Except for beavers eh. They see a creek, they imagine a home, they build a dam, then a home...

Come to think of it, lots of things change their surroundings to suit their needs, so...

...I guess the prevalent theory is that if we can't communicate with them (let's ignore that maybe they don't want to talk to us) then they can't communicate, and so also cannot have an imagination, or anything else that we don't assign them. (sigh) I find people's inherent arrogance a constant annoyance, continually operating on a jumped up assumption of superiority.

With respect to what happens to our consciousness after death; I adhere to the "energy cannot be destroyed, only transformed" theory. My consciousness will transform, or transmigrate, to an alternate location or energy level. Perhaps some fundamental memories, or memories of memories, will remain for me to build upon in the next go round. — Book273

The beavers' behavior comes in the genes, not the development of the brain. We can inherit skills like beavers, birds, and other animals and insects. This is called "Genetic memory" and it is not equal to human imagination. Maybe someday high schools will include knowledge of our brains and modes of thinking. I think that would be a huge benefit to individuals and society. It might improve our communication etiquette.

Respect, kindness, and consideration form the basis of good manners and good citizen-ship. Etiquette becomes the language of manners. Rules of etiquette cover behavior in talking, acting, living, and moving; in other words, every type of interaction and every situation.

Manners and Etiquette | Encyclopedia.com — encylopedia.com

But the purpose here is to draw attention to people who claim as a matter of right under freedom to do what they want; and to the harm they do, potentially to be sure, but too often as a matter of fact.
— tim wood
The problem is, I think, that you’re using two meanings of freedom. Is, in your opinion, the freedom to do what you want related to Kant’s idea? It seems to me this second freedom is so meaningless that there’s no way to use it in the context of your OP. — Brett

I love the debate the two of you are having.

If we want government services we must give up a degree of freedom. If we are going to rent instead of own our homes, we give up some freedom. If we want to use computers and the internet, we must give up a degree of freedom. Even if we want medical care we must give up a degree of freedom because we can be denied medical care and just about anything else if we are not cooperative.

Antony Nickles

suggested reading Heidegger's essay “The Question Concerning Technology”.

He tried to make amends with me by saying he was influenced by his mother and grandmother who experienced the war years. I wonder if he noticed their expectation of everyone accepting their authority instead of waiting to know the policy and what they must do to comply with it?

Well, I deeply apologize; I got an email that I thought was you replying to my post, but it was, instead, you replying to someone else's (a little new to this). I thought it was strange, but I made some poor assumptions, and I'm sorry that I offended you. If it helps, my mother lived through the war in England, and my grandmother the century before last. — Antony Nickles

No apology is necessary. I think we should recognize we are coming from different cultures and that this may lead to misunderstanding. We have lost sight of the fact that can be more than one truth because there most certainly are different situations, and what is true in your situation may not be true in mine. My very old logic book makes this clear, but that is no longer the logic we are working with, therefore, we have intense conflicts and even violence. Education for technology has to led us thinking something is either true or it is false, and now we are tearing each other apart and tending towards violence instead of reason.

"As I don't take this as a real desire to learn, I would only say that people who take Nietzsche as proposing "ideas" or social opinions, miss the point (which is to say everyone who has only read snippets of him, or think the "will to power" is a moral theory.) His mission was to show the historical and contextual quality missing from Kantian and deontological morals, along with the additional point I am making about our human condition (I think it important to say, though, that he did not believe we are always living beyond morals; only that they have a life and a limit)."

I am sure you did not mean to insult me, by saying I do not have a sincere desire to learn. I will point out, as my very old logic book did, that there are too many things for us to learn for anyone to know all of them. No human being can learn everything. Nietzsche does not come to the top of my list something I must study, however, that does not mean I have no desire to learn. How the masses understood being supermen has come down through history as a nightmare that is regrettable. Nietzsche's influence on society and the impact of rapidly advancing technology has backed humanity into a corner, and I think Greek and Roman philosophy might better prepare us to make the transition to the New Age, better than Nietzsche and Hegel. Not that what they said has no value, but it did not lead to the democracy of the US. It has however influenced the US ever since Eisenhower put the military-industrial complex in place. It is far better for humanity for us to strive to be the best humans we can be, instead of us being driven to be supermen. I will add, women being liberated to be as men is not as good as them being empowered as women. As civilians and police clash, we need the feminine force.

Again, my sincere apologies. As a token of peace, I offer that you might (if you can forgive him for basically being a Nazi) find Heidegger's essay “The Question Concerning Technology” interesting. He has a very dark view of the influence of technology, roughly, "enframing" (narrowing) our view of humanity and nature as only a means (echoing Marx).

Now that appears to be along my line of interest. It is insane that we fight for our liberty and give it up for technology! Not just technology like our computers and the web, but bureaucratic technology as well. The changed bureaucratic technology has shifted power to government and disenfranchised us. To use the Christian term, this is the beast on steroids!

