Perception, Inception and the Trojan Horse Money Meme - Part Four of Four

Cognitive Dissonance's picture




 
0
Your rating: None
 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 05/30/2011 - 03:48 | 1321654 KTV Escort
KTV Escort's picture

.

Sun, 05/15/2011 - 03:11 | 1275667 His_Name_Is_Zero
His_Name_Is_Zero's picture

Definitely different, thought-provoking reading Cognitive Dissonance.  I would first say that the "work on yourself" part is probably the most important thing for me to do particularly with regard to money and investments, having passed by quite a few opportunities that I was very accurate on.  That for me justifies your posting here. 

However there are other factors involved with people's minds and thinking.  These range in a very wide array of operations loosely termed mind control.  It seems difficult to make any progress in improving myself and my capabilities in the omnipresent electromagnetic daze of 110/120 50/60 AC power, cell towers, Wernicke's Commands in all media, hypnotism, and quite a few more.  I have even experienced what I could only term "disinformation dreams".  I could only assume that all accessable areas of the conscious mind have been up for grabs while we have no firewalls and a myriad of backdoors.  There are a few tools to counter these; however they are not widespread, plus those people available to use them are not willing to help on the required scale, or are not properly trained and/or they are too programmed to deprogram themselves and/or others, or operate for the negative control system, consciously or unawares. 

This is some of the soft stuff:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyQjr1YL0zg

Then there is more direct, electronic mind-control programming, for example Wernicke's Commands in movie theaters, Starbuck's, airports and other public or strategic places and media.  Have you seen the anime Code Geass?  Wernicke's Commands essentially function exactly the same as Lelouche vi Brittania's power, except the effectiveness varies from person to person. 

With the constant barrage of mind control, how can it be possible to make any real progress?  It feels as though I've been stuck in this same place in my mind forever, with any seeming improvement almost instantly countered and negated. 

 

 

 

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 10:54 | 1274170 l0nEr
l0nEr's picture

I really enjoyed reading your 4 articles. Looking forward to more.

May I suggest you read the Tao Te Ching, written by the Chinese Lao Tzu 3000 years ago.

Or perhaps the I Ching.

 

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 08:06 | 1273997 Matto
Matto's picture

Cog Dis, thanks for the post. I have in the past copied the text of your writing, stuck it in word, printed it to a PDF and put it on my e-reader to read through later. May I suggest that beyond 'blogspot' a series of downloadable PDFs may also be useful.

 

Cheers for the thoughts, I get the most from your work as a motivation for introspection rather than any particular thoughts or ideas in themselves, which is as you say what you are striving for.

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 08:16 | 1274008 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I have converted some of my other series into down loadable PDF's and will do so with this as well.

And my ultimate goal is to inspire, not provide concrete ideas. That's why I ask lots of open ended questions. Everything I produce is ultimately just my opinion. I reserve the right to be wrong 100% of the time and half wrong the other 100% of the time.

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 08:23 | 1274014 Matto
Matto's picture

haha of course you know that adds up to 150% which is impossible!?!

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 08:34 | 1274022 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Thus proving I can be wrong even more than all the time. :>)

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 11:44 | 1274252 Matto
Matto's picture

Logically illogical!

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 04:40 | 1273905 mkkby
mkkby's picture

Sorry CD, A for effort, but I think you drove off the rails with this one.

"If we are going to (once again) become sovereign entities and autonomous individuals we must begin the process by thinking and perceiving as one who is sovereign. A slave or captured mind does not see the world through his or her own eyes, but rather through those of the master."

The whole thing is a lot of circular logic and generalities.  What specific ways are we being decieved, enslaved or conditioned?  Can you come up with concrete examples?  What are the specific boundaries you speak of?  I might guess at a few of them because I'm a regular ZH reader, but I'm just guessing what you might mean.

You really started to speak to me in part 3 about opting out of "systems".  But again, what systems?  Opt out of what, how?  Since you never transition from theory to specifics the readeer never gets further than the perception he started with.  Too bad, because I think you have a lot to offer.  You need a good editor who can help you express yourself more clearly.

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 04:50 | 1273908 mkkby
mkkby's picture

Perhaps I should explain myself better.  In an essay or persuasive writing class one is taught to start with a conclusion or summary, then explain it with specific facts.  For example, my theme might be "cars are better than horses".  I would support that by saying cars are faster, they don't get tired, and they don't crap all over your garage.  If my facts and examples are persuasive enough, I "win" the debate and convince most of my readers.

Respecfully I suggest you take a writing class or two and your essays will have much more impact.

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 06:21 | 1273946 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Thank you for your feedback.

I do not present specific conclusions or even a more refined road map because from my point of view there is none. Every person's journey is a unique experience and only they can find their way. I will not impose my view of reality on the reader, but rather just show them what I see. This is the reason I ask many open ended questions and sometimes wander around. I wish to show people the butterfly, then allow them to draw their own conclusions.

The sole purpose of this essay was to prod a few to move a little further along and to show them they are not alone. This essay is not a text book, but instead an invitation to explore. I state this clearly with the first two sentences of the italicized paragraph front and center. 

