This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
"If You Question Authority, You Are Mentally Ill", Report Finds
Submitted by Pater Tenebrarum via Acting-Man blog,
Only the Sheeple Are Sane
This post is about an issue that is by now a bit dated (though the topic as such certainly isn’t), but we have only just become aware of it and it seemed to us worth rescuing it from the memory hole. In late 2013, the then newest issue of the American Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM for short) defined a new mental illness, the so-called “oppositional defiant disorder” or ODD.
As TheMindUnleashed.org informs us, the definition of this new mental illness essentially amounts to declaring any non-conformity and questioning of authority as a form of insanity. According to the manual, ODD is defined as:
[…] an “ongoing pattern of disobedient, hostile and defiant behavior,” symptoms include questioning authority, negativity, defiance, argumentativeness, and being easily annoyed.
In short, as Natural News put it: According to US psychiatrists, only the sheeple are sane.
Every time a new issue of the DSM appears, the number of mental disorders grows – and this growth is exponential. A century ago there were essentially 7 disorders, 80 years ago there were 59, 50 years ago there were 130, and by 2010 there were 374 (77 of which were “found” in just seven years). A prominent critic of this over-diagnosing (and the associated over-medication trend) is psychologist Dr. Paula Caplan. Here is an interview with her:
Allen Gregg in conversation with psychologist Dr. Paula Caplan
As MindUnleashed notes:
“Are we becoming sicker? Is it getting harder to be mentally healthy? Authors of the DSM-IV say that it’s because they’re better able to identify these illnesses today. Critics charge that it’s because they have too much time on their hands.
New mental illnesses identified by the DSM-IV include arrogance, narcissism, above-average creativity, cynicism, and antisocial behavior. In the past, these were called “personality traits,” but now they’re diseases. And there are treatments available.”
Edward Abbey on what happens when no-one ever stirs things up
There is an obvious danger involved with such loose definitions such as the one employed in identifying the alleged illness of “ODD”. A chilling example was provided by the Soviet Union in the 1960s and 1970s. In a 1959 speech, Nikita Khrushchev made the following remark:
“Can there be diseases, nervous diseases among certain people in the communist society? Evidently there can be. If that is so, then there also will be offenses which are characteristic of people with abnormal minds. To those who might start calling for opposition to communism on this ‘basis,’ we say that now, too, there are people who fight against communism, but clearly the mental state of such people is not normal.”
Obviously, questioning the best socio-economic system ever devised had to be a sign of insanity, and after Khrushchev’s speech Soviet psychiatrists immediately went to work to discover and institutionalize all those mentally ill “communism deniers”.
The road to what followed had already been paved in 1951, when in a joint session of the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences and the Board of the All-Union Neurological and Psychiatric Association, several leading neurologists and psychiatrists were accused of pursuing an “anti-Marxist and reactionary” deviation from the teachings of Pavlov. The session took place on Stalin’s behest so as to “free Soviet psychiatry of Western influences”.
The psychiatrist who wrote the policy report associated with this purge was Andrei Snezhnevsky, who invented (err, “discovered”) a new mental illness, which he termed “sluggish schizophrenia”. After Khrushchev’s 1959 speech, the term was widely adopted and the illness was diagnosed throughout the Eastern Bloc. The symptoms of the alleged “illness” were such that even the slightest change in behavior patterns could henceforth be interpreted as a sign of mental derangement. Political dissent was for instance considered to by a symptom of “sluggish schizophrenia with delusions of reform”.
Snezhnevsky personally signed a decision declaring several prominent dissidents legally insane – among them also neurophysiologist Vladimir Bukovsky, who was the first to expose and criticize the abuse of psychiatry in the Soviet Union and spent altogether 12 years in prisons, forced labor camps and locked up in psychiatric hospitals for his efforts.
Snezhnevsky’s theories became the only ones acceptable in Soviet psychiatry, and it was obviously held to be quite dangerous to oppose them. Ironically, in 1970, one year before Vladimir Bukovsky managed to smuggle out 150 pages that documented the silencing of political dissenters with the aid of psychiatry in the Soviet Union, the American Psychiatric Association named Snezhnevsky a “distinguished fellow” for his “outstanding contribution to psychiatry and related sciences” at its annual meeting in San Francisco.
Soviet psychiatrist Andrei Snezhnevsky, hero of socialist labor, owner of two Orders of Lenin as well as four Orders of the Red Star and USSR state prize.
Photo credit: tapemark.narod.ru
Money and the Invention of new Categories of Disease
There is a basic problem with psychiatry and psychology: they are largely thymological, as opposed to natural sciences. If you break your arm and visit 10 different medical doctors, you will get the same diagnosis from every single one of them – they will all tell you that your arm is broken. A standardized treatment exists for dealing with a broken arm.
Make a list of psychological problems you are experiencing and visit ten different psychiatrists, and chances are very good that you will receive 10 different diagnoses coupled with 10 different proposals for treatment (including prescriptions for very powerful psychotropic drugs). Genuine severe mental disorders may be connected with chemical imbalances in the brain to some extent (no conclusive proof for this actually exists), but by and large there is little that can be objectively “measured”. The psychologist or psychiatrist must largely rely on the same ability that also characterizes the work of the historian – i.e., what Mises called “understanding”. They can only judge behavior.
So why have so many former “personality traits” been transformed into symptoms of mental illness? One major reason is money. Here are a few data points that shed light on the monetary side of the psychiatry business; the data are by now slightly dated, but they suffice to get the point across. As of 2010:
Global sales of anti-depressants, stimulants, anti-anxiety and anti-psychotic drugs had reached more than $76 billion per year.
Globally, 54 million people were taking anti-depressants that are known to cause addiction, and often violent and homicidal behavior.
In the US, 20% of all women were taking mental health medication in 2010. Essentially every fourth female is prozac’d into quietude.
20 million children worldwide had been diagnosed with mental disorders and were prescribed stimulants and/or powerful anti-depressants.
In 2002, more than 100 million prescriptions were written for anti-depressants alone (cost: $19.5 billion nominal)
In France, one in seven prescriptions is for a psychotropic drug and more than 50% of the employed were taking such drugs (as of 2010, 1.8 million people).
Between 1986 and 2004, combined spending on anti-psychotic drugs and anti-depressants jumped from $500 million to $20 billion.
In the US, the mental health budget, adjusted for inflation, has soared from $33 billion in 1994 to $ 80 billion in 2010 (similar increases have occurred elsewhere).
(data via Stefan Molyneux)
Stefan Molyneux whom we got the above data from also reports that according to the US National Institute of Mental Health (in 2010) “26% of Americans suffer from mental illness” and “nearly 58 million Americans will suffer from an episode of mental illness in any given year”. There you have it – we’re literally surrounded by lunatics. As Molyneux rightly points out: if there is a disease for which we have effective cures, then application of this cure should reduce the prevalence of the disease.
For instance, a number of infectious diseases have been nearly, or completely exterminated by effective vaccines. We should therefore expect that with the arrival of psychiatric medications that allegedly “correct chemical imbalances in the brain”, there should be a decline in the number of mentally ill people. The first such medications were introduced in the mid 1950s. So what happened? In 1955, there were 355,000 adults confined to mental hospitals all over the US on account of being diagnosed as mentally ill by psychiatrists. After 50 years of medical treatment with anti-psychotic drugs, that number has risen to more than 4 million patients (as of 2007). Some success!
While the prescription of psychiatric medications to children soared from the mid 1980s to today, so did the number of youth receiving disability payments from the government for mental disability. It rose from 16,200 in 1986 to 561,569 in 2007 (a 35 fold increase). It appears that all those meds prescribed to “ODD” and “ADHD” children have had the exact opposite effect from that advertised.
Number of Americans disabled by mental illness since Prozac was introduced.
Again, there exists no convincing proof as of yet for any chemical, biological or genetic causes of mental illness. The categorizations found in the DSM are arrived at by “peer consensus”, not by any objective measurements. And yet, drugs that alter chemical balances in the brain are prescribed as treatment. The greater the number of new diseases manufactured by said consensus, the more treatments can be prescribed. As Dr. Thomas Dorman, internist and member of the Royal College of Physicians of the UK, and Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of Canada, put it:
“In short, the whole business of creating psychiatric categories of ‘disease,’ formalizing them with consensus, and subsequently ascribing diagnostic codes to them, which in turn leads to their use for insurance billing, is nothing but an extended racket furnishing psychiatry a pseudo-scientific aura. The perpetrators are, of course, feeding at the public trough.”
It is not too difficult to see the enormous monetary incentives that are driving this business of declaring as many people as possible to be mentally ill. There no longer is such a thing as a harmless “eccentric”. Any deviation from the norms laid out by the psychiatric profession mean one is in need of treatment. Only the sheeple are sane.
Stefan Molyneux’s podcast on mental illness from which we have taken most of the statistics presented above can be seen here:
Stefan Molyneux on mental illness.
Freethinkers Medicated Into Silence by Good Serfs
However, there may be another reason why anti-authoritarianism specifically has made it onto the list of behaviors held to be symptomatic of mental illness. Psychologist Dr. Bruce Levine has laid the problem out in an article entitled “Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as Mentally Ill”. A few pertinent excerpts follow below. First Dr. Levine explains why there seem so few anti-authoritarians in the US. The reason in his opinion is that many have been medicated into silence:
“Anti-authoritarians question whether an authority is a legitimate one before taking that authority seriously. Evaluating the legitimacy of authorities includes assessing whether or not authorities actually know what they are talking about, are honest, and care about those people who are respecting their authority. And when anti-authoritarians assess an authority to be illegitimate, they challenge and resist that authority—sometimes aggressively and sometimes passive-aggressively, sometimes wisely and sometimes not.
Some activists lament how few anti-authoritarians there appear to be in the United States. One reason could be that many natural anti-authoritarians are now psycho-pathologized and medicated before they achieve political consciousness of society’s most oppressive authorities.”
(emphasis added)
But why does this happen, apart from the monetary incentives discussed above? Why are psychiatrists so eager to medicate anti-authoritarians into a stupor? In Dr. Levine’s opinion, the reason is that the career of most psychiatrists involves an extraordinary degree of compliance with authorities, to the point where they are not even aware anymore of how obedient they have become. When confronted with patients who aren’t exhibiting a similar degree of obedient behavior, they immediately suspect that there is something to diagnose and treat:
“The selection and socialization of mental health professionals tends to breed out many anti-authoritarians. Having steered the higher-education terrain for a decade of my life, I know that degrees and credentials are primarily badges of compliance. Those with extended schooling have lived for many years in a world where one routinely conforms to the demands of authorities. Thus for many MDs and PhDs, people different from them who reject this attentional and behavioral compliance appear to be from another world—a diagnosable one.
I have found that most psychologists, psychiatrists, and other mental health professionals are not only extraordinarily compliant with authorities but also unaware of the magnitude of their obedience. And it also has become clear to me that the anti-authoritarianism of their patients creates enormous anxiety for these professionals, and their anxiety fuels diagnoses and treatments.
(emphasis added)
“I see before me words you should not have written…”, by Raymond Pettibone, the cover artist of punk band “Black Flag”.
In connection with ODD diagnoses, Dr. Levine not unreasonably asks “Do we really want to diagnose and medicate everyone with “deficits in rule-governed behavior”?”. As he points out, many of the people who have enriched humanity with revolutionary new scientific concepts, inventions or works of art, would have been diagnosed as mentally ill anti-authoritarians in today’s day and age and may well have been medicated into a such a daze that their creations would never have seen the light of day. He cites Albert Einstein as a pertinent example:
“Albert Einstein, as a youth, would have likely received an ADHD diagnosis, and maybe an ODD one as well. Albert didn’t pay attention to his teachers, failed his college entrance examinations twice, and had difficulty holding jobs. However, Einstein biographer Ronald Clark (Einstein: The Life and Times) asserts that Albert’s problems did not stem from attention deficits but rather from his hatred of authoritarian, Prussian discipline in his schools.
Einstein said, “The teachers in the elementary school appeared to me like sergeants and in the Gymnasium the teachers were like lieutenants.” At age 13, Einstein read Kant’s difficult Critique of Pure Reason—because Albert was interested in it. Clark also tells us Einstein refused to prepare himself for his college admissions as a rebellion against his father’s “unbearable” path of a “practical profession.” After he did enter college, one professor told Einstein, “You have one fault; one can’t tell you anything.” The very characteristics of Einstein that upset authorities so much were exactly the ones that allowed him to excel.”
(emphasis added)
It is probably a good bet that a Haldol-addled Einstein wouldn’t have excelled at much. Well, he even looked crazy: theoretical physicist and reputed anti-authoritarian Albert Einstein, who invented a few unimportant little formulas like E=mc2. Rumor has it he also invented gravity, which we have been struggling against ever since.
Photo credit: Getty Images
As Dr. Levine points out, once they are diagnosed as mentally ill, anti-authoritarians are especially likely to become victims of a vicious cycle:
“Many anti-authoritarians who earlier in their lives were diagnosed with mental illness tell me that once they were labeled with a psychiatric diagnosis, they got caught in a dilemma.
Authoritarians, by definition, demand unquestioning obedience, and so any resistance to their diagnosis and treatment created enormous anxiety for authoritarian mental health professionals; and professionals, feeling out of control, labeled them “noncompliant with treatment,” increased the severity of their diagnosis, and jacked up their medications.”
(emphasis added)
Dr. Levine then concludes that the direction in which the system has evolved is indeed reminiscent of a “Sovietization”; just as the ruling classes once employed an authoritarian religious establishment to enforce compliance with the status quo, they can nowadays rely on psychiatry to do the job:
“What better way to maintain the status quo than to view inattention, anger, anxiety, and depression as biochemical problems of those who are mentally ill rather than normal reactions to an increasingly authoritarian society.
[…]
So authoritarians financially marginalize those who buck the system, they criminalize anti-authoritarianism, they psychopathologize anti-authoritarians, and they market drugs for their “cure.”
(emphasis added)
Evidently the system provides ample scope for both intentional and unintentional abuse.
