Brian's Recommended Blogs
[x]
Logic, Philosophy, Inquiry, Gary!
Hank Campbell: Science Advocate, Blogboss: Curt, Bright, Fair.
Michael White: Molecular Biologist who digs Philosophy.
Gerhard Adam: A damn fine human,
Patrick Lockerby has a lock on language.
Blogs Instructions
Brian's Recommended Books
[x]
The Outsider a.k.a. The Stranger
Pale Blue Dot
The Demon Haunted World
Books Instructions
Brian's Affiliates and Organizations
[x]
hasn't added any organizations or groups yet.
1 Badges Instructions
About Brian
"The World is what we make it and to the making of it each one of us can contribute something. This thought makes hope possible: and in this hope, though life will still be painful, it will be no longer purposeless." - Bertrand Russell from "A philosophy for you in these times." 1941
Brian Taylor : tries very hard to think about everything he says, does and is. Writer, Philosopher, and Communicator by trade. Has faith in science and believes it to be of much more worth than many other pursuits. Only wants to help... Offers only best thoughts...
Human Male.
Less than perfect.
(Shameless exhibitionism)=>(Designed for feedback.)
My work on Authentic Self stresses the utility of Assignee's Prerogative and the importance of empirical measurements in your contemplative paradigms. My goal is to reduce the ideas of the New Enlightenment to their lowest common denominators, understandable by all, while leaving ideals out of it.
Keep thinking out loud!
The following are excerpts from my essays on Authentic Self and Assignee's Prerogative to entice you to read the whole damn thing here:
OR goto
http://www.anti-socialengineering.com
to read the finished products
Human ability to interfere with our own ideas gives us the unique power to work against ourselves or defy what nature would likely do. It doesn’t seem logical when stated as such, nevertheless, to date, we are the only species we know to act in this way.
One thing certainly experienced by modern humans is the urgent desire to form an opinion of any given subject, immediately and often in spite of not having any foreknowledge or understanding. If you wish to test the hypothesis just ask anyone what they think of anything. This enormous egocentric fault is demonstrated by our ability to work against our own best interests. It is also very likely to lead to our extinction.
Nevertheless, it’s important that we understand the significance of the concept of Paradigms for three reasons: 1.) We can understand our opinions are formed by associations. 2.) We can examine the constructive associations of our opinions and measure their validity. 3.) We can reclaim identity through the formulation of our own, original opinions. (Authentic Self.)
Paradigm ignorance leaves me stuck with a paradigm I don’t even know I agree with, don’t know I can change and won’t know how it’s going to change me. Currently, almost everybody falls prey to this phenomenon, which is terrifying.
A paradigm should be a flexible entity, able to shift, grow, shrink, even disappear. If I was exercising my Assignee’s Prerogative I would say my “Prostitution Paradigm” is that they exist, I don’t have to bother with them, so I don’t. If I ever do, then I guess I will. This, in our current reality, is unnacceptable. Our paradigms must be known. How are we to know who you are if we can’t know what you think? Furthermore, due to the long rampant influx of generated opinion, our paradigms are the facts. Our opinions become the object.
Did IBM know there was going to be a computer revolution and home computers would become as common as toasters? Yes. They knew there a tiny movement afoot that claimed it was coming. Did they believe it was a threat or even possible? No. Apple did, in fact, they set out to make it happen and succeeded. (The beauty of this example is that nobody needed a home computer, Apple created the need by making it useful.) Seiko Japan did the same thing by buying the quartz watch movement that the Swiss didn’t see the value of. (Look at your watch, does it say “quartz?”) Bill Gates bought the DOS operating software that makes “Windows” possible for the price of a decent used car from a man who couldn’t envision its utility. The list goes on and on but those are instances that had a positive outcome for the people that saw the value of the paradigm shift.
(on faith)...Therefore we are referring to the logic of a human being, not just the pure philosophical essence of “logic” as it relates to any mathematical measurement. It’s an acceptance of logic as a personal decision of what it might mean, per paradigm. If that means that we have to make a leap of faith to be comfortable, so be it. I think we should be allowed that privilege as there are many deep running unknowns and we’ve been so wrong, so often before. After all, we have only our perceptions and our paradigms to go on, and there seems to be little to no actual logic being demonstrated by our commitment to them.
In other words, if an ant colony is getting too big it will sacrifice a part of itself for the good of the whole. That is not the nature of our conundrum for we, lest we forget, are the species that doesn’t always work in it’s better interests. We can, at the least, gain an ability to recognize when we’re being handed our hat. (Anti-Social Engineering...)