If you found little or no value in this essay then it was not intended for you. That's fine and I don't say this to be insulting. Not everyone finds value in the same things. But thank you for caring enough to take the time to leave a comment.

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 12:57 | 1274348 mkkby
mkkby's picture

"Every person's journey is a unique experience and only they can find their way. I will not impose my view of reality on the reader, but rather just show them what I see. "

EXACTLY!!!  Show them your god damned reality.  You haven't done that, Cog.  Don't just call them hypnotized or enslaved.  Explain how.  By whom.  When.  Where.  

That's not imposing.  The reader is still responsible for his or her jouney.  You aren't that powerful.  All you can do is persuade or not.  I'm saying if you're going to spend days/weeks/months writing essays, decide to persuade.

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 15:12 | 1274509 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

You and I have different points of view of our purpose here on the third rock from the sun. Everything is a lie until it has been confirmed within, including anything I may say to persuade. If someone doesn't have the courage to look within I won't be providing it for them.

Either the end product sells itself or it doesn't. The searcher ultimately must decide if there is even value in looking. If I persuade, they I am creating a false or illusionary value. An inner trip such as this started under false pretenses nearly always ends poorly. 

In a consumer and religious environment where everything is sold, the value of inner peace and happiness must be self evident or no amount of persuading will have an effect. For me to declare this, that and the other thing is the cause of their suffering will turn off as many or more as it will enlighten.

Worse I then set myself up with trying to prove the impossible, that those whom I accuse in fact have ulterior and hidden motives. Then I discredit myself and those who have decided to listen to me. This is a fools errand because I fall into the bad and good, black and white games that are used to divide and conquer. As I said in my essay those tools are designed to always fail. If you feel this should be done I strongly urge you to do so. It is not my path.  

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 02:03 | 1273850 chindit13
chindit13's picture

CogDis,

I have read most of your work, though admittedly not every single word. For the most part I enjoy it. Perhaps because I also have read your opinion on several of the issues or events in the world today, however, I cannot help myself from thinking that one of the intents of your philosophical writing is that anyone who reads it has to reach your same conclusion on those other issues and events. I know you make disclaimers to the contrary, but there still seems to be a relentless and only partially hidden push to have everyone arrive on the ground you occupy.

As you may or may not know from my own comments on this site, I disagree with many of the more widely held opinions on ZH. I arrived at my own conclusions through my own life experience, which includes lots of strange jobs and personal pursuits, and living in a host of countries and cultures, areas where each of the world's major religions are the majority faith (Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Shintoism, Hinduism). Personally, I have no faith, other than the Bag o' Bones School of Theology.

Regarding practical matters of society at large, I am a complete non-believer in the Illuminati and the Hidden Hand, no matter what anyone wants to call it. Just as I believe in no omnipotent gods, I don't believe in omnipotent humans, or anything close to it. I think the world is too big, egos are too big, and there are too many variables and too many divergent goals for anyone or any group to control the whole show. That doesn't mean that some will not try, nor does it mean that some will not find a limited degree of success in championing their own cause (e.g., the bank lobby), but on balance, I don't think anyone is fully in charge. I go so far as to say some people use the "Illuminati" as an excuse for personal failure (by failure I mean not achieving what one wanted to achieve, whether that be wealth, position, or recognized expertise).

Sometimes I feel like a Greek ("for every two Greeks there are three opinions"), because I can hear two sides of an argument and disagree with both. This stubbornness might have led me to the view that even those who think they are truly being open minded and not exhibiting confirmation bias, are still doing exactly what they think they have avoided or overcome. Obviously, if I am honest, I might have to say I probably do the same. Maybe it is impossible not to do so. At the same time, there have been numerous instances where I have seen things written on this site that I know, from my own eyes and ears, to be absolutely wrong. There is no point in pointing much or any of it out---though on occasion I slip up and try---because almost nobody wants to listen to something that goes in the face of what he believes. Most people need to think they are more clever, more insightful and less sheeplish than anyone else. No doubt me, too. Of course not everyone can be.

I notice on this site, and even within comments you make in articles, almost a pathology to determine the so-called “real story”. The official explanation of an event, whether it comes from the USG or MSM, is dismissed out of hand, as if neither source is even capable of truth. This propensity seems to fly in the face of the entire body of philosophical and sociological work you have produced, as it demonstrates to me that you might be driven more by your own confirmation and personal biases than by any honest and legitimate search for truth. I’ll tell you, it often makes me wonder what the entire point of all of your thought and writings has been, since it seems you have yet to take even the first step toward eliminating the baggage that causes a man to close his mind. While some of this tendency may stem from the fact that there have been instances where either the USG or MSM lied or obfuscated, a good deal of it also comes from within, in a way mirroring the behavior of a petulant child hurt by a broken trust. One lie caught leads to a belief that everything has been a lie and that everything in the future will be a lie. (I hope you are not a parent, given children’s propensity to lie on occasion!).