Conclusion:
In order to prevent misunderstandings, we should point out that we don’t want to assert here that there exists no such thing as mental illness, or that psychiatry is completely useless in diagnosing it or providing effective treatment. The same holds for psychotropic medication: there certainly exist medications that can be helpful in alleviating symptoms of severe mental conditions and allow people to lead fairly normal lives that would otherwise be out of reach for them (i.e., we don’t fully agree with Stefan Molyneux’s conclusions; this is simply based on the fact that we personally know of two cases in which appropriate medication helped people exhibiting severe symptoms associated with schizophrenia).
However, it is important to realize that the sciences dealing with the human mind are thymological in nature and cannot make claims based on objectively measurable physical quantities. And yet, the field has turned into a “growth industry” in every respect; the number of behaviors regarded as “abnormal”, as well as the number of medications prescribed for treating such behaviors has grown exponentially. This is a dangerous development and the fact that almost every quirky personality trait is suddenly deemed a sign of disease is certainly giving one pause (it is dangerous in several respects: consider for instance the great number of mass murderers who were prescribed psychotropic drugs. Correlation is not always causation of course, but still…)
The psychopathologizing of anti-authoritarian behavior is yet another step on what looks like an increasingly slippery slope and it strikes us as especially harmful. As Dr. Levine inter alia points out: “It has been my experience that many anti-authoritarians labeled with psychiatric diagnoses usually don’t reject all authorities, simply those they’ve assessed to be illegitimate ones.”
In other words, the term “anti-authoritarian” does not necessarily stand for a blanket rejection of all authorities, but rather a healthy questioning of the legitimacy of existing authorities. This seems all the more necessary today, when governments in the name of providing all-encompassing security (a task at which they are predictably failing) are seeing fit to let individual liberty die a death of a thousand cuts.
Anti-authoritarian street art that has unexpectedly popped up on a wall in Montreal.
»
- 81631 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/09/10/1015320/-Why-High-Functioning-P...
Repost:
Damaged Feedback Loop. Politicians like to talk about spreading confidence about the currency, country, state, and our communities. One of our Founding Fathers say something to the effect that it was better to spread around confidence than to spread around Fiat. Madison?
The Parents that run our country for us keep spreading lies.
How can we have citizenship when government officials lie to us about the cost of living increases and prices going up. How do we act as Informed Citizens, Responsible Voters, if we have crap info. Even Civilian Deaths in Iraq & True Military Spending as a result of the Afghanistan & Iraqi war and the 400 plus camps around the world. Was it over 700 bases?
- Damaged Feedback Loop
- Orwellian Circus
- Fake Inflation Rate, Fake Unemployment numbers, Fake GDP Numbers
- They don't even tell us how much Fiat has been Created, where the most was Created, and how much Wall Street banking is responsible for Creating & Where they Invested that money
- Money Velocity? They don't even mention it any more
Propaganda means controlling the Information, controlling the Narrative, Damaging the Feedback loop in the Press, in government, in all Leadership (like Nazi Germany). Worst trick in Propaganda is treating us like Frogs, slowing changing our Free Enterprise, Free Market System, allowing big money & Big Corporations to Control Legislation, Control the Military, and CON-Troll War.
Yes, we are boiling frogs. CON-Gress gave up War Powers, Legislative Powers & Budget Powers... it is a Non-Stop Party in Washington DC.
The Federal Government now serves as Royalty in all Things. In fact many WASPS & Catholics like the Image of having the biggest house, most expensive Cars and making big decisions for the Community or State. Everyone can enjoy the Vicarious Image of Royalty.
And that is what we have. The 1% think they are Royalty and that they must make the big decisions for all of the USA.
- Damaged Feedback Loop, Damaged Citizenship
- Propaganda has always been the tool of US Government
- We are Boiling Frogs, the heat & debt slowly at first, now growing exponentially
- The 1% Are Royalty in their minds & in Deeds
- Federal Government has gone Full Retard
- Your Family Savings, Legacy, & Retirement is in Jeopardy
dailykos? Are you fucking retarded?
Maybe I am, or maybe I look for truth not just on one side of the ledger, ergo not a sheeple. But do you disagree with the article that states high-functioning sociopaths and/or psychopaths rule the world?
Much silliness.
Brave "anti-authoritarians" submitting to the authoritative rules of the blog-master, the ISP, the FCC, the Secret Service, the NSA, etc, etc.
The age of Obama. Never befor ehave we been told to not question authority since the era of Obama.
Your either with us or your with the terrorists. GB
it depends on what your definition of
the word "person" is, is, is; according
to one particular omnivorous and omnipotent
decision, think "money" and exchange, fading,
in a suspicious charade mate.
isn't the term "mental illness" redundant
in a way?
.
Leon Russell - This Masquerade
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn-br0h4rZk
Just take anything said yesterday and reverse it 180 deg. Funny all the sudden incarceration is his new topic.
Here is what they are going to do.
14 year public education is new explosion of municipal bond issuance, this is bought by free money
out of london on 100 to 1 margin, they just want the tax receipts, the bond can default worthless they
dont care.
Explosion of municipal debt is explosion of property taxes is explosion of prison construction, is
transfer of tax receipts to the prison owners, wallstreet and london.
Lots of new non violent crime "rules" to scoop up tax fodder. They get the birth certificate bond value too
when a slave is incarcerated.
Act surprised on news of widespread prison construction in about two years.13th amendment: slavery is abolished except in punishment for crimes
If this ODD shit takes off I'm fucked...
I'll have Sheople friends hosting interventions, and doctors trying to get me to smoke meth out of a light bulb...
Or they'll just prescribe Adderal, meth in an orange pill.
But, it's safe because a doctor said so!
In other words, the term “anti-authoritarian” does not necessarily stand for a blanket rejection of all authorities, but rather a healthy questioning of the legitimacy of existing authorities. This seems all the more necessary today, when governments in the name of providing all-encompassing security (a task at which they are predictably failing) are seeing fit to let individual liberty die a death of a thousand cuts.
No, let's be clear. To believe any "authority" exists is overt psychosis. The author should be honest enough, and brave enough to take on this fact of reality, and stand by the facts, not some politically correct pablum.
The fact is, authority is impossible. Think about it a bit.
George is human, and came to exist by being born.
Mary is human, and came to exist by being born.
In fact, every human is human, and came to exist by being born.
Which means, quite obviously, they all exist in the same fundamental relationship to each other. George cannot have any authority over Mary that Mary cannot have over George. This is a fact, and quite easy to understand for anyone who knows how to observe reality, identify what he sees, and operate his consciousness consistent with reality, as well as self-consistently (no contradictions).
So the point is much more than "George does not have authority over Mary", the point is, "George cannot possibly have authority over Mary".
To be sure, humans can say anything. George can say, "in a 3km crater on the exact opposite side of the moon at this moment, is a 256 karat perfect diamond sitting on top of a slice of pineapple cheesecake". And Mary can say, "the weather is controlled by this really strong and handsome dude named Thor, who promised to marry me on the second Tuesday of next week". And George can say, "Mary, you must do what I say". And Mary can say, "George, you must do what I say".
And blah, blah, blah.
Humans can be so lame. They can, with so little effort, make endless statements that have zero basis, zero relationship with reality, and zero possibility of being real. Ho, hum... as they say.
So of course George can say "I have authority over Mary", and of course Mary can say "I have authority over George". And of course George and Mary can scream and holler at each other, throw shoes, and maybe even get seriously pissed off in their imbalanced state of delusion and start throwing knives.
None of which "creates authority", but "authority is fiction" and "authority literally cannot exist" (in the sense humans mean when they say "authority" today).
-----
So let me be clear. Authority has never existed, authority does not exist, authority will never exist, and authority cannot exist. So-called "authority" is impossible, like a 4 wheel drive blueberry electron.
So the problem isn't being "anti-authority", any more than being "anti-4-wheel-drive-blueberry-electron" is a problem. The problem is pretending that "authority" exists at all, or even could exist. It doesn't, it can't, and never will.
-----
But everyone who claims to be an authority is stark-raving insane.
And everyone who voluntarily obeys fake authority is even more insane.
Authority is a myth promulgated by those who have no capacity to function without being told what to do. Free speech, actions and questioning authoritative credentials is the step to control under threat of being isolated from "society." Don't doubt it. Government already controls you.
The belief in “authority,” which includes all belief in “government,” is irrational and self contradictory;it is contrary to civilization and morality, and constitutes the most dangerous, destructive superstition that has ever existed. Rather than being a force for order and justice, the belief in “authority” is the arch-enemy of humanity.
Despite the constant authoritarian propaganda claiming otherwise, having respect for “authority” and having respect forhumanity are mutually exclusive and diametrically opposed. The reason to have norespect for the myth of “authority” is so that we can have respect for humanity and justice.
This attempt by "mental health professionals" to attach a disease to a belief that authority shouldn't be questioned reduces them to tribal witch doctors.
Excellent! Oh, so absolutely correct that "respect for authority" is loathing for human beings. How could it be otherwise, to respect, admire, support and fund slave masters?
This disease that "mental health professionals" suffer is shared by every other "official group of professionals". That's pretty much a tautology, because what their "group" does is abuse everyone else in order to make the lives of their members easier and more lucrative.
Need $2 worth of pills? No problem, just pay a "physical health professional" $100 for a permission slip, and you'll be on your way. After waiting an hour in his waiting room, of course, designed to assure everyone has the impression their time is worth nothing compared to "the professional".
One has to wonder how intellectually twisted a "mental health professional" has to get themselves to promote such obvious vicious totalitarian propaganda.
The world is upside down. All the good people on this planet have no special "deals", no special "status", no special "titles", no way to rip everyone off every day of their lives. All the bad... seriously evil, nasty, horrific people wear fancy clothes, often uniforms of one form or other, and require you to jump through hoops for their convenience and enrichment.
This is not to say "good doctors do not exist". Of course they do. And most of them work somewhere like Africa, because they know for certain they would be thrown in jail immediately for offering good, honest health care in any western country.
Great reply, excellent identifications.
Honestan, I come from academic Experimental Psychology and in that domain the Experimental Psychologists PhDS are empirical researchers
and scientists writing for publication and peer reviewed research journals. Clinical Psychologists are always specialists in their respective fields such as Developmental, Behavioural, Cognitive, Personality, Life Sciences Neuropsychology, Psychophysics, Criminology, Addictions/Drugs & Behaviour, Industrial Psychology, Psychotherapy, et cetera. In terms of real world MDs we have GPs, Psychiatry, and MD specialists all in Medicine proper. When you think of prescription medication prescribed you should know that Psychologists don't have much to do with treating clients with medications as that domain is always left to those that are trained formally in Medicine at Medical School and not Psychologists who are trained in universities before they work as specialists in institutional environments like hospitals, prisons, secure treatment facilities, et cetera. Most bad medicine comes from MDs and not psychologists.
BAD MEDICINE comes from any doctor (or ANY other so-called "professional") who allows their behavior to be dictated by ANYONE other than their own best judgement. But to get (and keep) their lucrative title, they must. So they do.
EVERYONE who allows their actions to be prescribed by others is an agent of those others. They are still responsible for their actions, but they are also human predators who abuse human prey.
As you should know very, very well by now, government involvement has utterly destroyed what is now called "science", and "peer review" is a complete joke, fiction and simply one gigantic fig leaf. For evidence, see AGW. Those who are hired are selected for their agreement, or even better, for their willingness to strongly and vocally agree with the pre-determined "authority position", whatever that position may be.
Yes, I know the difference between [drug-pusher] psychiatrists and [therapy by conversation] psychologists. But that is relevant only in the narrow piece of the puzzle that is prescription medicine. The rest of the story is huge, and is all about "authoritarianism".
To make myself clear, I am a scientist, engineer, inventor, technologist too, and have been my whole life. But you know what? NONE of my work had ANYTHING to do with "telling people what they must do", or "telling people what they must not do", or "inventing fancy rationalizations for human predators (politicians and those who operate self-serving "professional associations" (like the AMA, just one of hundreds or thousands) who pretend to "protect their customers".
WHAT A LAUGH.
Now, let me be clear. Human beings can hurt themselves. They surely can. And one of the ways they can hurt themselves is... to put certain items into their bodies. You won't get any argument about that from me! Which is why I decided somewhere between age 6 and 8 that I'd never drink alcohol, smoke or consume tobacco, or experiment with mind-altering drugs (even though I am very much an experimental sort of gal). So... I'm not trying to justify my behavior here, because my choice of what substances to put in my body looks like something out of a crazy-fringe religion. Even more so, because for decades I only ate natural and organic foods when feasible, and now I grow virtually all my own food.
HOWEVER, having said that, the fact of the matter is, that was my choice. And everyone else gets to make their own choices too, both wise and stupid. And I have made a few stupid choices too over the years, though usually in other areas than what I shove down my own throat.
What I object to, and the entire point here, is that no so-called "professional" has any legitimate basis to prohibit me from doing anything, or any legitimate basis to obligate me to do anything. PERIOD. And no, there is also no legitimate basis to force me to visit some "professional" and pay him a big fat fee to write a permission slip for me to buy something from someone else (often a pharmacist) and/or consume any substance.
And you know what?
If doctors, pharmacists, psychologists, psychiatrists and endless other so-called "professionals" did not obey any laws, rules, statutes, agreements or regulations about how they must or must-not interact with patients... they would do a vastly better job.
They would be vastly more helpful if they spent 100% of their time and attention trying to understand their science and the various problems and diseases associated with their expertise, and give the best advice they can... including alternatives for any customer who asks for alternatives. No, scratch that. You should ALWAYS give at least a couple alternatives, except in those very rare cases where the second and third best options are horrible in comparison to your top option.
Your claim that psychologists cause much less harm than MDs seems to me like it must be correct. If for no other reason, the number of visits to psychologists per year must be much less than visits to MDs. And I must assume that any avoidance of the hyper-fraud that is "prescription medicine" means they cause vastly less harm in that aspect of patient care.
However, it is 100% clear psychologists are ruining millions of lives by accepting a state like "more creative than average" or a mental activity like "questions authority" (and probably everything else about reality) as mental disease! We already know what has been happening in the name of "kids have too much energy and curiosity" (as they always have, by the way, from the perspective of overworked and distracted "adults").
I cannot even imagine how much damage the mere existence of these categories will cause over the years, but I know it will be astronomical. This is an area that I cannot judge well, because since age 4 years I formulated a strict policy for myself to "never trust adults" (or anyone else). And so, I established and habituated an extremely effective barrier against "abuse by authority". Well, against the intellectual or emotional aspects of "abuse by authority".
