise to my rape I was able to forgive my parents and find peace in my family.

I did not remember my rape, which made me feel ashamed and stupid. I doubted whether I would be responsible as a parent or colleague (immediate society level). But then I questioned my own intelligence and when I studied a course in the natural sciences it gave me the confidence that I needed about my own logic. Similarly, I now have confidence in my emotional intelligence after spending time on this site (so thanks guys!)

Then when I started working I saw first hand the environmental damage that people do. It made me afraid of having children because I felt it was morally wrong to put any further strain on our natural resources (the greater society level). However, when I began questioning the direction that the human race was taking (NOT THE ACTUAL IMPACT THAT WE ARE HAVING ON THE ENVIRONMENT – THAT’S OBVIOUS) I read about race population dynamics and realized it wouldn’t make a difference whether I had kids or not.

Whites have become responsible towards the environment but we have found ourselves in the situation of being out “bred” by the less educated and less responsible races. When everybody decides to act responsibly and only have a small number of children I won’t worry about the greater good of society. In the meantime, I don’t have the authority to tell other races that they must not have too many kids and they will continue to do it. Therefor I could argue that the more kids I have, the better!

I believe we are heading for a meritocracy, which will curb population numbers responsibly and it is something that I can be proud of. So I have made peace with my race too.

When people get brainwashed by family, church or whatever, they are not true to themselves anymore. Some people just need time before they come around and connect the dots. Others never come around because they simply don’t have the ability. Can we judge them because of it? No! But clearly these people are out of touch with the goals of the people around them and therefore they are unable to align themselves in a way that they will benefit from the association.

You asked the question “What does it say about their ability for critical thinking?” It means that under the circumstances they can’t do it.

I don’t know about where you guys are but today is the most idyllic day we’re having here. Warm sun, no wind, calm sea….

Andrea Murrhteyn said...

Anon (11:20 AM): if it works for you; thats all that matters, to me. I imagine a superficial 'skeptic' may critic whatever 'theory' being promulgated; and a systemic skeptic may go deeper; 'out of the box' so to speak.


Dachshund (11:45 AM):
Well, in the same way that beauty is in the eye of the beholder; I imagine so too, are other interpretations of behaviour, such as 'interesting', or 'nutcase' or whatever. So, I appreciate your choice of 'interesting'; and found it gave me quite a bit of food for thought. Thanks. Feel free to let me know when you find my contributions 'interestingly' offensive, or disagreeable too.

Andrea Murrhteyn said...

FishEagle,

Perhaps this is nothing, and perhaps you want to ignore it (no problem); I just thought I'd give you the feedback; but my feedback is based on very little observation; only you would be able to examine the issue further for yourself.

I noticed when I read your sentence: I believe it is in my interest to have children one day.

I had to go back and read it again a few times. It sounded so alienated. Almost like you (the person typing, and thinking as you type) were talking about someone totally outside of you, separate. Almost slightly little dictatorial, as in decisions made about what the interests are, and should be.

If you don't pay close attention to language and how people speak, and what they say; what I am saying to you may sound like the biggest load of hogwash gobbledygook BS to you.

Before you do, imagine for a minute, you are a psychologist, and you have two men sitting in your group therapy class: This is how they express thier problems:

1: 'Doctor, I have a problem; I have insomnia. Although i have a beautiful wife and nice children. I have a happy marriage, and I have many worries.'

2: 'Doctor, I am troubled; I cannot sleep. Although I am married to a beautiful wife, with a lovely family. I am also troubled.

Do you see the subtle psychological differences in terms of how these two men perceive their 'problems'?

How we express our problems is often, an indication of how we perceive them; and how we perceive them, frequently determines how we confront them, or allow them to consume us.

If you are remotely curious to explore the issue further (only you can benefit from expressing yourself in a way that is more intimate to your desires, and wants and needs)

For example: If you say the following sentences; how do they sit with you intellectually, psychologically, emotionally and physically (any tension in your being, for example: tense shoulders, grinding teeth, relaxed or whatever??):

1. I very much want to, and need to, conceive and give birth to children one day.

2. I am excited and passionately intensely seeking the man I wish to make the father of my children.

Compare those to:

I believe it is in my interest to have children one day.

FishEagle said...

Hi Andrea,the issue of having children is an emotional issue. If I am having a conversation with my sister, for example, I may express myself in the way that you are suggesting. At the time that I wrote the comment my thoughts certainly were not motherly. That does not mean that I don't have those motherly feelings.

In the context of this discussion I have taken myself and my emotions out of the conversation. I don't really see the point of expressing my emotions when we are having a discussion about critical thinking.

I was hoping that my example would prove my point regarding critical thinking efficiently. Just because I am a very emotional person does not mean that I'm not efficient. I believe it is important to be able to determine the appropriate tone for a conversation. It is important to determine who is going to get the message and the intention of the message. My intention is not to engage the readers of this blog with my emotional motherly needs. I'd rather prefer to engage the readers on the complexity of being able link emotional needs, critical thought and so forth.