This assumption of falsity is part and parcel of what leads to confirmation bias, as dismissal of the (potential) truth means an alternative explanation that fit’s the bias must be found or created. In my opinion, the people I call the Internet Gurus then exploit that behavior by providing the answers that fit the bias. They become Pied Pipers, leading the blind down a fool’s path, all the while filling a need of their own for an audience of sycophants. In the worst instances they create a body of followers that could be exploited for untoward means, in the exact same way these followers might accuse other authority figures of trying to mold and direct behavior. Fortunately, the likes of Alex Jones and Webster Tarpley seem content so far with a fawning readership. Max Keiser, on the other hand, is on the edge. His perpetual anger would not leave him even if he landed in Shangri-la.

Having such a dark view of traditional authority becomes self-reinforcing, and in my view there is a tendency, even a determination to seek misery actively. Being perpetually critical and negative seems to create a comfort zone from which not only do practitioners not try to escape, they actually endeavor to remain there as if the familiarity brings a kind of psychological ease. That others feel the same way, and freely inform each other of this fact, reinforces the loop and makes escape undesirable. One gets both a steady state and a support group if one stays on the dark side. Nowhere is this more readily apparent than when scrolling through the comments section of a Zerohedge article. It even shows up in the comments under your articles.

What is both amusing and infuriating at the same time is to witness the genesis of willful ignorance. Most recently this happened after the reported death of Osama bin Laden. Immediately the official story was tossed out, because, well, it was the official story. This dismissal is justified as cleverness, as in “’they’ can’t fool me anymore because unlike the sheeple, I am awake“. Awake means that one believes without question what someone they don’t know has produced with sketchy or non-existent sourcing, but sourcing that takes on created truth the longer the link line becomes to it. Also, its believability rests partly on the fact that it is in direct opposition to officaldom.

In the initial stages people compete to create the most nefarious explanation possible, applauding each other for illuminating the extent of supposed deception on the part of the authorities and the degree and amplitude of evil malevolently hiding behind the “truth”. Then comes the spurious conclusions and the illogic. These early stages are filler, serving to keep the misinformed and untrusting masses properly hyped up until the Internet Gurus can arrive on the scene and provide what will become the alternative truth, something to which the disciples will link to in any future recounting of the event. From what I can see, a thrice linked lie becomes truth. This was on open display in an article six months or so ago by David Degraw, a piece that makes yellow journalism seem as if it comes from scripture.

Here’s how it happened this most recent time: the announcement came, Osama was killed in a secret raid. Immediately this was laughed at as fabrication, either because he was long since dead, or because he was always a CIA asset and this just closed that no longer useful story. Next comes the search for holes in the official release, which is easy because in such dramatic events there are always holes. Sometimes, in the excitement of the moment, authorities speak too soon, before all the information has been collected. Other times “sources” are quoted by journalists hoping to scoop the story, and in the meantime these journalists forget the standards under which they should operate. People who were not on the inside, but who want to portray themselves as being part of the inner circle to pump their own egos, can provide just what the reporter needs: immediate and exciting narrative. If inconsistencies appear, the authorities receive all the blame, lax reporters and ego-driven sources get off Scot free.

Then we had the first of the “death photos”. Quickly these proved to be fakes, and even though they were created and released by people having nothing whatsoever to do with the USG or the operation, the blame for them fell on the Administration, as the need to disbelieve and dislike is so strong that it makes assumptions that fill the need.

After that came the “Last Will and Testament” of bin Laden. This document came from a Middle eastern source (alanba.com.kw), and was then translated by an Israeli blogger. It had nothing whatsoever to do with the USG or the operation. People criticized it as fake, and blamed Obama. Some “clever” reader noted that the date on the document was done in the order an American would date: month/day/year. Since this is an American affectation and not how most of the rest of the world denotes dates, this was “proof” that it was a fake manufactured by the USG. People applauded themselves for their supposed cleverness.

Curious, I went to the alanba website. I read the original document, in its original Arabic (which I can read). The date on the document reflected both the Islamic and Gregorian calendars, as in the “(Islamic date) corresponding to this (Gregorian date)”. The manner in which the Gregorian date was displayed in the original was consistent not with the US affectation, but the other style of day/month/year. The English translator had altered the date to reflect his own habit. Also, the alanba site did not attribute the document to the USG. Thus, every supposed “uncovered” lie in fact was either not a lie or had nothing to do with the USG. No matter, the blame stayed on Obama.

After that the various Internet Gurus, not a one of whom was anywhere near Abbottabad and who have probably never even been to Pakistan, started publishing their “truth”, closing the loop and providing the fantastical historical record which will feed conspiratorialists forever. Welcome back Dark Ages.

For a number of years I lived in the heart of the Koran Belt in the Middle East. One of the Arab people's favorite words, or concepts, is "muammarah" or conspiracy. It is almost a game. I would sit in tea shops chatting with folks who could find a way to connect the most unrelated dots, sort of like the Kevin Bacon Game, then end their presentation like a mathematics professor with a dramatic Q.E.D., certain they had proven their point. I never thought I would see anything quite as bizarre or convoluted as some of the tales they produced. Now I see such things regularly on this site and others like it.

Well, there's a long post with little point other than to say even an enormous amount of thought does not guarantee the right answer, nor does it guarantee intellectual and cerebral freedom. Time and excessive thought alone do not grant anyone the privilege of declaring victory over biased thinking. In fact escape from self-imposed restrictions may well be impossible, which is reason enough not to jump on anyone’s bandwagon or take action against someone or something that may be without blame.