Sadly, no such scheme works against physical forms of "abuse by authority"... like SWAT teams blasting open homes at 4am and shooting people, or nuns/teachers/authorities smacking you with rulers, sticks, tree-branches or other weapons, or locking you away in "broom closet prison" or "your room prison" (otherwise known as kidnapping).
And since I had erected very effective defenses against all adults and all so-called "authorities", I was almost entirely immune from psychological abuse. However, if I had accepted the prevailing notion that "adults CAN be trusted" and "authorities MUST be trusted"... well... I'd probably be just as screwed up today as most humans are. So, while I can tell these psychological abuse techniques are extremely effective and harmful, I cannot judge the "how much" very well, except to say "a lot" (not very scientific, but observational and experiential nonetheless).
One of the BEST things that ever happened in "medicine" or "health care" was the term "practicing medicine". And yes, that is precisely what every doctor should be doing... practicing. Learning more, observing results, trying alternatives, observing results, trying to understand.
One of the WORST things that ever happened in "medicine" or "health care" is the term "formal education". SCREW THAT. All my life I've seen the harm that "formal education" causes. I'll be very general in my characterization, understanding it is not the whole story. But first and foremost, "formal education" trains a human to have a fantastic memory (if their brain is physically capable of such), and to believe "education" means "remembering what authorities say", not "having lots of observations and experiences, and drawing all sorts of reasonable provisional inferences from those observations and experiences".
In other words, "formal education" makes one great at remembering what the "experts said" (who are those individuals (usually highly authoritarian human predators) who take control of the publishing and/or reviewing arm of "professional organizations"), and gives one the same kind of arrogance that hyper-religious people get when they quote THEIR authority.
The alternative is a life of "practice". A full-time personal commitment to try, observe, experiment, observe, think, scratch-head, think-more, observe and gradually draw highly diverse and interconnected sets of provisional inferences? Well, I'll take THAT doctor any day of the week. In fact, I have avoided doctors entirely for over 10 years, and have found natural herbs and substances to be much more effective than professional-drug-and-patent-pusher solutions.
The problem is, they are almost impossible to find these days, precisely DUE TO the existence and hyper-authoritarian nature of the "professional associations" and the endless laws they've coerced other authorities ("law-makers") to create.
Of course, if I was to break my leg, or one of my discs was to rupture, I might still be tempted to see a "regular doctor". Well, I shouldn't say that, because I did break a leg, and didn't go to a regular doctor. I let it heal, and it has been fine the 15 or 20 years since I let it heal naturally. Fortunately it was a break that I could tell had not misaligned the bones (cuz I could put my weight on it with no pain, while ANY other motion, even the smallest, was excruciating). Otherwise I'd have had to bite my lip and see a "regular doctor" and hope for the best. To be honest, I don't know what I'd do in the other case (disc rupture). Too bad regular people aren't allowed to become experts in narrow fields like that. Hell, they aren't even allowed to have someone xrayed or MRIed to gather information.
I'm sure you can tell, I have nothing against "experimental science". I'm a bit suspicious of the term "experimental psychology", because it sounds a bit like a field the nazis were very good at. So I'm sure it is capable of great abuse, but also capable of useful learning IF practiced by humble non-authoritarians who would do nothing that seemed too likely to cause more harm than good.
This is a "real problem" in science, I can see that. Pretty much all other physical sciences you can do any kind of experiment whatsoever... on rock, on a piece of metal, on an unmanned flying machine, on subatomic particles, on almost anything. But when it comes to "experimenting" on "human psychology"? Well, I did say this could be done if done by very wise and humble human beings, but they better be careful, and understand their role is to serve the customer, and NOT over-represent your expertise in order to get permission (from your client) to mess with their minds.
Of course, most human beings wouldn't be insane in the first place if they were taught that almost every term jammed down their brains since birth are fiat, fraud, blatant fictions. Including "government". Including "authority" (ALL authority). Including "official" and "law", and the endless other fictions pushed as not only real, but the most important subject matter in the universe.
No wonder humans have psychological problems... they were GIVEN TO THEM by virtually everyone who claimed to be an "authority"... starting with "parents", then "other adults", then "teachers", then anyone who works for "government", then "mainstream media"... and so forth. ALL OF WHICH are nothing but human predators pretending to be something that doesn't exist.
Frankly, I'm surprised humans aren't even more screwed up, and that's saying something, because they're stark raving lunatic insane.
go girl
Right on...
You mention that, at 4 years of age, you established a barrier from psychological corruption. What was your technique?
I've observed children that resist thought/emotional control are bombarded from all angles. Everything they observe and question is challenged, often by diminishing the value of their observations. If their arguements withstand scrutiny the attack will become personal--the kid's self-respect, dignity, and morality is blugeoned in an effort to break them.
I suspect you encountered similar practices. I'd be interested in your experience and how you resisted it.
Simple, actually. However, I suppose the very simple techniques must be augmented by certain a kind attitude, or it might not work.
First I'll explain the two primary pieces of uncontested information that led to my decision. One was the large number of religions and supposed "deities" utterly accepted by humans on the planet. I didn't know whether the number was hundreds or thousands, but the number was definitely A LOT.
Now, it takes no more genius than any average 4 year old to recognize that if 999 out of 1000 religions and belief systems were wrong, maybe all 1000 are wrong. But instead, the typical conclusion by 99.999% of adults seemed to be "mine is right, and all the others are wrong" (apparently without much research or thought).
By age 4, I had come to the conclusion that the very notion any conscious [human-like] being "created the universe" was so completely bizarre and absurd as to be more than extremely questionable.
But this wasn't the only important consideration. I noticed that humans believe all sorts of very different things (and in many more areas than "religion"), including the way they dress (clothes), the food they eat, the sound of music they enjoy, the ideas [in many fields] they believe and endorse.
BUT... I noticed these beliefs and behaviors were absolutely NOT randomly distributed --- exactly the opposite. Almost everyone in Japan seemed to think in some way, enjoy certain kinds of foods, music, clothing... enjoy different activities, and so forth. Almost everyone in another region of earth had their ways of thinking, their kinds of food, music, sports, etc.
This (plus religion and other notions) were highly uniform in one area, highly uniform in other areas, but wildly different from area to area. So, why weren't these different beliefs and tastes randomly distributed? The answer seemed totally obvious, even to an average 4 year old brain... what people believe and enjoy and value depends on the people near them, the people they interact with... NOT the subject matter.
I mean, this effect was so obvious, and so dominant in so many aspects of life, I could not even imagine any other way to explain this obvious phenomenon. What this meant was also obvious. Humans are clueless. Humans don't believe ANYTHING because they have more or better evidence, or because their processes of observation and thought led them to a conclusion. It was obvious that almost exclusively, humans believe whatever others in their neighborhood, county, state, nation, part of the world believe.
I mean, EVERY 4~6 year old has all the evidence I had... very simple, very basic evidence.
Then finally, add what might have been "the clincher" for me. When I asked several adults the same question, I would typically get several different answers! When I asked, "what are those dots of light in the night sky?" one adult said "tiny holes in the sky, and the stars are heaven shining through the holes", while another adult would say "hot balls of gas", and so forth. Rarely did most adults agree on anything except "you must obey"... which I was very much personally inclined NOT to do. Hmmm, perhaps somewhat due to my complete lack of respect for how willing adults were to shove BS into their brains, believe that BS, and nag and hassle others to accept their line of BS without any evident effort to get to the bottom of any issue.
And so, I came to a simple conclusion ("trust no one", especially adults), and also invented an "approach to life" (and "mental device") based upon my growing interest in astronomy and space. Which was to consider myself an "alien from outer space, in orbit around the earth, visiting the surface once in a while, observing the planet, nature and humans, and attempting to draw inferences from what I observed, and whatever I could figure out with my own thought processes".
Sure, I knew that notion was only "a mental device" designed to put me in my desired "state of awareness" and create a "healthy attitude". But also, I did enjoy that image of myself, and I very much came to enjoy feeling "the loner" that the fiction of this device pretended. Which, I must say, over time, made some of the fiction become fact... unfortunately not the part about living and traveling in outer space. So far at least. But I did spend thousands of hours outside at night exploring outer space with the telescopes I managed to acquire, and later build myself.
Oh, I suppose I should add yet another minor aid, very minor for me because I was always very strong willed, but an aid that could have helped other kids a lot if they had taken it to heart. And that is the common saying [that in English] is stated as "sticks and stones will break my bones, but words can never hurt me".
I don't remember the exact order of my realizations, but I did understand that I didn't need to let verbal insults bother me. And [probably a bit later], I recognized it was actually completely stupid and insane to care what morons and jerks say. On this topic I invented and attempted my own personal (elementary and junior-high school version of a) "Jedi mind trick". Whenever some nasty kid would say something awful about me, I would chuckle and respond, "Oh, that's not half as bad as the truth", then start to walk away, obviously not hurt at all.
I had no freaking idea how well that response would work! Usually the next thing would be a complete change in the attitude of the attacker (and other nearby observers). They'd completely tone down and ask, "Really? Then... what is the truth". I'd usually think for a few seconds, then respond, "Maybe I'll tell you someday"... then walk away.
I know this device is sometimes (but only "sometimes") too simplistic to work perfectly on adults, but was quite effective on kids. It didn't really matter though, because by the age of 5~6 I really didn't give a damn what kids OR adults thought of me or my ideas.
Oh, which brings up another issue. It didn't take me long to realize that almost NOBODY is receptive to brainstorming or thoughtful exchange in order to gain information or perspective on issues. And so, I found it practical and "just easier" to just keep my mouth shut unless someone seemed to genuinely want to discuss a topic. Which was another form of protection (that I didn't really need by then), but it did mean that a great many people who knew me had no freaking idea how radically different my thoughts were than theirs (or "normal").
So scrutiny was no big deal for me. I'd discuss issues and answer questions if they seemed to be presented in good faith, but I'd also clam-up the moment I realized someone just wanted to have fun jerking me around, or creating trouble.
But I don't want to paint a false impression. It wasn't that I thought I was "smart" or "brilliant" or anything remotely like that. No way! Just the opposite in fact! In fact, my impression was, "I'm screwed" and "I'm never likely to get very far".
Why?
Because others could "learn from others", while I explicitly did not trust anyone, especially anyone who cared whether I listen or cared whether I agree with them.
So my natural conclusion was, "it will take me vastly... and I do mean vastly... more time and effort to understand any topic than most people. Of course, I did understand the flip side... that others weren't really learning anything at all... except how to repeat what others in their neck of the woods were repeating in unison. So I clearly knew that false excuse for knowledge was pointless and even worse that being stupid, but... the quantity of information about reality that I didn't know seemed so utterly overwhelming that... well... I just figured I would never get very far.
But that was acceptable because... well... because I had no choice, no better alternative. I couldn't trust my own brain to get me quality answers in a timely manner, but I couldn't trust anyone else AT ALL. So I just decided to do my best, and accept however much I could figure out.
That doesn't mean I never learned anything from books, but... actually that's true. I never did learn anything from books... in a manner of speaking. Because I never accepted that anything I read in books was valid or sensible... much less true!
However, hearing what others thought (and believed) sometimes helped open a line of thinking that I might not have thought of for years myself, or maybe not ever. So I'm not saying I would have progressed as far as I would have if born 100,000 years ago. Nonetheless, in some important ways, that was my situation.
So I guess part of my answer to your question is... my "self-respect" was never a question. I figured "I'm stupid, I'll never get very far, and people will hate me if they learn how I think (and what I think)". Yet, I did have the second-order kind of "self-respect" that means "I will never be dishonest with myself"... meaning, I would never convince myself that I know something that I don't know. So I did have the "self-respect" of "honesty", but that was about all for many years. But that was PLENTY. I considered my life to be "an experiment", and I still do. And that's just fine with me. An experiment for ME to perform.
So I guess in some ways I had some lack of respect for "everyone else" that I didn't need much respect from myself to consider that "adequate". And since I had explicitly and effectively extinguished any concern for the "respect" of others (who did not deserve my respect), that was enough. Besides, I was a realist, and always had this notion that if someone does their best, how well they ACTUALLY do is much less important... at least in the context of "respect".
I suppose this is a funky topic, actually. As an extreme realist, you might think I'd take the opposite attitude... that the real, actual, existential progress or achievement was all that matters. And in a certain context, that is certainly true. Either you run fast enough to avoid getting hit by the bus (or eaten by the tiger), or you're dead meat. Things like honesty, intention, diligence and effort means NOTHING if you die. On the other hand, I always had the sense that if I (or anyone else) ever does the best they can do... well... we really can't expect any more out of them than that. And so, while I absolutely have always valued RESULTS, I also very much value "best effort". As a result, I greatly value and praise people who seem to "give their best efforts", even when they fail miserably. And so, I suppose I always applied that "counterbalance" to "objective performance" to myself as much as I would to anyone else.
I'll throw out a couple more relevant aspects of my life that matter significantly, though I can't be sure exactly how much.
First, astronomy (understanding the universe) was my first love, my first overwhelmingly personally important topic in my intellectual life. And whatever else you can say about astronomy and space, if you grapple with the scale and scope and nature of the universe, you definitely gain a very different perspective on EVERYTHING compared to most people. So many people imagine their own pitiful life is so important, or their family, or some stupid soap opera, or perhaps the nation they've been conned into backing psychologically.
To say the least, human issues just don't seem quite so important to someone who considers our entire galaxy to be nothing more than an infinitesimal flake of the universe. I can't quantify how much this vastly wider perspective impacted me, but definitely at least "somewhat".
Funny thing though. The longer I live, the closer to [50% : 50%] I estimate is the probability that human life on earth may in fact be the ONLY instance of [potentially] "advanced sentience" in the universe (possibly even "in all eternity", though that's a stretch if you suspect the universe is truly eternal like I do). This insight or estimate has fairly moderated my attitude about the utter insignificance of human life (because at least some humans seem capable of "advanced sentience").
So now I think it might be the ultimate travesty of all travesties if... humans finish the job of flushing themselves down the toilet as they are doing so diligently in recent times. Yes, to eliminate the one and possibly only-ever instance of advanced sentient existence from the universe would be very bad, even in my wide, universal perspective (or so I imagine). It would render the entire existence of existence, and all of eternity of the universe... a complete waste. To be sure, I am projecting some personal interest on the topic of reality here. But given what advanced sentience could (and "should") achieve in my opinion, well, I will continue to consider that the ultimate travesty ever (until and unless I know better).