I flirt when I want to flirt. I enjoy the weather when I want to enjoy it. That is what I've enjoyed about this site so much.

Vanilla Ice said...

@FishEagle and others.

I don't accept the notion that we instinctively know what is good for us since the outcomes are so varied and many choices people make are just stupid. As Andrea mentions, the departure point would have to be defining what it is that is good for us. In order to rationally define what is good for us we need to determine an appropriate time frame. Is it good for me now, or will it benefit me in the long run. The long run is usually what counts and in order to be successful at that takes understanding and mastering delayed gratification. These are not instinctive concepts. A common denominator for successful critical thinkers is undoubtedly intellect, but the field becomes murky when you consider that the lack of critical thinking can affect entire groups, or nations. So there is obviously an interplay between intellect and indoctrination.

Andrea Murrhteyn said...

FishEagle,

As I said, I could be wrong. Just how I heard it. Having spent much of my life in the area of raising children (not my own), I no doubt got my wacky ways about how prospective mommies must communicate! And its good when they don't obey and communicate as they wish! ;-)

I get your intention and point.

FishEagle said...

VI and Andrea, I agree the departure point is defining that which is good for us, i.e. making the logical deductions from the given facts. Of course the conclusion will depend entirely on the given facts, which will include the person’s environment.

Andrea posed the question, “If critical thinking is partly the ability to take care of one’s interests….it would behoove yourself to accurately define your interests based upon what REALLY, AND I MEAN REALLY LIKE A BULLET TO THE BRAIN INTERESTS you…after much serious thought, even better after some serious experimentation and exploration…to determine for yourself EXACTLY WHAT YOUR INTERESTS ARE AND THEIR PRIORITY…”

The term “know” was used in the context of her question and meant in terms of logical deductions and not instinctive decisions. My point is that with any given facts people are always capable of making the correct deductions when they need to make decisions that benefits them, although it may be to different degrees.

The problem comes in when the balance between the 3 parts of the brain is disturbed, which may be due to stunted emotional development, trauma and so forth. That is when the implementation of logical deductions becomes problematic or ‘incorrect’ and people become confused, are unable to bridge the gaps of conflict and align their emotional spheres. That is when critical thinking becomes particularly useful to restore the balance, as I have hopefully illustrated in the example in my previous comment. Please note that I am not attempting or I have not tried to attempt to define critical thinking. I’ll leave that to the experts.

FishEagle said...

Andrea, I just read your last comments. Lady, I will not take such patronizing crap. Unbelievable! NOBODY here is a child, get it? Nobody here needs to speak as if they are speaking to children!

And regarding your comment under the other post (Mother’s Limbic Love Connection), “I wouldn’t be too harsh on yourself,” wake up please! The f*cking audacity of some of the assumptions you make! I’m not harsh on myself. I’m just making it clear that you must not be harsh on the likes of myself. Whether you wrote the book or not, you quoted it! Take some f*cking responsibility!

Gees I’m disappointed!

Vanilla Ice said...

Oookaaaay. FishEagle I didn't interpret Andrea's comments the way you have. I had a few things to say but I think I will leave it there.

Andrea Murrhteyn said...

FishEagle (6:33 PM): I am not sure what specific words I wrote, that you chose to interpret as 'patronizing crap'. Perhaps if you clarify for me what words exactly I said, I can understand how it is you are angry. I was simply being playful. My attempt to indicate that I am a playful person, even when I share information on a serious issue, are the included cartoons.

Irrespective I hear that you think that something I said was patronizing. I don't know what I said that you so interpreted; nor do I know exactly how you define patronizing. Until you do, I won't know.

Perhaps this may help: My view on life is that in many aspects we are all big children; who have forgotten how to play. The world is cursed with the Curse of Greyface (see Dischordianism).

My apologies you chose to interpret what I said as if I was speaking to a child. I was speaking as one big child, to another big child, in playfulness. If that offends you, my apologies.

As for being harsh on anyone;.... and the 'fucking audacity of some of the assumptions i make'.... that was hilarious! Were you being serious, or are you joking?

If serious, me does think the lady does proteth a little.. and thats okay.. I am prone to protething allot too!

RE: "Whether you wrote the book or not, you quoted it! Take some f*cking responsibility!"

Please clarify what you are trying to say: I should not have quoted the book? That would have been responsible?

FishEagle said...

“and the “fucking audacity of some of the assumptions I make”…that was hilarious!” Now that is a comment I can sincerely appreciate.

Some of the examples of your patronization, which were specifically addressed to me:

“I won’t even begin to attempt to say your definition is incorrect.” Gee thanks.

“If you don’t pay close attention to language and how people speak….what I am saying to you may sound like the biggest load of hogwash gobbledygook BS to you…” Really dear, and who died and made you the expert?

“I no doubt got my wacky ways about how prospective mommies must communicate! AND IS GOOD WHEN THEY DON’T OBEY AND COMMUNICATE AS THEY WISH!” Wtf??? I’ll make sure that as a prospective mommy I will not obey as you suggest.