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 09:15 | 1274049 tip e. canoe
tip e. canoe's picture

hey chindit, i concur with cog's invitation for you to write a column about this.   not only b/c i enjoy the way you weave words and your personal anecdotes are fascinating, but b/c i think you are zeroing in on a phenomenon that begs for further collective collaborative investigation.

this whole concept of "muammarah" for instance, which is also prevalent in the african american community (tupac's fame could be chalked up solely to his exploitation of this in his lyrics).   the question i think is interesting is why does this phenomenon exist?   why is "conspiracy" spun amongst the outcasts of society?  what are they searching for?   what purpose does this serve?   is this simply a quest to find a rock of certainty to stand on or is the digging serve a worthy purpose?  why do so many times the search for truth spins wildly out of control into another illusion?   

also, the whole "conspiracy movement" is rather interesting as well.   the anti-authoritarians jumped from one pyramid to the other, even if this one is inverted and named for some guy named Exeter.   and as far as MaxK is concerned, his new HUGO BOSS ad pretty much seals the deal for me.   this is why i like it here, the fierce anonymity of the Tylers provide a subtle but profound buffer, even when the posts may seem sometimes desperate for page clicks.

also one last morsel : sometimes something can be True on one layer of "reality", yet be utterly false on another, whether you want to call it "higher" level or "deeper" level is immaterial.   now we may all agree to disagree on "who's" pulling the strings, yet we should not deny that when a web of deceit is spun, the spider is aware on some level that the silk is not pure.

 

Sun, 05/15/2011 - 09:36 | 1275869 chindit13
chindit13's picture

No column for me. I've written the occasional article over the last two plus year, but I'm wrapping up my avatar and moving on, like most of the early readers have done.  In my opinion the vocal readership has gotten a little too bizarre, an unattractive mixture of racists and the Batshit Crazies.  I suppose it is the nature of the internet, and an unmoderated forum to boot, that makes such a decline inevitable, as popular sites act as a magnet for the lunatic fringe. 

When the fringe finds like-minded souls in attendance, they set up camp and pretty soon become the overriding personality of the site.  This has happened here.  The entire site's credibility suffers, and a guilt by association sort of thing happens that lets critics dismiss the entire site by pointing out the element it attracts.  As I've said before, I guess the moonbat demographic is more attractive than I would have thought. 

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 06:52 | 1273959 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Thank you for your comments.

However, other than as part of several paragraphs where you talk about your poor opinion of me, you have not actually commented on the subject at hand, this essay. You do discuss the Illuminati and the Hidden Hand, the Zero Hedge readership and those who post comments, Internet Gurus, Alex Jones and Webster Tarpley, the reported death of Osama bin Laden, Max Keiser, David Degraw and yellow journalism, the CIA and so on.

But mostly you talk about yourself and how your views are reasonable and clear minded. Though I must admire the one time where you do admit you might just be susceptible to the same afflictions you accuse others of. But you moved quickly past that and bravely finished your dismissive summation of me and the Zero Hedge readers.

You are well written. Maybe you should consider contributing to ZH. I most certainly would read your thoughts if they were posted here. In fact I think ZH needs a different point of view and I don't disagree that at times the comments reflect a herd mentality and a narrow point of view. That's why I try to discuss alternative subjects, even if my effort so clearly disappoints you. Hopefully I'll get it right at some point in the future. 

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 11:32 | 1274234 chindit13
chindit13's picture

First, please consider this a response not to this piece in particular, but to your entire body of work.

Second, if I had such a poor opinion of you, I would not read your pieces. I would not be here commenting. Please don’t make assumptions there. As I said in the beginning (though since I write in a long winded manner, the beginning may well have been in a previous life), I enjoy your writing. While I enjoy discussing the here and now, and even subjects that are banal, the big questions have been, and will continue to be, something that occupies my thought, albeit in an enjoyable way. Not knowing is part of the excitement life offers. Whether or not it shows, I’m a rather positive person, who takes triumphs and defeats with nearly equal pleasure, as to me that are the grain of life.

I come across a little hard because it pains me to see the conclusions intelligent people come to. Obviously you are not just intelligent, but far above the mean. To some extent I don’t blame anybody for what they believe. One poster above says that I gave a long winded defense of the party line, which I cannot do fairly because no outsider knows the truth. His statement is only partially true, at least in its implication that I am an outsider. Without going into too much detail, one of the shocks I experienced in life---the equivalent of when a young lad realizes his father does not know everything---is that nobody really knows much of anything. Many have pieces of the puzzle, some more than most, but to a large extent everyone is in the dark. That can be scary, but I find it exhilarating. It means people have more options, and more power, than they might otherwise think.

I do believe that many people reach a mindset where they need to believe, and nothing can dissuade them from the belief they have developed. Many need to believe in an order, even if that order is malevolent. Randomness is, for many, too much to take. People would rather have an evil god than no god at all. Hence the grasp of conspiracy. I am not like that. I have come to accept randomness, even welcome it.