Unfortunately, Christians tend to study their Bibles instead of reality. If they paid as much attention to reality we might all be working together much better than we are. Right now the US divide between science and religion is ripping the nation apart and we must get back to understanding why our Statue of Liberty holds a book and what science has to do with morals and liberty.

agree that "higher-order thinking skills" embetters us and our society, not only with knowledge of the criteria of our morals, but also our understanding of our obligation to ourselves (and others) to the ethical consideration of a moral moment. I would only say that the idea of "dependent" and "different" does not affect the human condition between (any) morals and when they leave us turned upon ourselves without further guidance. Our "culture" and our "circumstances" and even our "morals" can be different, but the responsibility (among other things) that we have is universal, as you say, "to reason through our choices and make decisions", though I wouldn't call this a "learned ability" so much as a human obligation (categorically, as it were), say, our moral duty.

I would only else say that we are not born with moral/cultural/language, we are born into them. They are there before us and apart from us. We do not (always) "learn" these (as rules, laws), as much as we pick them up in going along and becoming a part of society (an unconscious social contract by osmosis as it were); they are wrapped up in what our society cares about and the way things count in the world (this is Wittgenstein's Grammar and Criteria)--they are not "knowledge" and we don't "agree" on them. But, yes, we can renounce them, be ignorant of them, contradict them, but also, become conscious of them, reform them, extend them (into new contexts), etc. We do not need nor have a "higher standard". It is not a dichotomy between feeling and knowledge--we/the world already have ordinary criteria for morals, etc. The criteria may be forgotten, or unexamined, but that does not mean we don't live by them (are left to our "feelings") or can't explain them if asked (by Socrates, Austin, etc.). — Antony Nickles

I agree that "higher-order thinking skills" embetters us and our society, not only with knowledge of the criteria of our morals, but also our understanding of our obligation to ourselves (and others) to the ethical consideration of a moral moment. I would only say that the idea of "dependent" and "different" does not affect the human condition between (any) morals and when they leave us turned upon ourselves without further guidance. Our "culture" and our "circumstances" and even our "morals" can be different, but the responsibility (among other things) that we have is universal, as you say, "to reason through our choices and make decisions", though I wouldn't call this a "learned ability" so much as a human obligation (categorically, as it were), say, our moral duty.

I would only else say that we are not born with moral/cultural/language, we are born into them. They are there before us and apart from us. We do not (always) "learn" these (as rules, laws), as much as we pick them up in going along and becoming a part of society (an unconscious social contract by osmosis as it were); they are wrapped up in what our society cares about and the way things count in the world (this is Wittgenstein's Grammar and Criteria)--they are not "knowledge" and we don't "agree" on them. But, yes, we can renounce them, be ignorant of them, contradict them, but also, become conscious of them, reform them, extend them (into new contexts), etc. We do not need nor have a "higher standard". It is not a dichotomy between feeling and knowledge--we/the world already have ordinary criteria for morals, etc. The criteria may be forgotten, or unexamined, but that does not mean we don't live by them (are left to our "feelings") or can't explain them if asked (by Socrates, Austin, etc.). — Antony Nickles

That is some heavy thinking. A couple of points hit a nerve. Mostly at this moment, I can not stop thinking of all those good people who stormed the capital of the US. I must be careful how I speak of this because I could be so easily misunderstood. I want you to know your post resulted in me leaving the forum to write a letter to the editor and I thank you for the thoughts that lead to that.

The people who stormed the Capital were fighting for our freedom, and I think we should consider what this action has to do with being proud Americans and proud of how our nation began with a rebellion. In the South, some people still wave the rebel flag, and we need to consider what that means to them and how it ties into being a patriotic citizen. I want to point out that the concept of freedom and duty in the South has meant these people strongly support the defense of the US when we go to war. Dumping our rage on them now without understanding their sense of cause is our wrong. Not that they were right, but let us be realistic. We have manifested a military-industrial complex that is disenfranchising people and rapidly changing our social order, and this just leads to the craziness we have been experiencing. This is not all bad but our lack of awareness is terrible!

"Our "culture" and our "circumstances" and even our "morals" can be different, but the responsibility (among other things) that we have is universal, as you say, "to reason through our choices and make decisions", though I wouldn't call this a "learned ability" so much as a human obligation (categorically, as it were), say, our moral duty."

That is true but, we have been disenfranchised. It is as Eisenhower warned us to let happen because the 1958 change in education made this so. Since 1958 the young for been prepared for "group think" and reliance on experts. We have extended the military order from our federal bureaucracy to every institution, and disempowered citizens. Because the citizens have absolutely no knowledge of the change in bureaucratic order and what this has to do the change in education, and the social, economic and political ramifications of this, they are not conscious of what has gone so terribly wrong but they are aware of the powerlessness. This turns us against each other.

People don't read long post so I will stop here. At this moment in history, talking about being born into a moral/cultural/language, seems to miss the reality of the US today. Our morality, culture, language, is in complete turmoil right now and we are killing each other trying to save our democracy. I am hating myself for not being a better writer and not completing the book I started long ago. We are unaware of why things have gone crazy and I hate myself for my failure to do raise awareness.

Unless you knew people of my grandmother's generation, I don't really care what you think. It is like talking about being an overwhelmed nurse in a hospital that is overwhelmed without having the experience. I have no idea why some people appear to worship Nietzsche. Nietzsche and Hegel got Germany into big trouble. Not directly but as others adopted their ideas and Prussia organized the whole of Germany into an industrial/military complex, we saw the horrors man can create when they love power and not wisdom.