The difference between the old Enlightenment and the new is that we now are waking up from our subconscious servitude (social engineering) whereas during the Industrial Revolution we were waking up from our conscious servitude (serfdom.) Therefore, back then we learned that we were real individuals, that we had rights as humans and we were going to exercise them. Now we "wake up" to learn that we're being controlled with ideas, our rights aren't really "ours" and we are only allowed to "exercise" within a fairly rigid framework (reality.)
It isn’t about deservedness. “Rights” have been created. You’re judging things by standards that are going on three hundred years old, and they were based on standards that came from two thousand years ago. To say "Yeah, but it’s working so well," is to deserve a smack upside the head!
To contemplate the ancient concept of self with a being that is truly “not-self” without even the ability to conceptualise having rules put upon you is to perpetuate ignorance and demonstrate the absurdity of modern human existence. To even achieve the question requires a paradigm shift that instantly opens an endless stream of possibilities. Furthermore, paradigms once found, put the mind into the flow of enlightenment. It is this new modern enlightenment that will spread the understanding to the point of beginning to answer difficult questions, and undoubtedly pose new ones.
Why do we even have the desire to answer metaphysical postulations?
When exactly have humans demonstrated a long-term foothold of human rights?
Are we not acting contradictory to our apparent natural expectations?
If we are, what does that mean for our future?
How trustworthy is moral reasoning?
What is the domain of morality?
How am I to adjust accordingly if I can’t trust myself?
It’s not enough for the new modern Philosophes to acquaint you with yourself, they want to push into the unknowable and declare the fantastic.
It seems, therefore, that Nature is left leaning. If considering Ingroup, Authority and Purity is far less important that considering Fairness and Harm, Society is in a state of illogical, counterproductive denial.
If we can accept that Nature’s default is that of an open, flexible, dynamic system, then we should be able to accept that we are working against it. If we know that we have been socially engineered to be the way we are, then the forces that made us that way, want us that way. So why do the powers that be want us to work against nature? Why have we been programmed to fail? What else have they programmed us to do? These are the questions of the new enlightenment. They may seem scary but the fact that we can figure out to ask them gives me hope for the future.
Banal paradigms get associations firing every day. Crazy ideas you don’t even want to think about stop you from thinking forward. Appropriately, child abuse will undoubtably not become a popular social habit but what if the “crazy idea” was that of “The Earth isn’t flat,” or “This mold will cure your infection?”
Brian Taylor : tries very hard to think about everything he says, does and is. Writer, Philosopher, and Communicator by trade. Has faith in science and believes it to be of much more worth than many other pursuits. Only wants to help... Offers only best thoughts...
Human Male.
Less than perfect.
(Shameless exhibitionism)=>(Designed for feedback.)
My work on Authentic Self stresses the utility of Assignee's Prerogative and the importance of empirical measurements in your contemplative paradigms. My goal is to reduce the ideas of the New Enlightenment to their lowest common denominators, understandable by all, while leaving ideals out of it.
Keep thinking out loud!
The following are excerpts from my essays on Authentic Self and Assignee's Prerogative to entice you to read the whole damn thing here:
OR goto
http://www.anti-socialengineering.com
to read the finished products
Human ability to interfere with our own ideas gives us the unique power to work against ourselves or defy what nature would likely do. It doesn’t seem logical when stated as such, nevertheless, to date, we are the only species we know to act in this way.
One thing certainly experienced by modern humans is the urgent desire to form an opinion of any given subject, immediately and often in spite of not having any foreknowledge or understanding. If you wish to test the hypothesis just ask anyone what they think of anything. This enormous egocentric fault is demonstrated by our ability to work against our own best interests. It is also very likely to lead to our extinction.
Nevertheless, it’s important that we understand the significance of the concept of Paradigms for three reasons: 1.) We can understand our opinions are formed by associations. 2.) We can examine the constructive associations of our opinions and measure their validity. 3.) We can reclaim identity through the formulation of our own, original opinions. (Authentic Self.)
Paradigm ignorance leaves me stuck with a paradigm I don’t even know I agree with, don’t know I can change and won’t know how it’s going to change me. Currently, almost everybody falls prey to this phenomenon, which is terrifying.
A paradigm should be a flexible entity, able to shift, grow, shrink, even disappear. If I was exercising my Assignee’s Prerogative I would say my “Prostitution Paradigm” is that they exist, I don’t have to bother with them, so I don’t. If I ever do, then I guess I will. This, in our current reality, is unnacceptable. Our paradigms must be known. How are we to know who you are if we can’t know what you think? Furthermore, due to the long rampant influx of generated opinion, our paradigms are the facts. Our opinions become the object.