I normally do not try to convince people of anything. What I do try to do is put myself in their shoes, and try to imagine what I might think if I didn’t know better. I don’t mean that to sound arrogant; it is merely a statement of fact, at least on some issues. I think people often trip over themselves thinking that things are far more complicated, and sinister, than they really are. Whether this is born of a starved brain anxious for an absolute answer, or if it stems from a diet too rich in B-movies and pulp novels, I don’t know.

In the end I will not change any minds. People need to do that for themselves. I simply wish that people would bring an equal amount of skepticism to the “alternative” answers as they do to the official ones. I do not see that they do. Instead, they grasp the alternative often merely because it is the alternative, and when they find like-minded people do the same, they find comfort in it, virtually guaranteeing that they will do it again. Real answers become less important that answers that fit the atmosphere of the comfort area they have reached, even if that comfort area is a fantasy of someone seeking an audience.

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 10:31 | 1274142 nmewn
nmewn's picture

CD,

First off, Chin and I disagree on some things while we still agree on others. We remain amicable about what we disagree on.

I believe what Chin is saying is, an opinion is just that...an opinion.

Furthermore, without empirical evidence to support it, it remains not only an opinion, but an unsupported opinion. And an unsupported opinion cannot be cited as evidence of anything.

To one of the points of your essay, the use of words to manipulate public perception and actions. I offered up my example back in chapter three commentary. I deem it was a true example because it was not refuted by anyone. The commenter I directed it at certainly didn't rebut or comment on it.

So I have to assume a bias for not engaging in an exchange with me on it. I am left not knowing what that bias truly is. Which is another, perhaps more subtle point Chin is making I think. To propagate one line of a meme without debating the other.

Chin is also correct on the Arab propensity to tell tall tales. Any free thinking society will not remain free thinking for very long without knowing this simple truth about another society.

On reptilian shape shifters...LOL...just because one of the most contemptable classes of people on earth (politicians) teamed up with an equally virulent strain of people (bankers) and created an off the books accounting method to fund government instead living within its means by taxation, does not mean they are from Mars...though I can see why some would say so...ROTFL!!!...it only means there are self serving pricks in high places and they are everywhere...and I mean everywhere. 

We were warned about this down through time by some very notable people I might add.

He did say he enjoyed it and so did I ;-)

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 12:11 | 1274294 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I did not say Chin was correct or incorrect in his opinions. I said his views were off topic and they were also an expression of his personal and derogatory opinion about me as well as ZH readership. Why exactly is a derogatory opinion about me acceptable in a comment thread under my article in which I posted no opinions about Chin?

And does it make it alright to do so by weaving those opinions around a larger swipe against the ZH readership by connecting everyone in a condescending manner to personalities that were never discussed in my essay. One could easily say that Chin was engaging in a broad based ad hominem attack carefully disguised as opinion.

If this were a open thread as Tyler occasionally produces, then it is understood that anything goes and any topic is open for discussion. But the overwhelming majority of time the thread is about a specific topic and it is generally agreed upon that the comments should reflect that topic.

While Tyler generally does not resond in the comment section of his articles, several contributors do and I do so extensively. As is my prerogative. It is also my prerogative to choose when, where and why I will or will not respond to comemnts and just because I do not doesn't mean that I have no logical or factual basis for a defense. There are times, particlualry when I have been personally demeaned, when I will not engage because to do so is validating what I personally find offensive. 

My response to Chin was pointing out that he was not on topic, but in fact simply used this thread to promote his own views, most of which had little (I'm not saying no) relation to the topic other than how he wished to spin it. He also used it as an excuse to express broad opinions about me and the comment posters on ZH. In other words Chin had an agenda and was promoting it. This was why I suggested he ask Tyler for permission to contribute.

Since Tyler plucked me from the comment section and asked if I would like to become a contributor, I have always maintained one point. In fact it was presented in my very first two essays. All authors and writers are propagandists. We all have an agenda. We all wish to promote our point of view in the best possible light under the most favorable circumstances. I use the term 'we' because I have clearly and consistently voiced that I also do this to the ZH readership.

Among other things, what Chin is doing is questioning my psychological motives for promoting my views. I feel that when done so in a derogatory manner such as he has I will not respond. It's very similar to trying to answer the question "So when did you stop beating your wife"? The question is loaded and serves no purpose other than to demean and entrap.

If Chin has something to say to the ZH readership he should use the proper forum. To use my comment thread to demean me and the readership is not that forum and I choose not to participate.

Once again nmewn thank you for your thoughtful comments.

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 05:05 | 1273894 i-dog
i-dog's picture

"one of the intents of your philosophical writing is that anyone who reads it has to reach your same conclusion on those other issues and events."

I disagree. And I also found your long-winded defense of the party line to lack any substance at all. No outsider knows the truth ... neither the conspiracy theorists nor the establishment apologists.

"even an enormous amount of thought does not guarantee the right answer"

True ... but an enormous amount of research combined with a decent amount of thought will get one very close.