This is not quick judgment but a very passionate judgment. The US and its allies defeated Germany in two world wars and then the US adopted the German (Prussian) models of bureaucracy and education and replaced classic education presenting Greek and Roman philosophers with education for technology and German philosophers, Now the US is what it defended it is democracy against. It no longer understands rule by reason but has reactionary politics as Germany did and I think we are in for a walk through Hades.

Exactly want is my part in the US being a Military Industrial Complex with reactionary politics and a culture that has lost sight of morality? :chin:

Let us call this parameter two.

Therefore, applying the above two parameters, I postulate the following:

Mark realizes that, due to pollution, over harvesting, habitat destruction, over population, and the lack of meaningful change to rectify these problems, the earth will no longer be able to sustain life, human or otherwise, within the next three hundred years. Mark, being an exceedingly talented geneticist, has the ability to create a virus which will eliminate 75% of the human population over the next hundred years. There is no suffering to speak of, simply a massive reduction in the ability to reproduce and the resulting population decline. This action will result in the betterment of future generations as well as restoring global balance and harmony.

Duty suggests that Mark release his virus, despite his personal feelings on the issue. He is aware of both outcomes, elimination of everyone (no action on his part) or elimination of 75% of humanity (action on his part). Good will (ensuring that life goes on) informs Mark's Duty to Act, which is supported by reason (Continuation of life over the cessation of life), and therefore, the act that Ought to be done.

And there is a rationalized justification for an act that most would consider genocidal. Lovely frame work. Thanks Kant. — Book273

Duty and honor go hand in hand. You are smart but what you wrote lacks wisdom. Your story associates doing the smart thing with killing which most certainly would not be considered honorable and this kind of thinking is exactly what is wrong in the US today. :rage: Education for a technological society with unknown values has destroyed the democracy we once had when we had education for good moral judgment.

Google definition of "freedom": the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants. Freedom is precisely how it's been defined but the actual situation on the ground may vary. Read the fine print :joke:

On a more serious note, one has to draw a distinction between what we mean by freedom and to what degree we possess it. These two are entirely different things. One - the meaning of freedom - represents our conception, expectation, and perhaps even our hope and the other - the freedom we possess - is reality's constraining, modifying, limiting effect on us.

Of course you might say that the facts as they stand matter - we have to mind the consequences of how we act, speak, and think - and that tells an entirely different story of human "freedom" than that supposed in the definition of freedom. True but notice a simple fact. Would you call this situation, having to walk on eggshells as it were, always mindful of the consequences of our acts, speech, and thoughts, freedom? No, right? I rest my case. — TheMadFool

It certainly is not my fault if the masses are ignorant of reality and what reasoning has to do with knowing universal law and the importance of living by the laws of nature. :grin:

I am having a huge problem with the limited education we have had and the changed meanings of words and spell-check is especially horrifying. I am horrified by how technology has changed our understanding of words and appears to be restricting our awareness of concepts. You might want to reconsider what being technologically correct is doing to our understanding of life.

Your distinction between freedom and the freedom we possess is interesting, but when I open the present of your thought, the box is empty. It is a word game without substance because if we do not understand cause and effect and the limits of our freedom, things can go very wrong, so I don't think separating cause and effect thinking from our understanding of freedom is a good idea. Yes, I do say "the facts as they stand matter". :kiss:

" that tells an entirely different story of human "freedom" than that supposed in the definition of freedom."
:kiss: Please, consider what I said about technological correctness. I think education, as focused on technology as the education we have had, is not education for science, and that it is deadly. We have a culture change and I wish the discussion of that could expand. We are about to experience the results of that culture change resulting from the 1958 change in education and I don't think we are going to like it. Our understanding of freedom and duty is nothing as it once was! We have fragments of that past in old books that we can not find in the books written by a technologically correct society. My grandmother's generation is long dead and loosing them is a terrible loss to us! Her father sold the family's beautiful home on the lake, and his business and he became a laborer and he paid off all the investors in the business he had until his business partner embezzled the companies money. In their day, honor was more important than money. This was clearly obvious in my grandmother's character and I have seen it in others that were of her generation. Being with these people was completely different than what we experience today. Today's understanding of freedom has nothing to do with honor and that is a terrible thing!

A very important discussion currently, so thank you for the post. What sparked my curiosity was the idea of duty and whether there is any compulsion. First, there is the distinction between the rational and emotional, or (Hume's) moral sense/innate moral judgment. I would argue that we can bypass this and still have a personal moral decision bound to reasonable action. — Antony Nickles

This would be highly dependent on our culture, associations, and the books we read. Social animals have what some call a pre-morality. They are wired for group behavior. They have different learning capabilities, with chimps having more ability to learn than baboons, however, animals can transmit culture to each other. They do not have the language essential to the thinking humans do, and we are not born with this language, nor are we born knowing the concepts essential to moral thinking and we aren't born knowing the high order thinking skills. Any "personal moral decision bound to reasonable action" is dependant on what we learn and because our circumstances are different, our sense of morality can be different.

This is where the higher-order thinking skills come in. That is the learned ability to reason through our choices and make decisions. The US focused on teaching these skills, and used the Conceptual Method, and had education for good moral judgment until the 1958 National Defense Education Act. Now the US has the reactionary politics Germany had. The US replaced its education with the German model. The best way to learn history is to experience and the next few days, months, year- will be very interesting. :grin: Morality based on how we feel instead of how we think, leads to power struggles not a high standard of morality.