“I was simply being playful.” Yip, big child you are.

“Perhaps this may help..” And why do I need help?

“if serious, me does think the lady does PROTETH a little..and that okay.. I am prone to PROTETHING ALLOT too!” If you had any underthtanding of pthychology you would have an underthtanding of the lengths to which a rape thurvivor has to go to, to actually become an adult in every sense of the word. Of course I am fucking protesting!!

“So I wouldn’t be too harsh on yourself…” posted under (Mother’s Limbic Love Connection) Well, you know what I said about that already!

Gees, I can’t believe you actually made me read some of your comments again!

Regarding your quote under the post Mother’s Limbic Love Connection, it is fine that you quoted the book. I can’t judge you in your ignorance. But then you go on to justify the comments after I asked you to be just a little more open minded and you actually go and say that I don’t have enough knowledge about myself to make an objective decision whether I have a reptilian brain!!!!! You haven’t asked any people in my social spheres!!! Go fuck yourself!

You have the freedom to behave like a big child. Who can stop you? I just won’t be taking the journey with you. And do you really think a big child is capable of critical thinking?? Ironic, hey, that you profess to be such an expert. You don’t know what you are talking about.

Viking said...

Hi Andrea

I'm not sure I agree that
"what you spent your life 'thinking' (read: obediently believing what you were told to believe) to be 'the truth' is not 'the truth', but lies and deceptions to manipulate you"
It all sounds very Dan Brown to me. There will always be debate on what it means to be a critical thinker, and a couple of good books to start with would be anything by economist Tim Harford, or "fooled by randomness" by Nassim Taleb. The latter is badly written but worth reading.

But back to the comment - our ability to think critically may be impaired (as Vanilla Ice says) by expernal factors, but some people seem to have an inherent ability to question. I was a critical thinker from a young age, and never followed the crowd. When I was 5 I switched to being a left-hander because everyone else wrote with their right hand, and I've been a contrary s-o-b ever since!

One of the hardest battles is against society's expectations. Get the good job, get the Merc, get the girl. It is the stuff of African-American rap music videos. But it is hard to escape from without becoming either a monk or a beach bum. In that respect FishEagle is right when she says "Critical thinking is partly the ability to take care of one’s interests", when you work out what your immediate interests are versus what your "real" interests are. Everything is a trade off.

On another note, I think you (Andrea) make too much out of the statement "I believe it is in my interest to have children one day."
There would seem to be very little food for pschological analysis there! seems like a rational statement to me, and is deliberately phrased so as to be rational and not emotionally charged.
Is it really in a person's interest to have children? they are an emotional and financial drain, and the potential benefit they bring to the world is a gamble at best!
From an emotional and personal point of view it is a crucial issue, and the definition of one's interest CERTAINLY includes one's emotional and spiritual health.

just my two cents..

Andrea Murrhteyn said...

viking: Thanks for the 2 cents; would you like any change? ;-)

Viking said...

Always in favour of change, Andrea :)

FishEagle said...

Viking, I liked your story about switching from right to left hand. If you’re a contrary SOB then I guess that makes two of us.

“But it is hard to escape from without becoming either a monk or a beach bum.” Such a true observation.

Andrea Murrhteyn said...

FishEagle,

In addition to be a contrarian SOB, I think you are a hell of a gutsy lady, in many more ways than one.

FishEagle said...

Thanks Andrea, truce?

Andrea Murrhteyn said...

FishEagle,

A Truce!

Humour Response: You gotta be kidding me! This war my friend! A catfight for the PC boysclub! ;-)

Serious Response: No, just kidding. I imagine we may yet disagree plenty, and so be it. We will sometimes stumble, and hopefully learn from each other. I appreicate your passion, and your gutsyness.

Doberman said...

Awww man..a truce..? ;)There's noting sexier than two feisty intelligent women having a fight, am I right boys?!!

Joe King said...

Dobes, I agree. I have been following this thing from the sideline and have been enjoying every response. Notice no comments from most (even anon) , but we cannot allow a truce- this is to much fun. Gentelman place your bets please. ;-)

FishEagle said...

JK, even though it is all actually quite sad you made me crack up with laughter. Thanks

Andrea, these guys are also going to have a go at one another one of these days then it will be our turn to place the bets!

Andrea Murrhteyn said...

FishEagle: If we were playing poker, we'd both have gone all in; and be splitting the pot! ;-) Well said.

Viking said...

"There's noting sexier than two feisty intelligent women having a fight, am I right boys?!!"

hahahaha never a truer word.
still cracking up over this one!

FishEagle said...

Viking,tussen jou en Doberman soek julle 'n vet klap!

Viking said...

@FishEagle

I love it when you talk foreign to me!

Anonymous said...

It was rather interesting for me to read this blog. Thanx for it. I like such topics and anything connected to this matter. I definitely want to read more on that blog soon.

Anonymous said...

Don't stop posting such themes. I like to read stories like that. BTW add more pics :)