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 23:08 | 1275435 chindit13
chindit13's picture

That "enormous amount of research" thing has me confused.  I see people here putting up fifty internet links, most all of which are cross referenced to each other, and in the end go back to one or two person's speculation, aka imagination.  That is not what I remember the term "research" to mean.  In fact, in a few instances (many noted in one of David DeGraw's pieces), I followed the links back to the original.  The original was a zephyr, and was pure fabrication.  I wrote a line in my post, in point of fact not so tongue in cheek, where I said a thrice told lie becomes a truth.

Then there is the less rigorous "research", such as when Julian Assange of Wikileaks was 'proven' to be a psy-op, either because "he hasn't been deaded (sic)", or because he didn't release any documents related to the "911 cover-up".

I'd like to disassemble the latter and note the odd assumptions it makes.  First is that 911 was false flag.  Second was that someone must have come clean on it and handed incriminating documents to Assange.  Third is that Assange has some sort of protected monopoly on receiving secrets, that is, if one is going to be a whistleblower, he is required by some international law to cc Assange.

Now Assange is known to not be a believer in the 911 conspiracy.  On the other hand, people like Alex Jones and Webster Tarpley---who have easily accesible websites--are believers.  By the "logic" of the Assange critics, both Alex Jones and Webster Tarpley must be co-opted CIA operatives, too, because neither of them has produced official USG documents proving the hand in 911.

I guess we'd have to add Tyler Durden to the list of secret CIA operatives, too, because anyone who might have "proof" would also be likely to know at least the readership of ZH and the willingness of TD to publish not completely vetted data (such as the single hedge fund bailout of Greece and the recent ObL death photo).

Sun, 05/15/2011 - 03:42 | 1275625 i-dog
i-dog's picture

"That "enormous amount of research" thing has me confused."

I guess that explains why you chose to turn a thread on a philosophy of self-discovery into your personal projection onto CogDis, followed by a rambling rant against Alex Jones and Webster Tarpley!

While doing so, you've constructed more strawmen than a champion scarecrow builder could ever hope to accomplish! I won't even dignify them with a further response.

Sun, 05/15/2011 - 09:19 | 1275859 chindit13
chindit13's picture

As noted in my response to CD, my post was in response to his entire body of work. I waited until his article had aged and when most who were going to read it had already done so, so as not to be too far out of line but still reaching the author. Of course would that you be consistent and point out on CD’s and other articles that going off topic is bad form, I might take your protestations more seriously, rather than something aimed at me for being in opposition to some of your champions. As for dignity or lack thereof, I’m not one looking for anyone’s approval, and any compliment or criticism I might ever get I would weigh in light of the amount of respect I have for the voice providing it.

Sun, 05/15/2011 - 12:34 | 1276280 i-dog
i-dog's picture

"aimed at me for being in opposition to some of your champions"

You just can't resist stooping to innuendo, can you? Nowhere in this thread, nor on this blog, have I expressed personal opinion either for or against Jones or Tarpley. Indeed, I have had heated debate with Tarpley here and been subjected to his characteristic invective.

You have, again, totally missed the point.

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 22:27 | 1273628 Hulk
Hulk's picture

Your persistence has paid off and you have hit big CD. Very glad that the negative comments and junkers of the past didn't shut you down. For this, and this article, I congratulate you Sir, well done indeed!

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 22:50 | 1273655 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Thank you.

There have been times when I have wavered under the barrage. And it doesn't help that I also suffer from a severe case of self inflicted foot-in-mouth disease. But those such as yourself who not only appreciate the effort involved but also find value in my work ultimately push me over the top.

So thank you again.

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 23:08 | 1273677 No Motto
No Motto's picture

Your article has struck a chord with me, and obviously has also done so with other denizens of ZH. So thank you. It is miraculous actually to see commentary almost completely devoid of trolls.  Good..!

Re: Bastiat's quote... I think you would find Huxley's "Doors of Perception" an interesting read.  It is very much aligned with what you have written, but stated in slightly different terms.

Hope you keep going with this stuff..!

 

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 23:20 | 1273695 Bastiat
Bastiat's picture

Read it many years ago, NoMotto. Huxley got the title from that Blake quote.

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 00:23 | 1273770 No Motto
No Motto's picture

Naturally I did not look far enough... here is the link:

http://www.mescaline.com/aldoushuxley-doorsofperception.pdf

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 06:08 | 1273937 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Thank you for your thoughts and the link. I have devoured both.

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 09:18 | 1274047 falak pema
falak pema's picture

I try and write. When I read this AH text, the doors of perception, I feel puny, insignificant. What richness of expression, what depth of vision, insight! WOW!

Ergo a choice example of this  : "Torn between fact and wish, between cynicism and idealism, Bernini tempers the all but caricatural verisimilitude of his faces with enormous sartorial abstractions, which are the embodiment, in stone or bronze, of the everlasting commonplaces of rhetoric - the heroism, the holiness, the sublimity to which mankind perpetually aspires, for the most part in vain."...

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 00:12 | 1273762 No Motto
No Motto's picture

Yes certainly the title and possibly even the content was a divine inspiration from Blakes's "Marriage of Heaven and Hell". 

I could not find the text online, but one link to some information about it is here...

http://www.mescaline.com/huxley.htm

The importance of this work is not Huxley's altered-state experience, however it may have been induced, but the notion that emerged from it, i.e. that our perceptions are filtered by biological necessity. 