We are the only animal that can imagine things differently than they are and then manifest the reality we imagine. That is pretty special and we need to be more responsible than a large percentage of US citizens are being. We need to dump education for a technological society with unknown values and get back to transmitting a culture that brings out the best in human beings.

Education for technology has brought the worst in us. It is as Zeus feared. With the technology of fire, we have gained all other technologies and turned our backs on the gods. We are now technologically smart but unwise. Our intelligence is not of value without wisdom.

Thanks but he took way too long to get to the bottom line. Did he ever mention what education has to do with this and what the 1958 National Defense Education Act has to do with the US ending the transmission of its culture? That is, ending education for good moral judgment and leaving moral training to the church. We now live with a Christian mythology and do not know our history from Athens to the United States. "The Founding Myth- Why Christian Nationalism Is Un-American" by Andrew L. Seidel.

Thank you for spreading the information that is sadly lacking in the US. If we do not correct the education wrong, very soon, our democracy will be forgotten because our young have no idea of what it once was to be a citizen in the United States to have liberty without authority over us and without constant surveillance. Every school should have a Statue of Liberty and every student should understand why she holds and torch and a book.

We all need to know, only highly moral people can have liberty, for the same reason we keep poorly trained dogs on a leash in the city. We ended education for good moral thinking and now we are on a leash and under surveillance and this could be the end of being an international leader.

I am not sure Kant would say that there even are situations where you cannot do your duty. If you cannot do something, it cannot really be considered your duty. What makes your actions free is then choosing your duty. — Echarmion

I apologize for being so gross, but what comes to mind is if you can not get your zipper down you can not pee. But nature isn't so reasonable and sometimes we pee before we are ready. That does not change the fact that is preferable to wait until the zipper is down and our body parts are correctly positioned. No matter what, our duty is to do our best to control what happens even though it is possible something may go wrong.

What do you mean by "raw capacity". You speak as if freedom has a meaning other than being able to do whatever we want. Pray tell, what is this other meaning? — TheMadFool

Laugh, believing we are free to do anything we want seems to lack awareness of consequences. Because there are consequences resulting from what we do, we are not exactly free. Sooner or later the wrongs will come back to bite us.

:heart: I love your OP. Absolutely correct and when that is not understood as a truth and it is not passed on by the culture, there can not be liberty.

Unfortunately, the US has forgotten what morals have to do with liberty and it is becoming a paranoid police state. When I became frustrated trying to do a money transfer at Walmart, I was told by the women at the service counter and someone supposed to be the manager that they have been trained to watch out for fraud. Well good for them. Better training in customer service would make the store more active. But it is not just Walmart, how about when we make a business call and get the message the phone call may be recorded to assure quality assurance purposes. How sad the employers do not trust their employees and think they must be kept under surveillance. Not even dentists and doctors are treated respectfully, but they too are expected to follow orders from the office manager and policy just like uneducated laborers.

Liberal education as we had in the past, beginning with the first grade, would correct this problem because it would create a culture that embraced what you said in the OP. The more everything is kept in a file, and records are checked, and people are kept under surveillance, the worse things get and this is what we defended our democracies against in two world wars. Today China is a model of government control of people, but the US is not far behind.

Hi, has anyone made progress on a New Year's resolution?

I have organized most of my apartment, and now areas that I thought were okay now look like they need improvement. I tried to hire a professional but my friend doesn't want to share her and won't give me her phone number. That is so mean. :lol: She showed me her closest that the professional organized and they are beautiful! Oh well, life is hard. :grimace: I guess I will just have to keep working on my apartment by myself. Actually it is kind of nice to look at what I have achieved and know that I did that myself. :grin:

It helps that a couple of you have shared the need to reorganize. It is kind of like we are doing this together and that makes it more phone. :heart: :flower:

PS with your help I have called the mortuary to arrange for my cremation. It is not the most pleasant thing I have done, and I will be glad when this New Year resolution is done and I don't have to think about it anymore.

The value of humans is something I think most of us wonder about and I like the way you handle the subject. I think a favor being pragmatic and Greek philosophy. And the way you worded your concern I am stuck with thinking we are less valuable because of imagining a different reality that is superior to this one. I know Plato did that and that has also bothered me. Just for the fun of it, let us accept our human reality is the best it is going to get. There may be more. There could live after death or we could have more than one life. but for now, on mother earth, it works for me to appreciate what we have and to strive to be the best human I can be.

But boy, yesterday I sure did blow it! I lost all my composure in a Walmart and I hope I can avoid that store in the future because the customer service is so bad! It was easier to be a pleasant human being in the past when there was an effort to please the customer. Wasn't it Aristotle who talked about the art of being angry with the right person, in the right way, at the right time? Yeah, I like being practical. It is better than trying to be a saint. And there should be a philosophical explanation for avoiding unpleasant experiences that bring out the worst in us. :lol:

The book A Beginner's Guide to Constructing the Universe explains sacred math. The numbers 1 thru 10 having powers or forces that we can see in nature. This way if thinking is different from our thinking and more like The Mayan Factor consciousness of amination. :lol: I laugh because I am sooo frustrated with trying to find the best terms to use and the definitions of words have changed so much the words are useless in conveying the meaning I am wanting to convey. Amination comes up as moving pictures not the spirits of the tree and river.