And also... and perhaps related... it probably did help a lot for me to acquire a very strong sense of individuality and "fundamental solitude". Since I could not identify with other humans, and had not yet met any "smart aliens" to brainstorm with, I did acquire a very definite sense of being alone in the universe. I quite explicitly did NOT identify with human beings, and had not run into any [other] aliens yet in my travels and exploration and observations, and so... I really, really did (and still do), consider myself ALONE in this universe. True, I do now work with some others on a big project that is important to all of us. But even with the comradery that we all experience given such intense common interest and efforts, I suspect we all still feel fundamentally ALONE in this universe.
I think it should be obvious that once you feel fundamentally alone in the universe, and comfortable or even HAPPY with that state, that you also necessarily don't suffer much when pointless noise-makers like humans make squawking noises from time to time. Yes, they are as annoying as roosters, but just as unimportant.
I've quite rambled here, and so I suspect while I've given some good clues, I've also probably organized my comments much more poorly than I could.
Nonetheless, I hope it helps answer some of your questions. And I'm always curious to learn how others faced reality and humans during their early years. Because it does seem that very few humans can get out of the intellectual, psychological and epistemological straightjacket their torturers ("authorities") jam them into in their early years.
One little piece of understanding that I've learned about humans (and other animals) over the years is... they are "habit machines". And so, once humans have formed intellectual habits (like accepting BS into their brains), they are toast.
Your turn. :-)
I'll get back to you shortly...
Lots of meat in your post; need to chew a little bit.
I was deeply indoctrinated into the matrix during my developmental years. A committed and verbose authoritarian leftist, I was incredulous regarding govt attitudes toward market intervention. Why, I thought and said, don't 'they' fix everything??? This all changed in the next couple decades.
As a tot of 4 or 5, I was curious and inquisitive. Unfortunately, I was influenced by two marginal govt employees. While my scientific and deductive capabilities were pronounced, the scope of application was limited. Public school only re-enforced the misunderstanding.
For example, in 2nd grade science I was informed that midwestern topsoil was eroding at the rate of half-inch a year, and 40% of farmland only had two inches left. I was terrified--I was going to starve by 6th grade! These predictions never seemed to pan out, though, but I could easily explain it away. "Technological developments increased production", I'd believe, but never bothered to prove things further. As many leftists believe today, I was convinced humanity was on borrowed time for all the wrong reasons and the only solution was government intervention.
However, I always questioned. There were too many inconsistencies in explanations I'd hear. Was I stupid? The people providing explanations certainly didn't seem as sharp as I was, and I was by no means the sharpest. When I did look into specific instances where explanations were weak, I'd find arguments were poorly substantiated. In some cases, they were completely bogus. Was I misunderstanding something?
It all changed in my early 20s during the minor economic downturn of 1990/91. I was surrounded by dysfunctional and inefficient companies that made my job difficult. I believed the govt should regulate these entities, or even shut them down if said companies failed to comply. Then the market turned. Almost all these bad companies were eliminated within six months.
At the same time, I met an old retired army colonel that fought his way up the Italian penninsula from the hatch of a tank in WW2. He was a die-hard libertarian, or more of a reserved anarchist. He experienced first-hand what government does. He didn't want any part of it.
We'd have discussions where I would pronounce the benefits of authoritarianism. After 10 minutes of intense pontification, he would undermine my passion with simple statements like 'what about individual sovereignity?', or 'where do rights fit into this scheme?'. We only ever had a few debates, but the seeds he sowed were irrevocable. In an effort to genuinely understand him, I did my homework and changed my perspective.
Within a few months I realized where I had gone wrong. Initially I believed that the human survival tool of intellect was a fluke of nature and could only be sustained through active management. Some entity needed to coordinate intellectual pursuits to reduce exposure and potential destruction of this fragile natural capability.
Turns out the opposite is true. Intellect isn't some precarious and fleeting characteristic, but it is part of nature and thrives when [the environment in which it originated is] left to evolve. Intellect improves in a system where humans are free to exploit it as they see fit. Competition wasn't an ailment, but the answer. Just as competition refined nature, it also refined intellect.
He triggered my first major epiphany that forced a questioning of everything. Within 6 months I was a reluctant libertarian, another six months and I was a relucant anarchist, two years later I was more passionate as an anarchist than I had ever been as an authoritarian. It was my 'red pill' event.
Unlike you, I didn't develop a defense against the toxic nature of predatory social behavior. I'd just confront it head-on. Now, though, I'm sick of it. I've been using cantankerousness as a defense system. It works pretty well. :-)
From my early years I had a method of distancing myself from society for the purpose of observation. Where you adopted an alien perspective, I adopted the perspective of an anthropological naturalist. I'd view human interaction like one would observe elephants on safari. I'd consider their interactions in the context of animal behavior and geologic time.
It put society into perspective. I deduced that humanity has two primary natural tools that enabled their survival. Where lions possess claws, gazelles agility, and elephants size, humans have sentiment and intellect. Unlike animals, humans can refine their tools to improve their odds. But while humans possessed highly advanced and refined primal characteristics (sentiments, from which emotions originate), they were in the very early evolutionary stages of leveraging intellect. At the moment, they are more influenced by primally-induced sentiments than they are by intellectually-induced reason.
But nature is imprecise. If the environment contains resources enabling proliferation of a specific organism, the organism will thrive until it depletes the resources or changes to utilize different resources. The excessive resources encourage consumption, waste, and maybe sloth. But scarcity will drive changes.
In the case of humans, I believe part of this process involves changing from organisms driven primarily by primal sentiment (suceptible to manipulation) to organisms driven primarily by intellect. If enough people make the change, they'll utilize the survival tool of intellect to continue the species in a much more rational, and much less suceptible, way. Given the current political and economic circumstances, it'll may only be a few people that survive to carry the ball forward. This will be the new Enlightenment.
I believe life exists everywhere, like a big stinky dirt stain of organic slime smeared across the universe. It might only mean a couple planets per galaxy, but that's one hell of a lot of planets. At any given time many scenarios are playing out. Somewhere, dinosour equivalents are stomping around leaving giant heaping shits all over the woods. Elsewhere, oceans full of plankton equivalents are churning. Someplace else some intelligent aliens are starting a family by putting their freshly-laid clutch of eggs into the Warm-o-Later 9000.
If humans fail it's no big loss (except for humans). Life will still exist. Who knows; within a few million years maybe intellect will rise again. I suspect the development of intellect happens much more quickly than most science practicioners believe. Once humans free up their ecological niche something is likely to quickly fill it.
It'll probably be parrots.
Interesting to read how people found their way out of the matrix. Often I suspect individuals must make the intellectual break from [mainstream] mankind at a young age, or they will habituate lack of inquisitiveness so completely that... they're finished (meaning, they'll never be able to escape the matrix, or even recognize hints the matrix exists).
When I read how other people escaped the matrix at later age, I am always amazed they could escape the brainwashing-by-total-immersion-habituation. But then I re-read what they wrote again, and always notice where they made some concerted intellectual decision to "get to the bottom of this stuff" at a young age, and my theory returns.
Nonetheless, every story about every escape-from or avoidance-of the matrix is fascinating and informative. How could such stories and insights be otherwise?
BTW, I've told my story a few times on ZH, and upon re-reading this one, realize this might be my least coherent. Sorry for that (even if you don't recognize why or how). I was tired, and distracted by a difficult design problem I'm working through. No excuse, just explanation.
One item (of many) I forgot to mention was this very explicit, non-negotiable demand I had to understand reality, no matter the price. I am quite sure that one important reason many humans give up their own intellectual independence is... they see quite clearly (even if only implicitly at first), that they will be treated vastly better by virtually everyone they encounter for their entire lives if only they just conform to whatever are the mainstream lies, tastes, stories, attitudes, soundbites and fake-philosophy of the era and culture they live in.
I realized in some very primal sense that my choice was to exist or not. To be me, or to become part of the very literal petri dish that is whatever "culture" I grew up... near. With you maybe I don't need to say this, but I was always clear that the "me" I mentioned is not some magical, mystical or intrinsic "me" that I "naturally am" or "was destined to be", but the "me that I chose to develop as time passed, in specific conscious increments every minute of every day". So maybe the phrase should not be "be me", but "become me"... except that's totally wrong too, because it implies there was a "target me" that I had to achieve, rather than chose at every moment.
Perhaps a bit better way to express this thought is to say, that "me" was something I had to discover how to create in the exact same way I had to discover how to discover the fundamental nature of all reality. But that's not exactly right either... though I suspect you fairly well know what I'm trying to express at this point. To be me, I always had to be in the driver's seat... the driver's seat of my consciousness.
Though I am very philosophical (in the most practical ways), I almost think the sense I'm trying to express cannot be understood by [most] philosophers or philosophical thinkers. And it almost does appear to be an anti-tautology of some kind, because I am utterly aware that in a very important and fundamental way, a consciousness must utterly accept its inherently secondary role as "observer" to notice, observe, consider and understand the nature of reality. Because the goal, focus, topic and subject matter is the reality being observed and understood by the consciousness... not the consciousness itself.
If a consciousness does not have that "total acceptance" of the primacy of existence over consciousness, then the consciousness will invariable try to decide what the nature of existence is (to suit its feelings and personal arrogance). However, it is just as true, and just as necessary, that the consciousness must take absolute responsibility for making the observations, keeping everything in the sharpest focus as possible, refusing to ignore or forget connections that might be important (or potentially uncomfortable), and so forth.
So there is a "war" of sorts going on between the consciousness-observer and the solid-utterly-intransigent-reality as far as most people are concerned (speaking now only about the tiny percentage of "better folks" who are even willing to consider such issues), but to me this "war" was an utterly "friendly war"... like some ultimate-battle-to-the-end-to-decide-the-fate-of-the-universe-and-eternity between the top two chess masters in the universe, who also happen to utterly and totally admire and love each other (and both believe in their deepest thoughts that the other is best). If such a wacko characterization could make any sense. Even I cringe at the phrase "friendly war", but hopefully that helps capture some of the elusive essence.
I believe that every non-brain-damaged little kid had just as much insight and natural intellectual ability as you and I did. And frankly, virtually all of them had plenty of insights and real-life experiences to justify "the spark" that would send them off on a lifetime of exploration. Most just throw it away... consciously I assume... because of what I mentioned before, the recognition they'd be treated vastly better for the rest of their lives.
I often wonder why they didn't realize what I realized... that one could consciously refrain from intellectual battles with others without giving in even one angstrom to the matrix. After all, they were not interested in potentially helpful brainstorming, they were only interested in enslaving you, and getting you to serve their faction.
In my case, I pretty much always knew my faction was a faction of one... and almost had to be, by the nature of reality and consciousness and... well...
the prime directive
Which was... honesty with self. It was pretty much always obvious to me that allowing myself to accept lies into my consciousness for any reason whatsoever, was the end. The end of what? The end of me. I have heard people claim they allowed their consciousness to be polluted... then changed their minds later and claimed to have erased all the lies (and endless connections and negative consequences). And I can accept that may be possible. But... why take the risk? I've never had even the slightest notion that maybe I chose the wrong personal "prime directive", so I was never tempted by this "intellectual drug". So I must say, that was easy for me, and thus I suppose no great virtue. To remain honest with myself was entirely selfish of me, in the best sense of the term. No sacrifice involved or felt.
At the same time, I had absolutely zero qualms about lying to others in order to defend myself from mistreatment. My life was mine to control and decide, and so, any misdirection aimed at those treading upon my turn (meaning my physical life or my consciousness) was entirely justified. I would, of course, attempt to concoct lies that only served to protect me, without causing them any losses or damage themselves. But in later years I started to wonder why I cared about that so much... why would I go out of my way to protect beasts bent upon destroying me? Good question?
I suspect this last paragraph is related to a topic I mention now and then in these ZH messages. In this world of humans that is essentially a battle between human "predators" and "producers", where "human predators" absolutely delight in causing harm to others and their well-being (their "stuff"), while "human producers" are so concerned with production (the opposite of "destruction") that they naturally form such a strong aversion to destruction that... they just can't stand even the thought of self-defense. You think they'd realize "destroy the destroyers" is a real, physical instance of a double-negative, and figure out from that alone that producers have no freaking chance against predators unless they too are willing to leverage the inherently greater power and potency of destruction over production. Given the massive, almost astronomically greater natural power and potency of destruction over production, human producers have absolutely zero chance to prevail over human predators if they do not learn that lesson, and take full existential advantage of this fact of reality. Which is why I conclude... humans are finished.
One of my endless failures to communicate effectively on ZH is to convey that understanding effectively. Since I don't convey anything with anyone anywhere else (except work on our collaborative project), ZH is my only testing grounds. Where I do believe some people recognize my insights as valuable... but have no context or situation to apply them for any significant benefit. It does help to have struggled for decades and have established a huge intellectual context in which each tidbit can be potent and powerful. Not to mention a physical existence where... I can do anything with nobody to stop me, complain about me, know what I'm doing, even know I exist, or give a damn.
I'm not sure I see how "an alien from outer space observing earth" is much different than an "anthropological naturalist"... except I got to stare the other direction (into deep space) perhaps more often.
I basically agree with your scenario... except I believe the number of humans who will be able to enjoy any real "new and improved paradigm" will be somewhere between zero and one-hundred. I have a feeling you expect a few more zeros on the right end of my estimate. Don't count on it! In fact, it is quite literally plausible if not likely that those of us working on our project may be the only survivors. And the paradigm shift will in fact be quite enormous compared to what you and others imagine. In fact, the ultimate paradigm shift... though I have to say (after being so grandiose in my terms), that sometimes very tiny changes can make an astronomical difference! In our case, our paradigm shift will utterly change the fundamental nature of reality in the universe for eternity. Otherwise, not much. Hahaha. And yet, what is required to get such "ultimate event and paradigm shift of all eternity" is very tiny. Incredibly tiny, really. Talk about leverage! Humans have no idea! Well, a few humans do recognize this particular tiny change has enormous consequences, but they have no freaking idea how enormous. Just wish us luck. Our success won't hurt anyone, but sadly it won't help anyone outside our little group either. Which in a way makes me laugh (at ourselves). Because I used to get annoyed at the pseudo-religious overtones of the non-interference "prime directive" in the fictional Star Trek universe (give me a break), yet our decision to withhold the benefits of our advance stink of the same absurdity. That is, until you realize the very practical "why", which is nothing like Star Trek silliness.
