“We will not solve an existential crisis by simply taking certain materials out of our lives. We have to become re-connected to our better selves and no longer abide to serve a system that upholds tyranny.
Tyranny does not require advance technology to exist.” This is what I’ve been trying to tell people; albeit, in a far less eloquent way. Most people don’t want to hear it -- and these are people who are (for the most part) logical, right-thinking people. They insist that we must ditch ALL tech to escape the clutches of these evildoers.
Thank you for discussing these complex but important topics. There are many valid points of view. You may want to take a look at this and consider participating as an equal partner. Thanks again.
Brilliantly insightful and challenging ! The existential crisis is an individual crisis involving personal choice, a choice granted by our Creator as part of a gift of life with its inherent freedom...but not without responsibility to honor and care for that gift. " I am now giving you the choice between life and death, between God's blessing and God's curse, and I call heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Choose life." (Deuteronomy 30:19)
Cynthia, This is a most informative and thorough treatment of a topic which interests me greatly. It also ties in very well with a project I’m working on at present, so timely as well. I’ll be in touch with you soon, as I’d like to have you as a guest on my TNT RADIO program The No Fly Zone in due course. If you’re up for it. Best wishes, GM
Hi Greg, glad to hear it and yes let me know if this subject can be fit into your TNT radio program. Looking forward to future discussion. Best, Cynthia
Cynthia, thank you so much for publishing such a profound and mind's eye opening thesis. It has helped me understand that there are no boundaries to the expansion and development of our minds and spirits.
A couple of comments: The much esteemed theory of 'the selfish gene' comes crumbling to the ground when it faces the fact that some people are simply not selfish. Some people, when playing games, out of kindness, compassion or a desire to teach selflessness, help the opponent win the game.
To me the 'big bang theory' and 'black holes' provided a valuable service: they informed me of the utter puerility of conventional cosmology. Because of peoples' fascination with explosions, Hollywood movies are full of them and that fascination or captivation has spilled over into cosmological theories. The biggest explosions that humans have witnessed are nuclear explosions so the current theory is that our own Sun is a planet of millions of nuclear explosions.
As you mentioned, the narrative control has been going on for a very long time: From medicine men or shamans creating a narrative to instill fear in the minds of those whom they wished to control, right up to the almost total world control of the fake pandemic and climate change.
Is the human race destined to be divided into those who know and those who do not want to know? I would love to see greed evaporate and humanity enter a true age of light.
Terrific description of how bizarre their intellect is becoming.
Comes across as a mental aberration about the abstract only.
Will they hack into the unknown as I’ve never heard humanity defined by these people and if humanity is all about adaption how could they possibly hack
The so-called Intelligenceia have always have been some of the most dangerous people on this planet when ever they get control or their ideas are implemented, from Russell, Sanger, Wells, Brzezinski, Shaw, Huxley, Attali, Harari, Gates, Schwab, et al. Great piece Cynthia!
Cynthia, thank you for sharing your outstanding presentation with us. I'm sure it was very well received in Basel! In getting in touch with our deeper humanity--which is, as you point out, is sacred, beautiful and good--I have found it helpful to look at some indigenous cultures that may not have had big technological advancements, but nonetheless demonstrated purpose and fidelity to humanity and the well-being of the community that are more advanced than many modern societies. Are you familiar with Malidoma Patrice Somé's book "The Healing Wisdom of Africa: Finding Live Purpose through Nature, Ritual and Community", about the pre-colonial period Dagara people in what is now Burkina Faso? Much for us to learn from here!
Excellent, you might also think of mentioning that AN Whitehead, after writing Principia Mathematica, went on to develop a philosophy of organism which has given rise to process theology and radical new inspirations in the realm of cosmology and epistemology
There was a legal philosopher and professor, Walter Berns, who tried to tackle many of these types of difficult issues in the application of the law during his career. In this piece written in 1963 below he takes on the role of behavioral science ("Nudge") and the law, behaviorism being a field that applies many of the same issues your piece describes. He's reviewing a book by another legal scholar who was advocating for a purely behavioral science-based system of law and jurisprudence. I think you'll appreciate it.