Language has so much to do with our understanding. Rome could not accept the trinity of God because it did not have a word for that concept and as a result Christians who thought God was a trinity father/son/holy ghost, and those who thought Jesus is the son of God, were killing each other! The Greeks had no problem with a god being a trinity and appearing in human form. Eventual Rome adopted the new terminology and they were able to get past the fighting.

This directly relates to this discussion. How do we understand the life force? Do we see what numbers have to do with knowledge of life forces? What do we know of energy and quantum physics?

There's the fact that two separated particles can interact instantaneously, a phenomenon called quantum entanglement. ... And there's another phenomenon called quantum superposition. This principle of quantum mechanics suggests that particles can exist in two separate locations at once.Dec 28, 2015

The Same Atoms Exist in Two Places Nearly 2 Feet Apart ... — JAY BENNETT

I :heart: Bitter Crank's post but maybe he would not be so sure there is no life after death if he thought all living matter has a spirit or if he saw reality as quantum physics explains it. Our language limits our notion of what we can believe is possible and if we do not have knowledge of math as more than numbers, we are blind to so much.

That is indeed one of the popular beliefs but it is not supported by my experience. :lol: :heart:

I like the Hindu notion of reincarnation better and most of my life has been preparing for the next one. Now maybe my spirit ends here, but it was been fun preparing for the next life.

In your post you speak of life being fast because it is in 3D. I would just suggest that life has 4, 5 and perhaps many more. I am inclined to think that if consciousness exists beyond death, may be in a different dimension to the one we are accustomed to in daily life. — Jack Cummins

Jack, I really do not know what I am talking about. We need someone who understands math theories.
but I think.....Three dimensions are required for the manifestation of matter. We process our concerns faster in a three-dimensional reality because there are boundaries. Without boundaries there is timelessness. That is there is no space-time. You can not run without the resistance of the ground. You can not go forward or backward, you just are.

Hum, did Descartes learn of Hinduism? I think a few of the past philosophers did. Our existence ending when the dreamer awakes is Hindu. Then the dreamer goes back to sleep what we know as life begins all over again.

The question is what is the truest state of being 'awake'? — Jack Cummins

I don't think there is such a thing but I am not sure of anything. I think we have different awarenesses but one would not be truer than another? And the experience we think we are having may not be true at all. Oh dear, how do we know the experience we are having is true? We may think we are loved and discover we are not loved, or think we are hated and we are not hated. The whole racist thing is people thinking something is true and there may be little truth to what one thinks. A con person is good at making us believe something that is not true or our inability to trust others could be internal. How do we know? When we are asleep we think the dream is true and when cross over who knows what that is like?

I have read what makes life on earth different is we can process the things we think about faster in 3-dimensional reality.

It seems to me that the question of an afterlife is a curious one because, on the one hand, if I do continue to live after I die, then by definition I will know it, whereas, on the other hand, if I do not continue to live after I die, then by definition I will not know it. So, essentially, I can only know the former, but not the latter, state-of-affairs, after I die. — charles ferraro

Someone who communicates with those who have crossed over said they do not know they are dead. When we are dreaming we do not know we are asleep. It is really great when we have a bad dream and wake up realizing it was only a dream.

I have a friend who lives his life as he does because of a couple of times of dying. He died in medical settings and the medical team was able to get his heart pumping again, not uncommon today. He is convinced of the importance of living a good life because our experience after death depends on where our head is at when we die. Death being sort of like being stuck in time. His stories of death are like others. There is at least one book on this subject.

There were two TV shows done by two different men who claim they communicate with the dead. I think they are very convincing that do in fact communicate with the dead, and that death is not the end. Here is a Youtube of John Edwards who communicates with the dead, and in this video about 1/3 through he speaks of the pandemic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e45ZGABCa0k

Journalling is a great practice. I find the thinking process very different when writing. When I was going through a hard time, I wrote a lot and it was the most helpful thing I could have done.

☆Happy 2021☆

I'm trying to get my place as empty as possible.
— Caldwell
Oh yeah, same here. :sweat: — 180 Proof

Alright, alright, I will organize at least one area of my apartment today. I have to admit it is pleasant when things are organized. I might begin with filling a box of stuff I can get rid of. You know all those CD's I never listen to, the catalogs I keep, thinking I will order something, stuff for children that they have outgrown.

:lol: I think only a philosophical person would consider all the different ways to look at something. I mean this as a compliment.

When I do workshops for healthy living, we have people make action plans. An action plan has to state what a person will do, when (what days and time of day), and how much (15 minutes, or 15 reps, or 15 laps, or 15 pounds)? We strongly suggest doing the planned activity no more than 3 days a week. So if you were to tidy your room, which days would do that and what time of the day? How much time would you spend on it? If you made a more precise plan it could become a habit. Such as making the bed when we first get up or brushing our teeth can be habits.

But honestly, I have never developed up the habit of being well organized, but I have made progress and that makes life so much easier. However, the piles of books I use for reference scream I might do better if I set a day for putting them away. My desk area gets totally out of control as I starting stacking books on top of books until can't find a book because I have such a mess. :roll:

Life is full of coincidences that can make us wonder.