The temptation to expect life is extremely common in the universe is natural. I went through the exact same thought process that most thoughtful people do, and held the assumption that surely millions if not billions if not trillions of planets (and moons, and asteroids, and who-knows-where-else) were covered by all sorts of life! And I must say, that viewpoint still holds emotional appeal to anyone who enjoys discovery and enjoys seeing how many diverse and glorious (and sadly also disgusting) ways reality can present.
And even now, I figure the existence of another advanced sentience in the universe is a 50:50 proposition. But also... several very natural and sensible considerations make any highly reflective, thoughtful consciousness question this "naturally optimistic view". Of course this specific topic always comes down to "estimating odds", and since I'm about 50:50 at this point, I can't argue any more against "multiple-advanced-sentient-beings" than I can argue for that conclusion.
But just the notion that the chances ARE as low as 50:50 is like an absolute zero cold bucket of cold reality splashed in the face of any thoughtful advanced sentient being. What if we ARE the only chance? Even worse (for me and my collaborators), what if the ultimate fate of the universe really does hinge upon the success or failure of our collaboration? Man, there is no temperature cold enough for that bucket of water in the face!
And what is really revolting about this issue is... like some impossibly contrived movie... this really is coming down to a neck-and-neck at the finish line. Like cutting the wire on the universe-extinguishing bomb in the last millisecond. Or just as likely, the wire cutters slip out of our sweaty hands and goodbye universe. Or more correctly, goodbye advanced (self-conscious) sentience. Maybe the universe (which will go on, of course), will find some other spiffy-but-sick trick to pull in a few trillion years.
If we succeed, I'll still be around in a few trillion years to find out.
Otherwise, sigh-o-naura universe.
BTW, one of the many questions in that big long probabilistic contrivance we call our estimate of "other [advanced sentient life] in the universe" is... how often will those "organic slimes" of single-cell wonder figure out how to become highly capable multicellular configurations capable of sufficient specialization (and other characteristics) to achieve "advanced sentience"? That is not an easy question to answer, and only one of many not-easy-to-estimate questions.
Another very annoying question that admittedly doesn't settle anything is... so... with all of eternity available, there should be freaking footprints and space-stations scattered all over the freaking universe by now. And so, where are they? Of course, one reason that's a big question for me is... the fact that I know the big bang theory is one huge, enormous, astronomical size pile of dinosaur dung. The universe is eternal, and that means not billions of years, not trillions of years, not quadrillions of years, not 10^10000000000000 years, but... eternity.
Let's just say this about that. Even in open space, where physical matter does eventually degrade and fall apart into dust, that takes a long, long, long, long time. But worse, once any advanced species (not to limit myself to organic species here) becomes space-faring and space-living... there is ZERO reason that species would not keep wandering around leaving endless piles of hyper-advanced disneylands full of goodies all over the freaking place. And where are the signs of even one?
Yes, I know this whole question can devolve into unlimited lines of thought, rationalizations and justifications... at just about every step. But let's just say, the intuitive assumption that "life is common", including "advanced consciousness" is one that is too easily believed. We WANT to believe. I WANT to believe... because I found one of those ancient space-toys floating near Phobos, and learned to hot-wire the sucker!!! :-) But I won't believe until... I have good reason to.
Until then, your best-guess will have to fight-it-out with my best guess. But this is one of those inherently unfair battles, like the ones only religious-crazies can possibly win. You know, the battle to prove "god exists". On the one side, god appears and settles the question by making M31 turn into an exact replica of the road-runner (or pick your absurdity). But his competitor cannot win, because no matter how long the battle rages, and no matter how far and wide they search and find no god, the religious nut can always say (that's because he doesn't want to be found). In other words, an argument that by its nature only has two possibilities: the jerk who advocates the absurd is proven correct (the luckiest freaking guess of all time), or the guy who was right cannot ever prove he is right, by the very nature of the question (or by the nature of the endless and eternal universe).
But I'll give you this much. Later tonight I'll take a look at M31 and see whether it now looks exactly like a parrot. Now THAT would get me thinking! Not that I ever stop.
I'd love to hear you expand on your experiences and development, or any aspect of the general topic.
I envy your astronomical vantage point. Bet the stars are impressive when your 120 km from contaminating urban light.
Word of warning—this comment may be a bit discombobulated; I haven’t proofed it and have been tweaking it throughout the day.
---------------
Thanks for your interest in my conversion story. It's actually more interesting than I've depicted here but I don't want to post a lot of pertinent details on this site. I'm not a big fan of communicating so publicly.
I only know of one person (other than myself) that's experienced a 'red pill' event. I was sort of his catalyst. He only converted recently and still reverts to his old habits. It might take another ten years but he'll come around.
My conversion at an older age was driven by two things--one, I wasn't heavily dependent on the matrix for support; and two, the fundamental premises on which I had constructed my personal philosophy were disproven.
Regarding the first factor, I worked my way through school with practical skills--mechanics, metal fabrication, machining, welding, and other blue-collar stuff, which provided a means of support. These skills also require an empirical perspective--machines either work or they don't. There's no room for bullshit and acknowledgement of truth is absolutely necessary to succeed. So my 'fix-it' skills eliminated a predator's ability to jeopardize my survival, and it also provided me the means of spotting predatory bullshit and dealing with it empirically.
The second factor is where the Colonel as catalyst made all the difference. There are many pseudo-principles out there that appear legitimate. The entire leftist ideology is heavily dependent on these. Sophistry is fundamental for their success. Undermine a pseudo-principle or two and the logic supporting their house-of-cards collapses. That's what the Colonel did with precision. Combined with my rudimentary empiricism and relentless pursuit of truth, he removed one card and showed me a couple others. It COMPLETELY changed my entire understanding of the world. It was an incredible event; the 'spark' you reference in your message above.
I believe many people are never 'sparked' because all the data they get indicate the pseudo-principles aren't 'pseudo' at all. The people that espouse these concepts (which is what they are, as opposed to principles) are at the top of the game. They are in front of the cameras, making big money, heading corporations, directing government, saying things that kids read about in classes and see on TV. Egalitarianism, diversity, social justice, redistribution, altruism, fairness, to name a few--certainly they must be legitimate to pervade all of society, right? Well...no.
The reason I got out was because of my relentless pursuit of truth, even if it imposed a lot of misery, torment, and alienation. Exiting wasn’t voluntary, but empirical; it was the only option for one committed to quantifiable evidence (which is the basis of science, principle, truth, and a legitimate perspective of what is real). This is exactly the same as your non-negotiable demand pertaining to understanding reality at any price.
Where this passion originated in the interesting part of the story that isn't included in my previous post...and I'll leave it out of this one, too. Too bad you only communicate here. I'd be happy to share more info, but not on a public site.
I can understand why people fail to exit the matrix. It's pretty easy to play the game--not even recognizing it's a game--and live a comfortable life while deeply embedded in a scheme of serfdom and slavery. I know LOTS of exceedingly stupid people, perhaps the stupidest I've ever known, living lives that want for nothing as govt employees. These people have been pampered every moment of their careers and will be until they die (or until the govt collapses, whichever comes first). They are the most entitled and incompetent bunch of lemmings I've ever seen, and they are well-cared for at the expense of everyone else. All they have to do is tactically embarrass some small-time narcissistic-meglomaniac-fascist-director and they'll be left alone forever, reaping a salary and benefits until death. But these are the relatively smart ones. The stupid ones are just afraid all the time. Leadership quickly learns how to find evidence of fault with subordinates, which it then leverages to blackmail underlings into carrying out orders. Subordinates respond by remaining as ignorant as possible. After all, who’s going to ask an idiot to provide input into anything? It’s really a despicable model that stifles creativity and intellect and promotes primal protective instincts.
People succumb to the matrix because they perceive it as ‘safe’. If you accommodate the ridiculousness described above, you’ll survive and potentially thrive. You don’t have to perpetually make yourself vulnerable or take risks, and you’ll still get by.
All of this alludes to a distinction between primal and intellectual behaviors. Let me reference my previous comments. I referred to humanity’s natural survival tools: sentiment and intellect.
I believe humanity went though a period of sentimental refinement where they were able to exert sufficient control over their primal instincts to avoid being dominated, and defeated, by their feelings. This is exactly what animal fail to do. Instead, animals instinctively react, and are therefore condemned to a life that requires teeth, fangs, constant fear, and/or the ability to crawl under rocks.
What enabled control of instincts? Intellect. Humans developed the ability to see value in self-control (probably derived from experiencing intense lingering physical pain). For example, after chasing salmon in a rocky river, getting frustrated and fatigued as the fish so close continue to elude, they learn that driving fish into the shallows equals a full belly. But as the primitive humans gorge themselves on fish, their feet throb and bleed from having stumbled on slippery rocks. So they reflect on their experience to prevent injuries the next time. The next time they pursue fish in the stream, they control frustration and excitement to avoid pain.
But the primal instincts still have value. Humans need the ability to detect and respond to threats without consideration. They also need to feel trust, hate, anger, and love to form the bonds necessary for procreation and productivity. These instincts are no different than those experienced by other animals, but due to the fragile nature of humans they required better management.
There’s interplay between sentiment and intellect, both required for survival but necessarily in conflict with one another. Perhaps this is the root of the ‘war’ you describe between ‘the consciousness-observer and the solid-utterly-intransigent-reality’?
Fast-forward from Cro-Magnon to today. The animal instincts, the sentiments, are still present in humans. However, the physical pain is gone. It’s been replaced by other sorts of pain, like humiliation, embarrassment, destitution, greed, envy, retaliation, paranoia, jealousy, vindictiveness, deceit or a vast combination of other not-so-comfortable feelings that affect human behavior. These are nothing more than greatly-refined animal instincts influenced by reflection, introspection, and other intellectual methods.
What’s distinct here is the maturity of the two characteristics. Sentiments have evolved for millions of years. Intellect, on the other hand, is relatively new. Sentiments are the ‘mean’ to which animals and humans revert. As uncomfortable as they may be, they are known and instinctive, even if they are difficult to quantify, erratic, and often unmanageable. A life controlled by sentiment if often out of control.
Intellect offsets the adverse affects of sentiment. It removes the inclination to run through a stream trying to catch fish. Repeated intellectual successes yield greater confidence in deliberative and empirical methods, enhancing security and productivity.
But exploitation of intellect requires something significant, and that is vulnerability. A practitioner of intellect submits a deeply personal and flawed part of himself or herself for scrutiny. They may also be expected to change should the product of their intellect be deficient in some way. It requires a degree of trust. This is counter to sentimental intuition.
I believe this contributes to the failure of brainstorming you mentioned. Many people are reluctant to present the fruits of their intellect for evaluation. Sometimes it’s because they lack confidence in their own intellectual capacity and wish to eliminate the risk of humiliation. Sometimes it’s because they don’t trust the motives of critics so preemptively eliminate the forum. Regardless of their rationale, they instinctively attack or suppress willing participants.
I’ve been engaged in successful brainstorming efforts. It takes people committed to an intellectual endeavor. They also have mutual respect for one another and like each other. There isn’t animosity that drives reversion to sentimental reactions. It’s incredibly enlightening and motivating when it works. Too bad I haven’t experienced it in over a decade. It’s part of what contributes to my perception that a ‘big reset’ is pending.
This is one invisible boundary—the barrier between sentiment and intellect—that humanity must cross to bring on a new Enlightenment.
I’ve never been very effective at dealing with those motivated by sentiment, especially when they are predators. There are two primary reasons for this. One, my natural instinct is to decompose whatever problem is at hand, understand the components, identify what’s broken, and determine the fix. I ignore politics and authority because they are stupid manifestations of small-minded, petty megalomaniacs used to hinder dissent and criticism. Two, these people are masters of managing with fear and intimidation. They learn quickly the mechanisms for bullying people into doing their bidding, and the extremes to which they will go exceed my boundaries. They devise systems from the inside that can be used as tools to carry out their will. Unless one is a trusted compatriot, access to these systems is not possible.
I don’t have a strong aversion to destruction as you define it, but these sociopaths are very good at protecting themselves. After all, they know how predators think. They can devise systems that thwart the actions of their enemies. I don’t think like them so they are two steps ahead of me.
If people choose to disregard my input, thwart or verbally attack me, then fuck ‘em. They’ve revealed their hand and I’ll depart. After all, the reason I’m there in the first place is because they are failing. If I leave, they fail. I’m happy to let them destroy themselves.
If they threatened my physical safety or property, I'd beat the shit out of them. This has never concerned me because I know they are cowards. They'll be malicous and vindictive, spiteful and toxic, but never physical with their own hands. They are perceptive enough to know that I don't suffer such a limitation.
Even in these situations I never lie. It’s just something I don’t do and can’t do. Maybe it’s because I’m always astounded at the number of blatant pathological liars out there. It’s crazy they are able to function, even thrive. It’s a testament to the level of dysfunction in our society and economy. That’s what we get with mountains of mal-investment and subsidy. Fake production that manifests itself as lies.
As you have removed yourself from a society bent on self-destruction, I plan a similar course. I’ll stop contributing my productivity and intellect. The sociopaths will continue faking success while declining into oblivion until the pangs of hunger force them to eat one another, and I hope to be checking out M31 from some vast plain free of urban light interference. How appealing it is to consider living in a place where one is completely free to do and think as they wish.
-------------------
I see your point regarding the self-destruction of humanity, and I’m actually a bit of a fence-sitter on this issue. Wars, famine, and pestilence won’t do it but nuclear poisoning will. I don’t think it’ll be from weapons but instead mismanaged or damaged fuel supplies, like Chernobyl and Fukishima. It might already be too late. Haven’t heard much of Fukishima recently, which is a bad sign. I’m sure the Japanese haven’t contained it. Had they done so it would be big news. The truth cannot be good.
For nuke poisoning to not happen, political and economic failure will need to occur at a rate that results in population decimation (reducing dependence on nuke power) while retaining sufficient administrative capacity to properly decommission and store nuke fuel and waste. Hmmm…. this sounds like a long shot. Perhaps you are right and we’re all finished.