Law and Behavioral Science by Walter Berns
Law and Contemporary Problems (Duke Law School), Winter, 1963
(the first 14 pages - p186-198 - are an exercise in judicial game theory, the legal and philosophical reasoning struggle with applying behavioral science as a legal governing system is in the remaining 14 pages - p199-212)
"Doubtless there have been "phenomenal technical and scientific" advances during the past century, as Beutel says, and that there is a "social lag"; and perhaps it is true that the "general science and art of lawmaking" has not developed "since the days of the Roman Empire"; but this is no reason for law to imitate physics or engineering. On the contrary, a grasp of the fundamental problems might reveal that there is an irresolvable tension between science, in its old or its new sense, and politics, and that any attempt to resolve the tension is likely to have terrible consequences in the political world; that the political world must be ruled not by science but by prudence. This requires at a minimum the recognition that there will always be a "gap" between theory and practice, and that the recalcitrant or intractable political problems cannot be wholly resolved - at least, not by a government of free men. True, Socrates said that "cities will never have rest from their evils no, nor the human race ... until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes of this world have the spirit and power of philosophy"; but Socrates, who failed even in his attempt to rule his wife, Xanthippe, knew and taught that it is extremely unlikely that the conditions required for the rule of the wise will ever be met. As Leo Strauss has said:
- "What is more likely to happen is that an unwise man, appealing to the natural right of wisdom [to rule] and catering to the lowest desires of the many, will persuade the multitude of his right: the prospects for tyranny are brighter than those for rule of the wise. This being the case, the natural right of the wise must be questioned, and the indispensable requirement for wisdom must be qualified by the requirement for consent. The political problem consists in reconciling the requirement for wisdom with the requirement for consent."
Legal scholars, and even practicing lawyers, know these exceedingly important things; they therefore have more to teach to the new scientists than the new scientists have to teach them."
FF Note: legal scholars and practicing scholars *before* they were taught intolerance and censorship is desirous constitutional.
Berns also wrote about pseudosciences, eugenics, touching on applied behavioral science to control, rule and eradicate people, the practice of eugenics:
[Still the law of the United States of America, upheld as recently as 2001]
And that monumental case, Buck v. Bell, known best for the majority finding that, "three generations of imbeciles is enough" to justify eugenics is brought forward in this piece (not by Berns) to the concerns of today that tie directly into AI, transhumanism, CRISPR, designer humans, etc. Which ends with important unanswered questions about what we will allow the rules, practices and laws around this technology to look like:
Buck v. Bell, American Eugenics, and the Bad Man Test: Putting
Limits on Newgenics in the 21st Century
Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality, January, 2020
Its like in a movie where the cultists are tring to do a ritual to bring a demon up from hell. But with this the devil is Krang begged Shredder "Give me a body." They are trying to build a machine body that will allow Satan to enter and control it so he can physically rule the world.
“We will not solve an existential crisis by simply taking certain materials out of our lives. We have to become re-connected to our better selves and no longer abide to serve a system that upholds tyranny.
Tyranny does not require advance technology to exist.” This is what I’ve been trying to tell people; albeit, in a far less eloquent way. Most people don’t want to hear it -- and these are people who are (for the most part) logical, right-thinking people. They insist that we must ditch ALL tech to escape the clutches of these evildoers.
Funny how it’s a all or nothing move .
Yep.
Thank you for discussing these complex but important topics. There are many valid points of view. You may want to take a look at this and consider participating as an equal partner. Thanks again.
https://solutionseeking.substack.com/about
Thanks Larry. I’ll check it out.
You're welcome Samantha. Constructive comments and criticisms that lead to improvements are welcome. We could use your help. Thanks again.
Brilliantly insightful and challenging ! The existential crisis is an individual crisis involving personal choice, a choice granted by our Creator as part of a gift of life with its inherent freedom...but not without responsibility to honor and care for that gift. " I am now giving you the choice between life and death, between God's blessing and God's curse, and I call heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Choose life." (Deuteronomy 30:19)
Cynthia, This is a most informative and thorough treatment of a topic which interests me greatly. It also ties in very well with a project I’m working on at present, so timely as well. I’ll be in touch with you soon, as I’d like to have you as a guest on my TNT RADIO program The No Fly Zone in due course. If you’re up for it. Best wishes, GM
Hi Greg, glad to hear it and yes let me know if this subject can be fit into your TNT radio program. Looking forward to future discussion. Best, Cynthia
Cynthia, thank you so much for publishing such a profound and mind's eye opening thesis. It has helped me understand that there are no boundaries to the expansion and development of our minds and spirits.
A couple of comments: The much esteemed theory of 'the selfish gene' comes crumbling to the ground when it faces the fact that some people are simply not selfish. Some people, when playing games, out of kindness, compassion or a desire to teach selflessness, help the opponent win the game.
To me the 'big bang theory' and 'black holes' provided a valuable service: they informed me of the utter puerility of conventional cosmology. Because of peoples' fascination with explosions, Hollywood movies are full of them and that fascination or captivation has spilled over into cosmological theories. The biggest explosions that humans have witnessed are nuclear explosions so the current theory is that our own Sun is a planet of millions of nuclear explosions.
As you mentioned, the narrative control has been going on for a very long time: From medicine men or shamans creating a narrative to instill fear in the minds of those whom they wished to control, right up to the almost total world control of the fake pandemic and climate change.
Is the human race destined to be divided into those who know and those who do not want to know? I would love to see greed evaporate and humanity enter a true age of light.
Terrific description of how bizarre their intellect is becoming.
Comes across as a mental aberration about the abstract only.
Will they hack into the unknown as I’ve never heard humanity defined by these people and if humanity is all about adaption how could they possibly hack
this unknown.
Thank goodness your grounded.