I believe I have entered spaces and felt an energy. This is most likely for me if the space was used for praying or seances or other spiritual things are done.

Looking for information I found this..

Birds, it turns out, are emissaries of the dead. According to Engler, "They will do something unusual to get your attention." — Lizzy Acker

A few years ago when a friend died, a bird did not move when I walked past. That concerned me so I bent down to pick up the bird. I would have taken it to a vet if it had a problem. Finally, almost touched the bird before flew away. I thought that was odd and went on my way. I went into my apartment building and got on the elevator. The door closed and the lights flashed and the elevator would not move. I was afraid of being trapped in the elevator and just before I tried to get out, everything returned to normal. In many years of using that elevator that never happened before or since.

Another time that stands out for me is a friend lost a husband, and the words red and bucket came to my mind. At the same time, I thought I had received a message for her but I couldn't believe that until she confirmed the words red and bucket have meaning. I was compelled to message her those words and she asked me why I did that. I told her I didn't know why I was compelled to write those words and was hoping she would tell the meaning. As it turned out there was a red bucket used as a wastebasket in her husband's bedroom.

Another time when a woman who had just lost her children in a house fire got in my car, and I was compelled to say something that came from a Ninja Turtle show, and she told me her son said that often.

I could go on. It seems like I have gotten messages from the other side but I could be wrong? However, a message from my dead mother warning me of a difficult time that would come out okay, proved extremely helpful to me.

And on this subject, there are people who can hold something that belongs to another person and come to know things about this person. I have to add that, because you mentioned objects can hold energy that is a form of information.

If we live without being alienated form each other, we start to see the universality of being alive and of being human in relation to other forms of life much more clearly than a person can today in a big house surrounded by material objects that are nonliving. — Garth

the animating force has to be present for life — Jack Cummins

It is hard to imagine my computer, books, desk, chair, etc. as animated. Effectively we are living in a dead world when we are separate from nature. I have a very uneasy feeling about this and wonder about the psychological and social impact.
.

I want to provide a better explanation of the change in bureaucratic order that has been adopted by all institutions including schools and hospitals and others. This change in bureaucratic order profoundly changed the focus of an education.

Here is why our reality today is nothing like the time of our forefathers. I am copying from a college text Public Administration and Public Affairs by Nicholas Henry. In reading this one might give some thought to Eisenhower's warning to not be too reliant on the experts. We might also consider if the arguing between the left and right makes sense when the common issue is a lack of personal control.

We have been suggesting in the preceding paragraphs that bureaucracy grows in large part because technology requires expertise, and bureaucrats are the political actors who have been saddled with the responsibility of interpreting and translating complex technology and social problems into policy. By adopting this explanation of the reison d' etre of the bureaucratic phenomenon as our primary thesis, we have posited a fundamental tension between bureaucracy and democracy. On the one hand are the bureaucrats-as-experts, the specialists with knowledge about particular professions and technics. On the other hand are "the people", those who represent what are considered human values. To carry Thithis dichotomy even further, we have the "computers"- the "technocrats" - squaring off against "humanity". This dichotomization, which obviously is grossly overdrawn, is nonetheless of the root tension between "the bureaucrats" and "the people". — Nicholas Henry

With regard to the influence of education here, that is why I think that it is important to have public educators going out and contesting falsehoods in the public discourse, making sure there is an argument about them and they don't just go unchallenged, even as dangerously close to authoritarianism as that might veer, because freethought is by its very anti-authoritarian nature paradoxically vulnerable to small pockets of epistemic authority arising out of the power vacuum, and if that instability goes completely unchecked, it can easily threaten to destroy the freethinking discourse entirely and collapse it into a new, epistemically authoritarian regime; a religion in effect, even if not in name.

In the absence of good education of the general populace, all manner of little "cults", for lack of a better word, easily spring up. By that I mean small groups of kooks and cranks and quacks each with their own strange dogmas, their own quirky views on what they find to be profound hidden truths that they think everyone else is either just too stupid to wise up to, or else are being actively suppressed by those who want to hide those truths from the public.

Like all these conspiracy theorists.

Meanwhile, those with greater knowledge see those supposed truths for the falsehoods that they are, and can show them to be such, if only the others could be engaged in a legitimately rational discourse. But instead, these groups use irrational means of persuasion to to ensnare others who do not know better into their little cults; and left unchecked, these can easily become actual full-blown religions, their quirky little forms of ignorance becoming widespread, socially-acceptable ignorance, that can appropriate the veneer of epistemic authority and force their ignorance on others under the guise of knowledge.

Checking the spread of such ignorance by challenging it in the public discourse is the role of the public educator. The need for that role would be lessened if more people would actively seek out education, but not everyone will seek out their own education and so some people will continue to spread ignorance – and even those who do seek out their own education may still accidentally spread ignorance – and in that event, there need to be public educators to stand against that.

But that then veers awfully close to proposing effectively another "religion" to counter the growth of others.