Did IBM know there was going to be a computer revolution and home computers would become as common as toasters? Yes. They knew there a tiny movement afoot that claimed it was coming. Did they believe it was a threat or even possible? No. Apple did, in fact, they set out to make it happen and succeeded. (The beauty of this example is that nobody needed a home computer, Apple created the need by making it useful.) Seiko Japan did the same thing by buying the quartz watch movement that the Swiss didn’t see the value of. (Look at your watch, does it say “quartz?”) Bill Gates bought the DOS operating software that makes “Windows” possible for the price of a decent used car from a man who couldn’t envision its utility. The list goes on and on but those are instances that had a positive outcome for the people that saw the value of the paradigm shift.
(on faith)...Therefore we are referring to the logic of a human being, not just the pure philosophical essence of “logic” as it relates to any mathematical measurement. It’s an acceptance of logic as a personal decision of what it might mean, per paradigm. If that means that we have to make a leap of faith to be comfortable, so be it. I think we should be allowed that privilege as there are many deep running unknowns and we’ve been so wrong, so often before. After all, we have only our perceptions and our paradigms to go on, and there seems to be little to no actual logic being demonstrated by our commitment to them.
In other words, if an ant colony is getting too big it will sacrifice a part of itself for the good of the whole. That is not the nature of our conundrum for we, lest we forget, are the species that doesn’t always work in it’s better interests. We can, at the least, gain an ability to recognize when we’re being handed our hat. (Anti-Social Engineering...)
The difference between the old Enlightenment and the new is that we now are waking up from our subconscious servitude (social engineering) whereas during the Industrial Revolution we were waking up from our conscious servitude (serfdom.) Therefore, back then we learned that we were real individuals, that we had rights as humans and we were going to exercise them. Now we "wake up" to learn that we're being controlled with ideas, our rights aren't really "ours" and we are only allowed to "exercise" within a fairly rigid framework (reality.)
It isn’t about deservedness. “Rights” have been created. You’re judging things by standards that are going on three hundred years old, and they were based on standards that came from two thousand years ago. To say "Yeah, but it’s working so well," is to deserve a smack upside the head!
To contemplate the ancient concept of self with a being that is truly “not-self” without even the ability to conceptualise having rules put upon you is to perpetuate ignorance and demonstrate the absurdity of modern human existence. To even achieve the question requires a paradigm shift that instantly opens an endless stream of possibilities. Furthermore, paradigms once found, put the mind into the flow of enlightenment. It is this new modern enlightenment that will spread the understanding to the point of beginning to answer difficult questions, and undoubtedly pose new ones.
Why do we even have the desire to answer metaphysical postulations?
When exactly have humans demonstrated a long-term foothold of human rights?
Are we not acting contradictory to our apparent natural expectations?
If we are, what does that mean for our future?
How trustworthy is moral reasoning?
What is the domain of morality?
How am I to adjust accordingly if I can’t trust myself?
It’s not enough for the new modern Philosophes to acquaint you with yourself, they want to push into the unknowable and declare the fantastic.
It seems, therefore, that Nature is left leaning. If considering Ingroup, Authority and Purity is far less important that considering Fairness and Harm, Society is in a state of illogical, counterproductive denial.
If we can accept that Nature’s default is that of an open, flexible, dynamic system, then we should be able to accept that we are working against it. If we know that we have been socially engineered to be the way we are, then the forces that made us that way, want us that way. So why do the powers that be want us to work against nature? Why have we been programmed to fail? What else have they programmed us to do? These are the questions of the new enlightenment. They may seem scary but the fact that we can figure out to ask them gives me hope for the future.
Banal paradigms get associations firing every day. Crazy ideas you don’t even want to think about stop you from thinking forward. Appropriately, child abuse will undoubtably not become a popular social habit but what if the “crazy idea” was that of “The Earth isn’t flat,” or “This mold will cure your infection?”
Search For Articles By Brian
Brian's Gallery
No Photos Uploaded Yet!
Brian's Articles
This is a list of the latest articles and blog entries that Brian has written.
Counterproductive Western NepotismTransparent Aluminum? You know what that means...Contemplating EudaemoniaOn Morphogenetics.The Alliance to Rescue Civilization is REAL! Click here to read all of Brian's articles.
Recommended Books
Affiliates
Brian hasn't added any affiliates.