In other words, on a need to know basis, we often don't.  Much of the information that is available to us is not needed for survival therefore it is simply not perceived.... i.e. it is filtered out so we are not distracted from the pursuit of our own 'prime directive'.

Examples abound among phenomena that we can detect by other means, mechanical or otherwise, even among simple things such as the spectra of sound and light.

We could on the one hand say that reality is only "that which we experience directly through our senses", and that argument is very difficult to defeat. It is after all our only personally available reality.

Huxley's thought is just that "reality" so to speak is not limited to that which we can directly observe. Our sensory perceptions are inherently "filtered" because, biologically we don't need the information for survival. Thus our perceived "reality" is not a total experience of the phenomena that are available.

This is not a negative notion.  It is the opposite.  What I mean is, that which we can and do sense, that is the tip of the iceberg... there is much more..!

Huxley may not have been a pioneer in this thought, but he was instrumental in my own realization of it.  And the above is merely my own take on it.

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 19:45 | 1273327 Bastiat
Bastiat's picture

If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear to man as it is, infinite.

Wm Blake

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 18:19 | 1273161 Confuchius
Confuchius's picture

As I have said many times, the journey of 1000 miles begins with but a single step...

 

Confuchius

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 15:38 | 1272635 Vincent Vega
Vincent Vega's picture

CD, I'm not a highly educated man and I suspect that's the reason I am always in awe of people who can have such enlightened thought and then put it in to words; as you do.

My kids are now finished/finishing school and I have recently started to examine my beliefs and priorities. I have decided, at minimum, that I do not want to spend the remainder of my days tied to a desk. Your writing has come at a good time for me as I try to regain my autonomy. Thanks.

 

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 07:37 | 1272814 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Vincent Vega, our man in Amsterdam. :>)

You are beginning a process that will be both the most difficult thing you will ever do and the most rewarding by 1000 fold. The thrill of discovery and the agony of ego destruction is staggering and it never stops. All I offer is one word of advice.

Baby steps my friend. Baby steps.

A step forward, no matter how small, is so much better than standing in place for the rest of your life. And even when you stumble backwards, and I promise you that you will, you are only temporarily conceding ground you would have never taken in the first place if you had never decided to move forward at all.

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 15:30 | 1272613 Bastiat
Bastiat's picture

The culturally embedded doctrine of original sin is a one of the ultimate control memes: you are born evil and doomed to eternal torment unless you rely on social (religious) institutions (control systems) for salvation.

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 16:20 | 1272785 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I consciously and very deliberately stayed away from the entire mound of religious though memes because to go there would turn so many minds into mush or stone. I decided to try and approach this from a fresh point of view. So there is only a brief mention of religion in the entire 4 parts.

That said, the Catholic, Jewish and Muslim redeemer complex has turned us all into a mass of people waiting to be redeemed rather than proactively seeking our our own personal redemption that comes from looking within and then doing the hard work of self discovery.

We surrender our sovereignty when we buy into the notion that there is someone coming to save us from ourselves. We become dependent upon an external higher power when in fact that power comes from within.

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 16:49 | 1272936 Bastiat
Bastiat's picture

Had a feeling you were deliberatlye avoiding that.  The truth you are pointing to is beyond doctrines and it's a good thing to try to avoid having it dragged down into that mud. But doctrines are important to consider inasmuch as they are obstacles--and that is an essential and deeply embedded one.  It's wise to address the mis-perception but also good to push the key hot buttons now and then too--because for anyone who really pursues this inquiry, it reaches everywhere. 

 

 

 

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 18:10 | 1273143 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I fully plan on going 'there' in a future article. But it will be in an article exclusively devoted to that subject. I wanted to use this series to lay the ground work for many coming articles on several subjects.

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 19:02 | 1273255 Bastiat
Bastiat's picture

Well done; and I look forward to reading those. 

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 13:55 | 1272332 windcatcher
windcatcher's picture

A PhD in any given subject only qualifies the recipient to question everything that they have been taught. A PhD is the beginning of discovery not the qualifier of knowing everything about the subject.

 

Some of the most ignorant people I have met have PhD’s and teach a subject. To them, the PhD was the destination and once they reached the destination, they quit learning; indeed they quit thinking. Never questioning, never challenging their own knowledge, yet regurgitating and preaching what they know as the absolute truth and damning anyone who questions the basic building block foundation on which the subject is constructed.

The great inventions of man were not brought forth by the prestigious universities and the PhD’s at those universities but by critical thinkers who think outside the box and who question the very building blocks of science.

The greatest inventor of this century is Stanley Meyer. Meyer’s invention with proven EMPERICAL SCIENCE outmodes oil, gas, nuclear, solar and wind as a source of energy and would eliminate any man made global warming from the continued use of fossil fuels for energy and would eliminate the need for using dangerous nuclear energy for power. Yes, H2O is water, one part hydrogen, and 2 parts oxygen. Hydrogen is 10 times more flammable than gasoline and 20 times more explosive.

 

Meyer didn’t have a PhD and never attended a prestigious university. Meyer was a self taught seeker of knowledge and truth who questioned the basic foundations of science.