I think there is perhaps an irresolvable paradox here, in that a public discourse abhors a power vacuum and so the only way to keep religions, institutions claiming epistemic authority, at bay, is in effect to have one strong enough to do so already in place. But I think there is still hope for freedom of thought, in that not all religions are equally authoritarian: even within religions as more normally and narrowly characterized, some have their dogma handed down through strict decisions and hierarchies, while others more democratically decide what they as a community believe. I think that the best that we can hope for, something that we have perhaps come remarkably close to realizing in the educational systems of some contemporary societies, is a "religion", or rather an academic system, that enshrines the principles of freethought, and is structured in a way consistent with those principles.

What semblance of that we may have once had in America sure seems to be failing nowadays, at least. — Pfhorrest

I can not praise what you said enough, but I add very valuable information to what you said.

We adopted the Prussian military-bureaucratic order because it is so much more efficient than the bureaucratic order we had and the public services we have today would not be possible without this change. Although what we call the German model is very powerful and efficient, there is a problem with it. Sara H. Fahey quoted the poet and seer India to raise awareness of the problem at the 1917 National Education Association Conference.

"Whatever their efficiency, such great organizations are so impersonal that they bear down on the individual lives of the people like a hydraulic press whose action is completely impersonal and therefore completely effective in crushing out individual power and power."

You can conclude from that in 1917 the US government was not organize

Apart from formal education I would say that families are the beginning of the process of learning to think, rather than just being told what to think. My parents used to talk to me a lot and encourage me to think freely. When I was at school I was aware that had discussed so much that others had not been encouraged to think about.It is surprising that my parents never thought through their religious beliefs fully, as I have done, and chose to cling on to their original beliefs. — Jack Cummins

We can not rely on parents to teach children how to think because of the fast thinking and slow thinking factor. Slow thinking requires learned thinking skills. We can pick up those skills from our parents if our parents have them, the chances a good that the parents do not have those skills, and go through reacting instead of thinking. That is why it is important for public education to teach the thinking skills and this would be learning math and how to diagram a sentence. I regret I did not understand this when I was young because it is harder to learn such things in our later years. Our brains don't accumulate new information as well. On the other hand, we are more apt to grasp the meaning and see the bigger picture in our later years. Our heads are so full we can easily have great awareness of meanings as thoughts come together, but learning math or a foreign language is very challenging.

Many of us grow up right-brain thinkers and have undeveloped left-brain skills.
I want to add a question, neglecting right brain activity with too much focus on left-brain activity might be harmful to humans?

At the same time, I also understand that this is a complicated discussion because we've already developed systems that are biased/polarised in one way or another and galvanised them with values and significance which we are compelled to uphold (fight for). It's why we must consider the positives of attachments even when, in essence, by definition, it is the antithesis to the meaning of freedom. — BrianW

Your comment makes me think of things someone I love gave me versus something I bought for myself. If it came from someone I love, and it is damaged, broken, or stolen that is far more disturbing to me than if I bought that thing for myself. The value of the thing is the value of my relationship, and if it came from my dead mother or father, it has greater value because she will be giving me any more things.

Then there are the old books I continually refer to. Loosing some of them would a tragedy to me, but loosing books that can be replaced is just an annoyance. My life is really built around those old books and spreading that past, they are part of identity unlike the books that can be replaced. I think there is a bit of crazy in there?

Jack Cummins
696 — Jack Cummins

About the paradox of wanting to be alone and wanting to be with others. I think it would be much harder for me to be in a situation like yours, than getting through this pandemic alone because I must, absolutely must, have that alone time to be on the forum. If I do live with others, it is tolerable if I am the head of the house, and intolerable if I am not. I have slept in places for the homeless and 3 days is my limit. By the 3rd day, I have to get away because the feeling to get away is so strong! But if it is my home, I can share it with many people as long as I have private space. I can cook and clean for everyone if it is my home that I am sharing. :roll: Now that is crazy. There is something about the position I am in, concerning the relationship to others, that is going on here?


.

That is a good question, although it is as if we are living in space capsules during this year of social isolation, with need or unmet needs. My imagined fantasy of a space capsule with all my needs met would be the chance for freedom to pursue the writing and artistic life. But I would probably still want to meet others. Nevertheless, I would prefer the space bubble to a really stressful social situation.
2 minutes ago
Reply
Options — Jack Cummins

I would have no desire to live with no chance of experiencing life on this planet and the humanity that goes with it and you are making me ponder this as I have not done before. As I think on it, I want to run without caution into life and experience life as it is as totally and completely as I can. But also before this moment and my contrary thinking, I would chose isolation to think and write. Relating the space capsule to how we are living now, makes me so aware of how much I desire to mingle with people. I love my isolation to think and write, but it has no meaning without other people and life itself. I just have no motivation without life and people stimulating me to think and do.

The focus of education needs to be how to think, not what to think.

The some of the Greek philosophers were fanatical about education being how we experience life and about education for practical use being fine of slaves and people who must work for a living, but totally unfit for the upper class and rulers.

Even if we follow the path of self realisation and self-analysis, I think that attachments are still likely to play a large part. I do believe that we can work on particular areas which we can work on, but not all the areas at once. Meditation has an a central role but do not necessarily have to aim to become sages. Of course, if becoming one occurs in the process it may be the best possibility, but if we were to seek that goal it might become a hollow attachment ideal in itself. — Jack Cummins

Suppose we lived in space capsule where all our needs to sustain our body were met. How long would a person want to live in that situation knowing it would never change? Do we really want life without attachments?