A magnificent opus
The so-called Intelligenceia have always have been some of the most dangerous people on this planet when ever they get control or their ideas are implemented, from Russell, Sanger, Wells, Brzezinski, Shaw, Huxley, Attali, Harari, Gates, Schwab, et al. Great piece Cynthia!
Thank-you! There is hope.
Cynthia, thank you for sharing your outstanding presentation with us. I'm sure it was very well received in Basel! In getting in touch with our deeper humanity--which is, as you point out, is sacred, beautiful and good--I have found it helpful to look at some indigenous cultures that may not have had big technological advancements, but nonetheless demonstrated purpose and fidelity to humanity and the well-being of the community that are more advanced than many modern societies. Are you familiar with Malidoma Patrice Somé's book "The Healing Wisdom of Africa: Finding Live Purpose through Nature, Ritual and Community", about the pre-colonial period Dagara people in what is now Burkina Faso? Much for us to learn from here!
Harrari would not stand a chance in debate with Cynthia. She could destroyed that idiot
Excellent, you might also think of mentioning that AN Whitehead, after writing Principia Mathematica, went on to develop a philosophy of organism which has given rise to process theology and radical new inspirations in the realm of cosmology and epistemology
Fantastic article. Thank you Cynthia!
Fantastic presentation of information, Cynthia!
There was a legal philosopher and professor, Walter Berns, who tried to tackle many of these types of difficult issues in the application of the law during his career. In this piece written in 1963 below he takes on the role of behavioral science ("Nudge") and the law, behaviorism being a field that applies many of the same issues your piece describes. He's reviewing a book by another legal scholar who was advocating for a purely behavioral science-based system of law and jurisprudence. I think you'll appreciate it.
Law and Behavioral Science by Walter Berns
Law and Contemporary Problems (Duke Law School), Winter, 1963
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2953&context=lcp
(the first 14 pages - p186-198 - are an exercise in judicial game theory, the legal and philosophical reasoning struggle with applying behavioral science as a legal governing system is in the remaining 14 pages - p199-212)
"Doubtless there have been "phenomenal technical and scientific" advances during the past century, as Beutel says, and that there is a "social lag"; and perhaps it is true that the "general science and art of lawmaking" has not developed "since the days of the Roman Empire"; but this is no reason for law to imitate physics or engineering. On the contrary, a grasp of the fundamental problems might reveal that there is an irresolvable tension between science, in its old or its new sense, and politics, and that any attempt to resolve the tension is likely to have terrible consequences in the political world; that the political world must be ruled not by science but by prudence. This requires at a minimum the recognition that there will always be a "gap" between theory and practice, and that the recalcitrant or intractable political problems cannot be wholly resolved - at least, not by a government of free men. True, Socrates said that "cities will never have rest from their evils no, nor the human race ... until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes of this world have the spirit and power of philosophy"; but Socrates, who failed even in his attempt to rule his wife, Xanthippe, knew and taught that it is extremely unlikely that the conditions required for the rule of the wise will ever be met. As Leo Strauss has said:
- "What is more likely to happen is that an unwise man, appealing to the natural right of wisdom [to rule] and catering to the lowest desires of the many, will persuade the multitude of his right: the prospects for tyranny are brighter than those for rule of the wise. This being the case, the natural right of the wise must be questioned, and the indispensable requirement for wisdom must be qualified by the requirement for consent. The political problem consists in reconciling the requirement for wisdom with the requirement for consent."
Legal scholars, and even practicing lawyers, know these exceedingly important things; they therefore have more to teach to the new scientists than the new scientists have to teach them."
FF Note: legal scholars and practicing scholars *before* they were taught intolerance and censorship is desirous constitutional.
Berns also wrote about pseudosciences, eugenics, touching on applied behavioral science to control, rule and eradicate people, the practice of eugenics:
Buck v. Bell: Due Process of Law by Walter Berns
Political Research Quarterly, December 1, 1953
https://sci-hub.se/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/106591295300600409
[Still the law of the United States of America, upheld as recently as 2001]
And that monumental case, Buck v. Bell, known best for the majority finding that, "three generations of imbeciles is enough" to justify eugenics is brought forward in this piece (not by Berns) to the concerns of today that tie directly into AI, transhumanism, CRISPR, designer humans, etc. Which ends with important unanswered questions about what we will allow the rules, practices and laws around this technology to look like:
Buck v. Bell, American Eugenics, and the Bad Man Test: Putting
Limits on Newgenics in the 21st Century
Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality, January, 2020
https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1622&context=lawineq
I hope you'll find all three reads informative as much as I've found your piece here informative on our journeys as both teachers and students.
Fantastic, as always.
Yuval Harare is what I call ‘A Useless Bleater’
Its like in a movie where the cultists are tring to do a ritual to bring a demon up from hell. But with this the devil is Krang begged Shredder "Give me a body." They are trying to build a machine body that will allow Satan to enter and control it so he can physically rule the world.