You probably never heard of Stanley Meyer and his US and foreign patents. He was murdered and his invention of the water/hydrogen fuel cell was taken off the market and replaced by a campaign by the government, Wikipedia, Banksters and Big Oil world corporate empire against Meyer’s honor as a scientist by discrediting his invention with slander and lies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOGAkRkCWfA

 

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 15:12 | 1272489 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

I have heard of this guy.  In a sentence, please explain to us where the energy comes from to split the water into hydrogen gas and oxygen?  It takes energy to produce hydrogen, hydrogen is NOT an energy source, but rather energy currency (store of energy) that I agree will eventually be a much safer currency than gasoline.  Alas, the question remains;  where is the energy for hydrogen production coming from?  Seems rather silly to utilize energy to make hydrogen so that you can burn it to release energy.  Why not simply use that energy source directly to power things?

 

While his technique was a substantial improvement in the efficiency of water hydrolysis, you still put in more energy to make the hydrogen than you got out of burning the hydrogen itself.

If you what to make a lot of hydrogen gas cheaply put some potatoes in a big jar with the organism Clostridium pasteurianum spores that have been activated.  Once it gets fermenting, this bioreactor will consume just about any waste material that has any starch content and produce explosive amounts of hydrogen.  But again, you still have to grow the potatoes and feed it plant waste.

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 19:50 | 1272717 windcatcher
windcatcher's picture

If you were truly interested in science you would have done research and looked up and read Meyer’s US Patents, but alas, you didn’t. That simple fact didn’t stop you from criticizing something you know nothing about, now did it? - Talk about posing “silly” questions and “silly” comments.

One sentence, as Meyer proved, it took less than ½ ampere to set off the electrolysis action that produced Hydrogen gas. Explanation, less energy to produce more energy.

 

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 19:51 | 1272706 windcatcher
windcatcher's picture

If you were truly interested in science you would have done research and looked up and read Meyer’s US Patents, but alas, you didn’t. That simple fact didn’t stop you from criticizing something you know nothing about, now did it? - Talk about posing “silly” questions and “silly” comments.

One sentence, as Meyer proved, it took less than ½ ampere to set off the electrolysis action that produced Hydrogen gas. Explanation, less energy to produce more energy.

 

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 13:17 | 1272150 tip e. canoe
tip e. canoe's picture

finally, in the spirit of steak's friday PM mixes (tho on the muchmomello tip)

tru thoughts to accompany the deep thoughts

http://www.mixcloud.com/truthoughts/hidden-orchestra-footsteps-mix/

warning: if u hate hip hop, even when done in the proper style, you're not gonna like this one, sorry

thanks cog.  this series made this joint fun for me again.   and that's all that counts in the end, no?   wonderful weekend to you all.

"Earth laughs in flowers to see her boastful boys
Earth-proud, proud of the earth which is not theirs;
Who steer the plow but cannot steer their feet
Clear of the grave."

~r. waldo emerson

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 13:34 | 1272267 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I'm delighted you had fun. That's what it's all about, exercising the mind through playtime and fun.

Touch a mind and create a new world.

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 12:16 | 1271995 Eternal Student
Eternal Student's picture

I'll add my applause to this great series, CD.

The third article really, really nailed something that I'm looking at currently. Namely, the question of how ancient Rome transitioned into the feudal society of the middle ages. Believe it or not, it's only been in the past 20 years that Historians have really started looking at this question. Previously, it was the old meme of Rome fell in 476, Dark Ages, and Medieval Ages. Which doesn't answer a lot of things, such as what it was like to live back then, or how the first Kings came to, and retained, power and why?

Recently a number of books have been coming out which start to address this transition period. But none of them explain the impact of preserving the existing memes as well as you did in your third series. That is really THE missing link in understanding what went on. Oh, they sort of beat around the bush about it, and get somewhat close. But preservation of existing memes just absolutely nails it.

I gave an example a couple days ago. It took two generations, until about 525 AD, before someone first wrote that the Western Empire had gone, and tried to date the fall to the sack of Rome in 476. Memes can be tough to change.

Anyway, my thanks to you for your effort in writing this. It was much appreciated.

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 13:28 | 1272257 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Other than starting with an over all theme or idea I never know what I'm going to write before I do so. Not even an outline or summary. Just a theme, in this case perception which led the deception to inception.

It's an interesting process because rather than determine the conclusions first, or at least the process to be followed in order to arrive at the conclusion, I let the subject develop itself. I write, then think, then expand, then think and so on. Often I will put it down for days or weeks, then pick it back up when I feel the urge or 'need' to write some more. In the case of this series I let it sit for 4 months because I couldn't find a connection I needed until one day it came.

My point is that because I let it flow naturally and I won't post until I am happy that it makes some kind of logical sense, what comes out isn't canned or blended with what is already known. Not to say that I come up with original thought because I don't. It's the expression that is original.

So your comment that I made a connection that you had found missing was exactly the connection that I couldn't find for 4 months....until it came. Thank you for recognizing what was the most difficult part of this entire exercise and the one part that made it all make sense....at least in my mind.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!