I am glad if you are able to clarify your thoughts through discussions on threads because that should be the purpose of philosophy. It may involve hard questions. Attachment is a monster and I am sure that there are even some dragons to come yet. — Jack Cummins

The Bible speaks of the beast and we can turn to Roman history and US history to understand that beast as reliance on military might to acquire essential economic resources and markets. The economy depends on the military and the military consumes more and more of the economy, forcing everyone to labor for the beast.

Rather than think in terms of this or that, we might want to think of terms of this and that. We are not logic and emotion but logic and emotion are two parts of the same thing. Life consumes and that is the reality of the beast. The beast is just much large when it is the size of Rome or the US or China. When we kill an animal it is natural to feel bad about killing, so primitive man gave thanks to the animal for giving its life so the hunter and the village may live. It is all yin and yang, a give and take, it is life.

The extreme American neofascist corporate oligarchic movement — hypericin

What if you're on the Left and see the above as a conspiracy that is already realized and ongoing. — deletedusercb

Well, knowing the history of Germany would help immensely, but I have already set myself up to be the target of emotional people, and I don't think I should I go any further before I know if people are going to throw stones or think about what I am saying and ask questions. Just consider this, the Bush family was very proud of leading the New World Order and they were well connected with Germany at the time of WWII. Eisenhower's term for that is Military Industrial Complex and Prussia gave us the model for this. The US adopted the German model of bureaucracy that shifts power to centralized government and the US adopted the German model of education that compliments the bureaucratic order.

It is probably true that declining quality of education increased the vulnerability of the population to conspiracies. A true conspiracy theory can only be believed when there are massive gaps in the believer's model of the world. I would contend that the balkanization of the media, taken to the extreme on social media, is a far more salient factor. — hypericin

Do you remember when journalism was consider essential to defending our democracy? Our local newspaper was named Register Guard and journalist took pride in keeping us well informed and in avoiding bias. Education promoted this understanding of journalism and democracy before our consumer economy took over and the only value we share is the value of money. That is, since Thomas Jefferson education was about making liberty possible and manifesting a strong and united republic based on democratic principles. That ended in 1958 with the National Defense Education Act and specialization for a high tech society with unknown values.

I believe Eisenhower was a man of integrity but he had a military education, not a liberal education and there were some things he just didn't understand, like what liberal education has to do with being independent thinkers and manifesting a culture for democracy that is cooperative and progressive because it comes out of enlightenment thinking. He asked congress for the education act and it had a time limit of 4 years! Some may say changing the purpose of education is just conspiracy theory, but the National Defense Education Act changes in education did not end in 4 years, but instead the federal government has taken more and more control of public education.

At the same time, Eisenhower, changed the relationship with government and research, and he the relationship of government and the media. This opened the door for Reagan's administration to use government funded research to uncover welfare fraud and scapegoat the poor for our bad economy when the oil embargo had us in a serious recession. Using the media to scapegoat the poor as Germany scapegoated the Jews, Reagan was able to slash domestic spending and pour money into military spending, and companies like Cheney's Halliburton were born to exploit the government for personal wealth.

What is the best way to cover this up? Declare such talk is conspiracy theory and add to it totally ridiculous and unfounded conspiracy statements. And people educated to depend on authority since 1958, and prepared for "group-think" rather than independent thinking, will follow the most popular belief and will not both to look for facts. We don't even know where to begin looking for facts and the University of Oregon removed the books of governments from the shelves, so we can not open a book and find these facts. The U of O had a space problem and turned to technology to resolve it microfilming the books and not realizing the importance of being able to read books not knowing what is in them.

Now I don't know if what I said is right or left. I just know what I discovered in a college library and the consequence of what Eisenhower did and for 20 years people respond to this information emotionally, without checking facts.

The role of education was to make our democratic republic strong and united and to manifest the hopes of the Enlightenment of improving life on earth. Without that education, it all falls apart, and the good intentions of those who believe a military-industrial complex and leaving moral training to the church is best, have destroyed the education and culture we did have. Without that education, we do not have the culture and we are not united and we are not strong. Is that a truthful statement or conspiracy theory?

So, do you think that the idea of renunciation is not about following a set pathway, but more of a mindset, in which one feels free from the binding of the concerns of day to day existence?
3 minutes ago
Reply
Options — Jack Cummins

I don't know what I think until I participate in one of your threads. This time I mentioned being happy now that I am past my years as wife and mother and having to work for a living. Had I never been a mother and never held a job, would my life have been more joyful? I think that is highly possible. My marriage was terrible and a lot of heartache has come out of that. I am not sure I would repeat it.

There are wonderful benefits to working, but I found low-income employment miserable because with autocratic industry the conditions of jobs can be intolerable! My life could have had been better had I been better prepared and made better decisions. That is not equal to renunciation. It is knowing what we want and how to get it. I knew what I wanted but not how to get it and made bad choices, the failures of my marriage are now impacting my great-grandchildren and I have deep regrets. To be happy I avoid thinking about my family and engaging with most of them. I guess I would do it all over again, but I would do it differently. Today women have more opportunities, and I hope we work through some human problems and that everyone will do better.