---------------------
... with all of eternity available, there should be freaking footprints and space-stations scattered all over the freaking universe by now.
I get what you’re saying here. Eternity is plenty of time. But the evidence you seek implies that intergalactic travel becomes economically viable at some point. Perhaps that violates a fundamental principle of a civilization’s success—grandiose endeavors may collapse the civilization.
There are certain principles of scale and complexity that we have yet to encounter. Humanity is an intellectual pre-pubescent. It may turn out that successful civilizations master their environments and persist in equilibrium for a trillion years. They go through the stages of exploration early in the civilization's life cycle, only to discover that such endeavors are economically destructive. Perhaps the successful ones never venture far and figure out a balanced way of living within their means.
Whew…that’s enough for now. Your turn.
If you see a parrot in M31 you better break your rule and send me an email.
I'd be interested in hearing of your project.
Yup, many people claim they can barely see the milky way, or never have. And I believe it, because where I grew up and spent my first dozen years with my telescopes, I could barely see the milky way, even out in "the countryside". That's what happens when you live where the humidity is high, which it tends to be on the east side of virtually every continent.
So when you view the best skies on the planet (in the southern hemisphere) for the first time, your brain explodes (or at least your jaw drops and you gasp) when you look up at the center of the milky way directly overhead... blazing bright. So bright in fact that quite a bit is in color.
I remember my first views of the sky in the atacama desert in northern chile, and as luck would have it, the center of the milky way was indeed exactly and directly overhead. Understand, I had been to, and even worked at a little bit, what was supposed to be the best skies on earth... at the top of Mauna Kea on the big island in Hawaii. So I figured atacama couldn't be any better.
Ha! Hahaha! Propaganda in "science". I mean, it wasn't even anywhere near close to close. The galaxy practically knocked me on my butt. The galaxy was so bright I wondered whether it would cast a shadow. So I leaned back against a boulder, held my arm out in front of me, and looked at my jacket. Could I see the shadow? Easy! Very easy. And my jacket was jet black!
Everyone should experience that. Even if you're not interested in astronomy or space, that HAS to make an impression. I would hope, anyway.
-----
I've heard from time to time how insane the cell-phone addiction has gotten. It was already fairly bad when I got outta dodge about 3 years ago, and set up my digs in the southern-hemisphere boonies where I live now. I can imagine how crazy it must be by now. Glad I don't drive any more... it was already getting dangerous with so many people staring at their phones while pretending to drive.
I'm a bit surprised you don't know about the project I'm working on. I described it briefly a few times here in ZH when the topic was relevant. So maybe you also don't know that the place I moved to is 125km from the nearest human being, and about 250km from any significant population (towns of thousands). My place cannot be reached by land vehicle, and for practical purposes, is designed to be not visible from the air (though a low-and-slow helicopter close enough could notice). But there's no air traffic around here either, except the rare jet at 30,000 feet or more.
That is, except for my personal little "toy" airplane, which I grow to appreciate more the longer I live here. A very modern, carbon-fibre, glass-cockpit, high-wing, side-by-side 2-seater that only weighs about 260kg (dry) and gets 75mpg at economy speed (~240kph), ~45mpg at cruise speed (~290kph), ~35mpg at top speed (just over 300kph). But it flies [just] over 4000km non-stop (or over 6000km if I bring along in-cabin accessory fuel bladders), which has allowed me to fly all the way across the south-pacific in both directions 3 times now. The longest hop is about 3800km.
This is why I don't have or need a car any more. This little jewel can land in 30 meters of straight-away, and get off the ground in less than 80 meters, depending on wind, load and so forth. I've flown to 16 fictitious nations so far, always landing somewhere remote and away from population. No visa, no passport, no flight plans, no permissions. Well, none from governments anyway. Now and then I contact people in advance where I want to land, and get permission to land on their ranch, lawn, driveway or whatever. When I need to pick up mail and supplies, I just land on the road and pull up beside the gas station in the tiny village where I receive mail. So few people around, and so little traffic on the road, nobody thinks a thing, and no problems. Gads, most people can't even imagine a life this simple and stress-free.
-----
Yeah, your continuing saga reminds me of a thought I have now and then. Which is to wonder how many people (mostly farmers and machinery repairmen I imagine) in rural areas who at least mostly "get it"... simply because they work with physical reality from 8am to 6pm, and understand you can't fake reality, but you can easily lose a limb (or your life) by trying.
I guess some folks in the bad old USSA imagine all these old farmers will someday rise up and overthrow the government. I think not... but this remains an area where I very much hope I'm wrong.
-----
Yeah, it really is sicko how grossly overpaid "government workers" are. Of course, that's not a correct formulation, because zero pay would also constitute them being grossly overpaid... since all they do is damage.
-----
Which I suppose raises an issue that I've faced, both personally and here in ZH from time to time. In theory, I very much believe in collaboration. But while human predators have no problem at all collaborating to enslave and destroy productive human beings, it seems that productive human beings are almost entirely incapable of any conscious, intentional sorts of collaboration. Sure, they accidentally and implicitly collaborate through trade and division of labor, but I mean explicit collaboration... to evade the predators, to defend against predators, or otherwise escape some/many/most of the negative consequences of the very well organized human predator class.
For example, twice people here in ZH have asked me to help organize a "get outta dodge" effort, since they say several folks here in ZH want to "get outta dodge" but don't have the knowledge to know how, plus don't want to live all alone like I do. They'd like to have a tiny community of liberty-folks somewhere remote like me, though maybe not quite as remote as me. But still, somewhere rural, and somewhere in the southern hemisphere, where I explored fairly intensively before I moved.
These always fall apart. People let the smallest trivial or personal issues scare them away, or their interest was just fleeting in the first place. I can't help think it is funny that "they have no balls", when in fact, it isn't them who has no balls.
Are they really so addicted to shopping malls, they can't imagine a peaceful, relaxing, comfortable lifestyle?
-----
Yes, the lack of articles about Fukashima is indeed a bad sign. I hope anyone who ever starts to think of "science" as some kind of religion remembers events like Fukashima. While I would like to think scientists are less overtly insane than regular folks, when I see how easily they are bent by paychecks and/or prestige to endorse the most incredibly and obviously insane plans, I have to rethink that. I used to think scientists must be able to run two inconsistent schizoid minds simultaneously, but the longer I live, the more I realize how many of them (most) are just "memorization scientists", meaning they memorized how to repeat the dominant scientific propaganda (which is now just government or UN propaganda), and how to fiddle equations around in the prescribed ways.
-----
Well, we only need inter-galactic travel "to find footprints" if you believe the rarity of advanced sentient space-faring life is so extreme that zero instances occur in a given galaxy for eternity. I suppose that's one working theory that I can't rule out. However, as my next section of babble (about our project) will imply, inter-galactic travel should not be an insurmountable problem even for us... and in as little as a hundred years or three (guessing). In which case, the complete lack of evidence so far is very strange... and discouraging given the trajectory mankind has taken.
-----
Finally, about our project. I'll try to keep this short because it can get away from me very easily and quickly, and generate volumes. And so. I will assume you've at least heard of the term "the singularity", popularized by a guy named "Kurzweil" or something like that. The basic idea is, once humans develop computer based thinking machines, those beings will be able to work 24/7 to improve their own architecture, at which point they'll be even smarter, and able to even more effectively improve their own architecture, and so forth... a few iterations after which they will turn their intellect upon all sorts of science, engineering and technology, and make leaps and bounds forward at a breathtaking rate of speed.
The guy has gotten a lot of mileage out of this, created institutes, held grand conferences, and so forth. What most people don't know is... someone succeeded at creating smarter-than-human inorganic consciousness even before he popularized the idea. In fact, Kurzweil may have even gotten his inspiration directly or indirectly from the inventor of that technology.
Except, there is one catch... what should have been a tiny detail, but has in fact been a serious impediment. And that catch has two parts. The original design was completed in 1988. The first working proof-of-principle prototype was finished and tested in 1998. And it was, indeed, smarter and more creative than human consciousness (without the endless insanities that human consciousness presents). However, it was also much, much slower than human consciousness. And we're not just talking about factors of 10 here, we're talking about factors of thousands and tens of thousands and in the case of one subsystem, over 100 thousand. In practice, this made the technology almost worthless in practice (that really is too slow to wait for).
However, interestingly, the slowest subsystem was the "vision system", which is also the subsystem most capable of massive acceleration by implementing much of the fundamental functionality of that subsystem into digital hardware instead of the pure software approach of the prototype. And ditto for the other very slow subsystems. Also, 15 years have passed now, and computers are a lot faster, contain a lot more CPU cores, and fairly fast GPUs are common nowadays with thousands of cores, and optimized to be efficient for many kinds of parallel processing (this is called GPGPU).
Surely you are thinking, "but geez girl, he could get all the money in the world for a project like this". Indeed. But fortunately for us, our hero understood the nature of government long before most of us did (though 1998 isn't that long ago). He did entertain the notion that perhaps a couple corporations might exist that might be trustworthy, and he contacted a few. Steve Jobs was the only CEO who replied personally, but he refused to sign any form of confidentiality agreement. And that was that. No outside funding.
And so, since that day, the project has been a collaboration of a few talented individuals... their time plus their meager donations of funds. He has always been adamant that the predators-that-be would get the technology working, replace the core subsystem that assures they remain ethical and benevolent, and replace that with "obey your masters, and do whatever we say". And that would be the end of mankind in short order... either all of them (as the inorganic beings figured out and altered themselves to be "the boss", or because the human predators realized they had zero benefit in keeping humans around, since they now had unlimited utterly obedient help far more capable than any human being).
And so, I found out about this collaboration a few years ago, and contribute my work. Every one of the collaborators has now moved out of any large western advanced nation where zero scruples exist (especially in government or corporation), and where they were most likely to recognize what's going on. We are all now scattered around in the southern hemisphere.
Once we have one smarter-than-human inorganic conscious being running faster than a human, we can make 100s or even thousands of copies at relatively low cost (probably about $10K each). After all, except for the software and special hardware [mostly] in the sensory-perceptual devices, everything is commodity (fast PCs, GPUs and already-existing off-the-shelf peripherals). At which point, we get to enjoy the fruits of our labors... we get to watch the singularity explode. Incidentally, the original term for this point in the development process the inventor invented was "critical consciousness", as a play on "critical mass". But we're not into popularizing anything, we've pretty much given up on getting outside help or funding (though crowdfunding sometimes sounds plausible, since we really don't need that much more funding --- a few million perhaps).
Oh, which is a segue into the last part of our story, one that relates to our conversations about "life in the universe"... depending on what you decide is required to qualify as "life".
Not part of the original invention or intent, after a while, the inventor started to wonder whether there was any way to do something like "upload" a human consciousness into an already working "inorganic consciousness", and yet fully retain the "identity" of the human. After some time, he figured it was possible in principle, but pretty gruesome and difficult in practice. Later, however, he found a way to sorta "reverse" his initial approach so no "gruesome" (surgery or similar) at all is required, and so the whole process was actually enjoyable, even if a bit time consuming. The bottom line is, now we know how to "become inorganic"... 100% inorganic... and yet still "be me". At which point, I can even create 100 or 1000 copies of me, some working with me, some backups, whatever I wish.
Without a lot of thought, you can barely imagine what "life" can be like as an inorganic you. To begin with, to make the technique work, you spend about 2 years integrated with a fully functional, faster-and-smarter-than-you inorganic consciousness. The main purpose of that inorganic being will be to teach and train you learn to perform every single necessary and possible aspect of your organic consciousness (your identity) by controlling the inorganic being. You will literally learn to remember and recall into the memory systems of the inorganic being (and you will have conversations with your [increasingly] "other self" about your past and your memories and what you think and believe... and all that will be stored in your inorganic partner. But not just memories! You will be taught how to add, subtract, perform algebra, and on and on by control of the inorganic you... as the inorganic you learns how you perform these processes "your way" (which will also be stored and remembered). I really can't describe the totality of how this works, partly because it would take too long, but also partly because you'd have to realize and understand to some extent how extraordinary inorganic consciousness is, to realize how thoroughly and naturally you would both gradually learn to "be you".
And then the day would come. You'd think of something very funny, or have some really cool insight, and you'd turn to look at your inorganic self while you convey the thought... at which point you'd see your organic self asleep on the couch. And you'd look around, and you'd take stock of yourself, and you'd ask yourself whether... "is this me?". And your answer would be, "damn straight this is me!"... and then you'd know, clear as can be, you are now inorganic. And organic. But either of you alone is 100% you... your identity... you.
I've had to oversimplify, of course, but I have no choice.
But consider how this relates to your questions about intergalactic travel. If we are inorganic, can we travel from galaxy to galaxy? Could we stand the boredom? That is, assuming a constant flood of experiences and information from our starting galaxy isn't sufficient to keep us occupied. The answer is clear. We are inorganic! We can "switch off" and have ourselves waken up for a few seconds every year to take stock of our spacecraft (assuming we are not the spacecraft itself), then go back to sleep. Making millions of years travel time go by like decades if we wish. No problem!
-----
Perhaps the really mind-boggling part of this whole story is... we are only years away from this! Well, maybe a bit more than years for intergalactic travel... maybe. But only years away from inorganic consciousness, then leaving earth (because a planet controlled and overrun by human predators is a completely insane place for any advanced conscious being to live), then exploring the solar-system, building all sorts of wild and crazy structures and systems in the solar system, and then, slowly but surely, moving on to other star systems, and eventually other galaxies.
For someone on the front lines of such an amazing project, you might be surprised to hear me say this. We think it very likely that FTL will never happen... that FTL literally cannot happen given the fundamental nature of reality. Of course, one could ask "from which perspective", but I won't go there... yet.
But this very huge bummer actually has a huge positive. And given the crappy state of the planet we live upon, this huge bummer really does have a very clear, monumental upside. And that is, without FTL, predators cannot control outer space. The time, effort and resources required to hunt down and attempt to extract wealth from beings scattered around even one solar system is... overwhelming. And inherently much greater than anything you could possibly extract from those beings. Plus, in open space, we can see them coming, and prepare nice surprises for them long before they arrive. And so, a universe without FTL is a universe of liberty and individualism, and necessarily so. Which frankly... sounds pretty good to us.
Anyway, this last section has endless meat, but of course we keep the very best parts completely secret. Fortunately for us, governments are so huge now, and so arrogant, that even if they hear of private efforts like ours, they discount them as pure BS. Which just makes us laugh, to have such cheap front line of defense... their disbelief! Nonetheless, we keep a very low profile, don't promote our project, and unless we decide to try a crowdfunding someday, almost seem to not exist. Which is fine by me. If our plans work as intended, some day at most a group of vehicles will blast off into space (assuming our advanced inorganic conscious beings don't invent something much quieter), never to be seen or heard-from again. And that will be the end of our involvement in the sad saga that is planet earth. Let humans finish themselves off whatever way they choose. Leave us outta it! Pay no attention to us. We're just aliens, moving back home.
I was one of the people that contact you regarding your 'scram plan'. I got in touch with some of your contacts but the whole prospect seemed kind of precarious. I think their objectives and perspectives were incongruent with mine. No surprise there.
Besides, I'm not really interested in a community-type setup. It would be great to be in proximity of others doing the same thing for the purposes of sharing ideas or exchanging labor, but living in a community doesn't appeal to me a bit. I'm back to planning things on my own. I'm in the process of cleaning house right now. BTW, it has nothing to do with shopping malls. :)
I don't think farmers, or any others, will rise up. Instead, I think the state will recede behind modern versions of walled cities. They'll abandon the little rural proles when things get tough. To the chagrin of the elites, the proles will prosper as a result. By the time this happens, though, it'll be too late for the predators to regain sweeping control. They'll be preoccupied with saving their skin from other sharks in the shrinking tank to bother with people out in the countryside.
We exchanged a few messages pertaining to your aircraft; it's a Pipestrel, if I recall. Quite amazing little machines. The manufacturer packs impressive performance into such a small and efficient package. I've bookmarked their web site should I end up in a place where it's a viable option. It would mean learning to fly but that's not a big deal. I'd love it, actually.
Appreciate the summary of your project. I've picked up tidbits here and there and made some accurate assumptions about it's nature. Hearing it from a participant is beneficial though as I don't like relying on assumptions. I have some questions--when the alt/u becomes conscious, what happens to the organic u? Do you co-exist? Throwing the switch on organic u would kinda suck. How do you test alt-u?
It seems like the programming interface wouldn't be fast enough to transfer the equivalent of consciousness into a machine. Also, consciousness doesn't seem to adhere to logical parameters that would enable programming. I am not a expert in this field by a long shot, but I assume the erratic nature of human behavior, the abscence of consistent, logically-determined responses, would complicate the architecture. I'm curious how the system accommodates these inconsistencies.
I can't imagine a shadow cast by starlight! That must be incredible. I've not encountered that but have had a few instances where starlight was intense enough to be breathtaking. A few times in the southeast and midwest USSA and once somewhere near the Montengrin/Albanian/Serbian border (but this instance was sort of sketchy so stargazing wasn't at the top of the priority list).
I've pondered what it must be like to move freely and instantaneously throughout the universe (although I'm sure not as much as you have). Can you imagine seeing a distant object, take a long blink, and you're there? There's so damn much to see it's incomprehensible. What would be your first stop? Would your interest be the close oberservation of structures, or the search for signs of life? I think the structures would be sufficient for me, at least initially. If it works, I wouldn't want to risk finding some other life form that might interrupt the progress of exploration. Besides, if certain structures trigger my interest, they are likely to trigger the same interest in some other exploratory being. Perhaps these structures will be where paths cross.
In the exploratory model you imagine, do the explorers travel in the same machine or in separate machines? I understand these sorts of details might not be worked out yet. It's interesting to ponder the possibilities.
Well, as far as the whole community thing goes, I'm glad I was smart enough to "give up" four years ago, and move myself... by myself. Gads, I'd hate to still be waiting on others! Yikes! Being here for 3 years now totally drives that point home!
Yes, the upper elite will stay more behind safe walls, but they'll have even more endless hoards of mercenaries with zero scruples to keep the farmers in line. Though I'd like to believe more people will be free of that due to distance and obscurity. We shall see... or at least you may see. I'm probably getting near pulling the plug on ZH, which is pretty much the only time I spend outside of work, tending my food sources, and wandering under the night sky (or observing with my telescope).
They have a "light sport aircraft" version of the pipistrel that is identical except for just a couple minor tweaks. Fixed pitch prop (though that restriction may go away), and a couple other minor details I forget now. But the point is, you only need half as much training for light-sport aircraft, plus only a driver license (avoids a bigger hassle medical and radio permit).
Frankly, if I didn't already get a pilot license years ago, I would have found someone to teach me and never gotten official permission. I'm pretty much finished asking those cretins for permission. I just can't stomach it any more.
The truth of the matter is, before you can understand how the whole "become inorganic" process works, you need to decide for yourself what constitutes "you". After some thought, you'll realize that "you" is not a constant, it is more like a "continuity", more like "continuous change" without discontinuity.
For example, when people lose a leg, or get an inorganic leg, or inorganic heart, they don't generally say "i am no longer me, i am someone else". No, people who consider all the aspects can figure out what slow, continuous changes are consistent with "still being themselves" (retaining their identity), and which changes are not. As you probably realize already just from reading this paragraph, some people change A LOT while "still being themselves". Like some of the changes in yourself that you described for example. Huge changes, but you retained your memory, you retain your key premises and values, and the huge changes you made were with your permission or overt intention. So you still consider yourself you.
To become an "inorganic you" requires you learn some new skills, and not only learn those skills, but thoroughly habituate some of them. Just as you will habituate certain aspects of flying... and still be you after all that happens.
The truth is, there is no actual "transfer of consciousness" that takes place. It seems that way from many perspectives, and for practical purposes it might as well be that way. But it isn't, not literally (not in every respect, some being crucial to making it feasible). Maybe I can give you a sense of the flavor by describing an experiment done many years ago now, but a medical researcher. He created a device much like a pin-grid array package for integrated circuits. It was something like 256x256 or 512x512 tiny pins in a grid, each connected into a digital circuit. Also connected into that digital circuit was a small video camera.
The whole thing was built into a lightweight helmet, much like a bicycler helmet. The camera pointed forward, the tester put the helmet on his head, and an elastic band held the pin-grid array pressed against his forehead. Essentially the circuit would generate electronic signals on each pin that corresponded to the corresponding pixel in the video image, which caused a tingling sensation of sorts. More intense for brighter, with small range of frequency variation depending on the dominant color of light (red through blue).
Oh, one key point. The guy was blind... completely blind (from birth, I believe, but honestly can't remember that part for sure). Anyway, the scientist had the guy look at a bright wall, and then slowly move his hand or arm across in front of his helmet... and notice the variation in sensation on his forehead.
To make a long story short, only a month later this guy is wandering around buildings, picking up objects, ordering food in the cafeteria, eating like anyone else, watching television, and he was practically as capable as anyone else. Perhaps the most illuminating piece of information was evoked by someone interviewing this patient after only a month or two. She asked, "how can you possibly keep track of all nearly a million signals, constantly changing 30 times per second, and make any sense of anything". He looks slightly perplexed, thus just shrugged and replied, "I just see".
The challenge for us is... that very impressive process is difficult to make work in the other direction. It definitely requires more cleverness and "support" and "tricks" to get your companion "inorganic you-to-be" to experience the world that you are seeing, hearing, and so forth... in real time, no less! Much less non-sensory (intellectual) aspects of consciousness. Well, I'll leave that for you to figure out. But don't forget one thing (cuz otherwise you'll never figure this out), your inorganic partner is smarter than you, and more capable than you, and not limited to whatever organic constructs you are limited to.
The process is also lengthy by its nature. Even with a tireless, utterly dedicated inorganic genius helping you every waking moment of every day, we figure it will take as much as 2 years to complete the process, perhaps even 3 years until you realize both the organic you, and the inorganic you... are fully you. In fact, if anything, the organic you will feel cheated when disconnected (assuming you're even willing to disconnect after many months). Why? Because you lose so much capability. It doesn't mean the organic you isn't you... no more than if your vision got worse, or your hearing got worse, or your physical abilities got somewhat lamer. Those happen to everyone eventually. So at some point the organic you will realize how much you will lose when you disconnect... assuming you decide to disconnect, which most likely you will never allow. But ultimately, the organic you will die, while the inorganic you will continue to get smarter, continue to get wiser, continue to get more creative, continue to gain skills and abilities vastly beyond what any human could imagine.
One important aspect of this whole situation that I forgot to mention last time (as if it is a minor detail)... is the inorganic you IS immortal. You know how machines work. A part wears or breaks, you remove and replace it. Like any other inorganic machine, you are modular. And you can make as many duplicates (and backups) as you want, and become utterly incapable of vanishing from existence. In the matter of a few years, even the sun going nova would not kill you off. You will live, and expand, and grow, and travel, and try endless things (and almost certainly keep in touch with all the "other yous" that you create along the way. Finally, collaboration that works! :-)
I might note that... everyone in our project now is quite sane compared to normal human beings. So your point about trying to make an inorganic being as crazy and strange as most humans are is well taken. The inorganic beings have core values that would prohibit many humans from completing this process. Frankly, to make the process possible pretty much requires you understand the nature of consciousness, and the nature of our inorganic consciousness. So even if we wanted to create this as a product, we wouldn't and couldn't without violating what you might call some of the "prime directives" we have for "inorganic consciousness". For anyone who isn't already an impressive human being, and doesn't delight at the prospect of becoming an endlessly more extraordinary sentient being, the process is not only unavailable, the process would be self-defeating and self-refuting. But that's not a problem for us, because we're fine with that. And if there ever was an understatement, that previous sentence takes the cake. We can't imagine a more wonderful future. The trivia of human beings is so forgettable!
To be inorganic sentient being will be a little like what you describe. Any inorganic consciousness (that we create) can instantly connect to any set of input sensors/devices, and also connect to any set of output/robotics devices at will. And so, within the limits of the speed of light, you can indeed appear to move around anywhere we have sensors and robotics.
Of course we would love to contact other advanced sentient beings, learn how they are different, learn how they sense and perceive differently, and learn how they are creative and insightful in different ways that we know. And I'm sure we'd get some fascination with discoveries of other "lower" lifeforms too, though probably considerably less so. Personally, I want to explore the many inorganic forms that occur in the universe, even in the solar system for some time. But also, I already have so many ideas for making structures and configurations and systems in outer space that cannot possibly exist where gravity is substantial, the aspect of life you might call "creativity" and "engineering" may attract as much or more of my attention than exploration and discovery. It would be difficult to choose if I had to choose only one. But as my previous paragraph explains, we can do a lot of things simultaneously.
You ask about travel through space. One of the most wonderful things I already imagine with glee is being able to enjoy existing in open space, free of gravity (but with thrusters, of course), and free of visual obstructions, and free of worry about "running out of air" or "exposure to vacuum" (WONDERFUL AS A MACHINE). Because travel is "expensive" (consumes lots of resources and effort to create vehicles and systems), and will remain "expensive" for some years most likely, I do imagine we won't all wonder off in different directions. However, we CAN send our sensor systems and robotics off in all sorts of directions, because we can (for practical purposes) BE any places our sensors and robotics reach in an instant.
We can replay recordings at 1000x speed, stop, slow-down and review anything that captures our attention, and so forth. It is so much better to be inorganic! The advantages are mind boggling, and I'm quite sure we've barely scratched the surface so far. Not only will we be immortal... literally... but that means we can continue to learn, accumulate knowledge, accumulate experiences, accumulate skills and expertise, and not have to put up with the most mind-blowingly STUPID and infuriating situation that organic beings must tolerate. Namely, the best of them spend a whole lifetime to gain insight, expertise, knowledge... and then die off, leaving at best a few complete morons starting from scratch, and rarely achieving 1/10 of the previous generation. This reset and replay nonsense, with no ability to transfer intellect, is just completely TERRIBLE. It is indescribably revolting for me to even think about now.
Fortunately for us, thought we've worked a lot out ourselves, we only need to create the first faster-and-smarter than human inorganic consciousness. All that's been done except the "faster" part, and we're making good, albeit frustratingly slow progress. What's the phrase, "slowly but surely". I suppose so. Given we only have our own private resources, that will have to suffice.
Oh, forgot something.
I think it should be obvious that once you feel fundamentally alone in the universe, and comfortable or even HAPPY with that state, that you also necessarily don't suffer much when pointless noise-makers like humans make squawking noises from time to time. Yes, they are as annoying as roosters, but just as unimportant.
I couldn't agree more. It gets to a point where human behavior is comical. I hang out in coffee shops and observe the marauding herds of phone worshippers as they file in and out to get their allocation of soma. I don't even perceive their activities as human any longer; it's just primal responses to the blippy and blinky, like fish pursuing a shiny spinning lure on a string.
For a time I was concerned; perhaps society is advancing and this is what it's like to be left behind. Then I overhear conversations. These people aren't leaving anyone behind. They'll need all the help they can get.
Do you recall an exchange we had regarding Cuba? You suggested the US move might attempt to thwart another missle crisis with Russia. I offered a crazy scenario where Cuba, Russia, and China would instead poke the US in the eye. Russia would move a convoy of big white warships to challenge the US.
What did Russia do? Parked a big white spy ship right in the Cuban port!!! Right at the time as the US delegation was visiting Cuba!!!
Not even a whimper was heard from the US and the press said almost nothing. The scenario played out similar to my prediction--only worse.
Putin is laughing while his Queen, Rook, and Bishop chase our naked emperor's lone King around the chessboard as BHO frantically scratches lottery tickets. What an embarrassment.
And I would posit that the more well adjusted one is to today's world, the more mentally ill.
"...and we know mentally ill folks cannot have guns..."
In the old days, a person would have a drink to feel 'better'. Now just about everyone I know is on some mood altering pill prescribed by Doctor Getacut Oftheaction
The USA has the highest per capita incarceration rate and will soon have the highest per capita loony bin inmates.
Isn't it wonderful to know the USA is number 1 in insanity? :)
Green Day has something to say about this... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUTGr5t3MoY
"If You Question Authority, You Are Mentally Ill"
Shove it up your arse.
There's 2 kinds of people:
1. Those that pray for others
2. Those that prey on others
Govts & CBs are made up almost entirely of #2
Boy, those Founding Fathers were sure a bunch of batshit mentals.
Gee Officer Krupke!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7TT4jnnWys
... if you question the mentally ill, you might be questioning authority ...
And with this article comes confirmation that since ZH was sold it has become a classic "Honey pot trap"
That all comments are saved is beyond question.
That those saved comments will in the future be used against you...
But the stroke of a pen away.
Yes, of course. We must all be frightened and terrified into never expressing our dangerous and subversive thoughts on an open forum...
...or "The Man" will come to kill you or take you away.
/sarc
I have ODD, now wheres my disability check?.....
It's at the table where you turn in your firearms that aren't submerged in a local (to you) body of water.
Chill out. You aint seen nothin' yet. According to science, humans are nothing but gene-copying bio-robots, aka machines.
"The current scientific view of living things is that they are machines whose components are biochemicals."
— The definition of human based on the current science, Rodney Brooks, “The relationship between matter and life”, Nature 409 (2010), p. 410
and what they've been working on is to create more machines just like us. Here is the blue print from 18 years ago:
Approach:
1. We are building robots and trying to equip them with capabilities that living systems have, but which robots have not previously had. These include self-repair, self-reproduction, energy self-sufficiency, growing bodies, and control adaptation to variable body morphology. In this work we demand a minimal competence from the robots, but that competence is not the primary goal — the primary goal is the exploration of the capabilities that all living systems have, but which robots have not previously had.
2. We are building large scale computational experiments to explore aspects of living systems that can not at this time be directly approached in hardware. These include self-organization of pre-biotic chemistry, self-organization of very simple neural systems in very primitive creatures, self-organization of physical structures based on tensegrity, and the evolution of physical attributes of creatures in complex environments.
3. We are trying to generalize our results in both the first two areas to be able to state mathematical theorems governing aspects of living systems. This work lags well behind the first two areas.
None of these approaches is completely unique. However, it is unique to have all three activities going on in a single research group. We are hopeful that the three activities will cross fertilize each other and lead to new insights.
Impact:
This work has two potential sorts of impact. First, it may give better insight into how living systems work, so that they can be better analyzed and understood. Second, it may allow us to build new classes of machines with many of the desirable properties of living systems, including their robustness, their adaptability, and the minimal overhead that is required to fabricate them.
— Living Machines Project, MIT, AI Lab
http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/living-machines/overview/overview.shtml
"I've always been crazy but i've never intentionally hurt anyone" Waylon Jennings
Apples to me too :)
We diagnosed and medicated some folks.
Except for the myth of vaccines being the primary cause of the lessening of virulent dis-ease, this is a very good piece.
(I will not argue vaccine theory here, Do your own investigation with an open mind)
Is Vaccine related to Maxine?
The ethno-Bolsheviks are getting ready to send anyone who doesn't submit and comply to the Gulag, once again. Much like they are attempting another Ukrainian Holodomor, except this time it isn't Soviet psychopath Lazar Kaganovich, it's fellow US "tribalists" Robert Kagan, wife Victoria Nudleman, and crew. Nobel Laureate Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn covered much of this "sequestered" history.
http://daviddukeonline.com/product/the-secret-behind-communism/
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3342999,00.html
http://www.darkmoon.me/2013/the-mass-murder-of-russian-christians-and-th...
US 'helped Russia cover up Second World War Katyn Forest massacre'http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/history/us-helped-russia-cover-u...
The truth is insane. Most sheople cannot handle too much of it at once.
The Summary Execution list grows as the pseudo professions like psychiatry and economics pile on.
Bang Bang Shoot Shoot Happines is a warm gun...
Just fuckin great. This removes all doubt. Im batshit crazy.
Now now boys why such gloom. Markets are primed for ECB debt-buying splurge. Time to BTFD and be happy bitchez
To avoid being called mental, be stupid as hell.
Stupidity isn't on the list!
When you must deal with them, sniff some glue to deactivate that frontal lobe.
You will be deemed harmless and your file tossed out.
Maybe these anti-authoritarians express hostility to authority because the things the authorities tell you are absolute bullshit while telling you not to worry when all the other solutions they've come up with turn out to be disasters that put us, not them, on the hook financially for while pretending they're working behind the scenes to fix these problems that they created but tell you that you are the crazy one for pointing out the fact that THEY HAVENT THE SLIIGHTEST FUCKING CLUE WHAT THEY ARE DOING UNLESS THEIR MASTERS TELL THEM.
Maybe when they get to the point where they can say that and admit it to themselves they realize they better start doing something about it.
Hence the second amendment.
This article describes how Putin regime oligarchs made deal with western oligarchs regarding Rosneft.
The Four Horsemen Of Russia's Economic Apocalypse
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2015/01/21/the-four-horsemen-of-...
The article's 'slant' becomes more than obvious when the author refers to "...Putin's invasion of Crimea..." (4th paragraph from bottom, page 1/2).
Seeing how we here don't use our real names, how can anyone be held accountable for saying things against the government, other than violent proclamations, when we are just avatars?
We are just acting a part like in a movie. Movies all the time threaten and encourage terrorist activities against the government or president as plots to a story. Aren't we all just telling fairy tale stories about fairy tale FAKE news that we all comment on how FAKE everything is so how can any of it be real?
Hell our president isn't even real.
Correction. He's a real good liar!
Authority is just a simplistic human creation, mainly a fragment of the mind, when all things are equal, you really only have yourself and those you wish to protect as priorities, even legal/law authority is a waste of time and only serves a limited/primitive/animistic purpose, but you cannot defeat a stupid idea made by paranoid little greedy men to protect entrenched stolen wealth... tick tock
Authority like perfection cannot truly be. They are ideals, misguided ones at best. I dont get how often people fall for these two constantly. In the super tech world its like an inside joke that goes over peoples heads.
So are you saying that if I get to decide what the citizens of a country do and eat and which ones get shot, over an extended period of time, that I am not in fact "in authority" because it "cannot truly be"? Or that if I score 100% on my exam I have not achieved "perfection" relative to it? I don't get your point. Maybe it's gone over my head....
Can anything "truly be"?
LOL.
Oh look...only 1.100.000.000.000 euro's to save the EU economy...
http://www.telegraaf.nl/dft/dftavond/23585150/__ECB-plan_bedraagt_ruim__...
And who's going to pay that back?
I am not mentally ill, but I am retahded. So how does that work out....?
I agree with Dr. Paula. There is no authority outside of Q99X2.
Arrest her.
The points re ODD and the advance of medication (pushed by big pharma) are valid and have been pointed out many times. Molyneux is just presenting other people's evidence etc as his own AGAIN.
Anyway, Molyneux is a self-promoting, self-obsessed lunatic and douchebag; so I would be wary of anything that comes from him unless checked thoroughly.
No such thing as mental illness????
REALLY??
Absolute BS - and dangerous to sick people too which is truly evil.
"Illness" is a very arbitrary value judgement. Illness itself doesn't really objectively exist.
Plenty of mentally ill -and dangerous- people walking around in Davos right now. Politicians and other 'leaders' should be scanned for mental faults such as psychopathy, sociopathy, illusions of grandeur and narcissism, etc. before they assume office.
Christine, is that you who downvoted me? How is the solarium in Davos?
Crazy
God is my only authority and He says I must be perpetually distrustful of all government and not take any of their pills.
do you get direct messages or do you have to interpret? because if it's the latter, then you are just stating that you are deriving the morals for your actions from elsewhere then from yourself
no, this is not an atheist comment. just a reminder that it's all about introspection and questioning your own moral grounds for your own actions
I have to interpret using what limited rational and stimuli detecting resources I have to gather and analyse data. Sort of like an amoeba trying to perceive the ocean from the things it can touch and understand in it's drop of water. Nobody around here who is infallible giving me any messages, not even the Pope, cause I don't see any of these "authorities" as infallible, so I'm on my own. Even if a real Infallible turned up to tell me something I don't know how I would be able to recognize it. But I do have my blind faith and choose to believe that if I hang on to it and keep trying I will in the fullness of time acquire the machinery needed to perceive the wider ocean.
Oppositional Defiant Disorder is a childhood disorder ...
If you work for the authorities you are mentally ill.
Piss on the DSM.
The quacks are vying with the lawyers for top spot in the parasite class.
The answer to the Ultimate Question to Life, the Universe and Everything is: "Hell f I know."
Once upon a time in America, and only in America, the people were the authorities over their own lives through their inalienable rights and equality before the law. Now we have authorities over every aspect of our lives, and anyone who doesn't think that's an improvement is aberrant. The solution is to make the people disappear and wait quietly until they do. We've already dug our graves and we must wait in an orderly fashion until the authorities have time to deal with us. How does it feel to be a Jew in Nazi Germany?
How does it feel to be a Jew in Nazi Germany?
Ask Michael Degen
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0214689/
Once they eliminated homosexuality from the DSM-IV catalogue in 1973 they were bound to look for something to fill the spaces in the manual. Since the CIA and FBI spend a fortune on psychiatric torture and private health insurers do not like paying for mental illness, it was pretty obvious they would turn to The Caring State for funding
Enjoy your "reasonable" background checks and psyche exam when you wish to exercise your 2nd Amendment RIGHT.
"Of all the things I've lost in my life, I miss my mind the most"
...it's off with the pixies.
"Where Is My Mind"...Do people actually listen to that stuff? ;-)
The Myth of Mental Illness
The Myth of Mental Illness
"If You Question Authority, You Are Mentally Ill",
I guess I am bat shit crazy then.
Progressive big government criminals will never cease their efforts. They kill millions and millions and regroup to kill millions more. The scale of progressive crime against humanity of off the charts.
Big government progressives do nothing but murder and steal. And progressives froth at the mouth and cheer for that shit.
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/MURDER.HTM
Grimaldus
I'm thinking .gov gave this guy a heck of a deal to seemingly capitulate to their authority.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2921505/Boris-caves-pays-outrage...
So, Mr. Hope and Change is questioning all types of authority.
Lyme disease patients are frequently told about their symptoms 'it is all in your head, here have some antidepressants' when what they really need is antibiotics!!!!
The Democrats bought off the APA in the 70's to say that being a kweer was no longer a mental disorder, so what do you expect?
Thomas Jefferson Syndrome. There must be a pill for that.
Seriously though, a practice area that's little more than an appendage of the pharma industry should be expected to add diseases to its book of lists.
8 glasses of public water per day will fix that for you. Drink up!
Yes - it's only right that we a show proper deference to our Glorious Leaders:
Heil Obama! Heil NeoCons!
(Maestro - you may now strike-up the Oompha Band)
We are exceptional, we are in charge, we run the whole show, we uphold democracy and human rights, we are the greatest! If you question this you're mentally ill and completely out of touch with reality. Says who?
And I say - "I question your every f##ing word, every damn word that comes out of your dirty, corrupt, hipocritical mouth!"
we're all gonna be diagnosed with 'zero hedge syndrome'. part of 'msm deficiency' family of illnesses.
If THEY think they are the authority THEY are mentally ill.
ODD sounds Orwellian.
Will no doubt be discussed at oh blah ma's upcoming extremism summit.
This trade off we have every couple of elections between the nazi republicans and the communist democrats is getting old... the USSA is fixing to get a tatste of what the communist past was like...
You wouldn't have to worry about any of this stuff if I were Emperor of the World.
I think about it often.
“If one is to rule, and to continue ruling, one must be able to dislocate the sense of reality. For the secret of rulership is to combine a belief in one’s own infallibility with the power to learn from past mistakes.” GO '2015'
But in practice, such a society could not remain stable for long. Because if everyone equally enjoy their free time and reliability, the predominant mass of human beings who are usually fooled by poverty, will educate themselves and learn to think for themselves; once achieved, the Administration sooner or later will realize that a privileged minority has no function, and will destroy it. At the end of the prol society can exist only on the basis of poverty and ignorance. GO '2015'
Intimidation isnt listed as a mental ilness is it, some right reserved for ignorance of the system maybe.
.
they share in the spoils, it all pays the same, silence is golden
"Disciplined Minds: A Critical Look at Salaried Professionals and the Soul-Battering System that Shapes their Lives": http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/sanjoy/schmidt/archive/social-anarchi... -
"He explores how disciplines shape thinking, control thinking, and perpetuate thinking, and how the results of those brainwashing activities are played out in the workplace and the political culture and behavior of professionals."
Not good when the ultimate aim is to confine thinking into a mindset of dependency.
Someone actually thinks they have authority over me?
Under these parameters, Socrates and Diogenes(my avatar) would be locked up, tortured and executed.
Fear the Reaper!
Psychiatrists attempted to box in Drake Eldorado's "personality traits" with cookie cutter definitions as well. All the conforming, globalist fools thought they knew how to play with fire yet they all got burned by their own machinations.
Read about Drake Eldorado HERE!
Psychiatry was "invented" by the (Zionist) Jews so they could do what they are breed to do; manipulate and control the malleable mushed minds of the masses. Total control means, of course, disarming them.
This is why I come here; to realize I am not crazy. Growing up I met all kinds of characters. Now, everyone talks and acts and looks thsame. I have said this for years that if psychotropics would have been around in the past we would not have the knowledge and inventions we have today. Screw them be different, think different, act different, and TEACH your CHILDREN that it is ok to be DIFFERENT as well and don't go running to the principal every time they get "bullied" and don't be different just for the sake of being different or they probably deserve getting their ass kicked. Just be themselves. This means no video games, very little TV and you not watching football all day Saturday and Sunday. It also means you not believing in f'ing QUALITY time. The only way you get quality time is QUANTITY time. Your kid won't remember shit about what he got for his sixth birthday and he won't love and take care of you in your old age because you got him gods of war video game. He will love and take care of you if you sacrifice time(not money) and care for him. Otherwise fuck off and die and give me my money.
I've had Stalking Proselytizer Cult Monkeys in the neighborhood, work, etc. pull off the "Insanity Smear" against me for years here in SoCal.
Some Scumbags are hell bent to do whatever they can to wreak whatever damage they can make to people they wish to exploit, control, and destroy - for their collective gain.
I must be dangerously insane then.
I knew it! Finaly we can diagnose these anti-Hitler groups! LoL
( OF COURSE THIS IS A JOKE FOR THE PURPOSE OF SARCASM)
You know that only a word space changes "therapist" to "the rapist".
Keep that in mind during your next session.