Tag Archives: society

competence

 competence

“Practice, particularly practice that involves Samadhi  states, is often characterized by ritual. Ritual is a form of galumphing , in which a special ornament or elaborationmarks otherwise ordinary activity, rendering it separate and intensified, even sacred.

This dawned on me one day when I was first given the opportunity to play on a Stradivarius. I simply had to wash my hands beforehand even though they were already clean. The hand-washing was a context marker  – shifting from the 9-to-5 world into a sacred space defined by a beautiful and sacred implement. I learned from such experiences, and from the trouble I have gotten myself into by ignoring them, that much of the effectiveness of practice resides in the preparation . The specific preparations begin when I enter the temenos, the play space. [“A sacred circle where one can be himself without fear.”] In ancient Greek thought, the temenos  is a magic circle within which special rules apply and in which extraordinary events are free to occur…. To prepare the temenos  — to clear it, rearrange it, take extraneous objects out — is to clean and clear mind and body.”

“Mastery comes from practice; practice comes from playful, compulsive experimentation (the impish side of divine play) and from a sense of wonder (the godlike side of divine play). The athlete feels compelled to run around the track just one more time; the musician feels compelled to play that if you can just one more time; the potter wants to throw just one more pot before going to dinner. Then just another, please. The musician, the athlete, the dancer, move through their practice in spite of aching muscles and breathless exhaustion. This level of performance cannot be attained through some Calvinist demands of the superego, through the feelings of guilt or obligation. In practice, work is play, intrinsically rewarding. It is that feeling of our inner child wanting to play for just five minutes more.”

Free Play: Improvisation in Life and Art

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9386.Free_Play

Page D-26, Summon The Magic

[&&]{**}[##]

 music:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoP2X9cJNyQ 

source for featured image:

http://amyjokim.com/blog/2014/07/24/empowering-mastery-the-golden-key-to-sustained-engagement/ 

[&&]{**}[##]

https://www.focus-education.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Mastery-four-stages-of-competence-700×495.png 

[&&]{**}[##]

Mastery: The Keys to Success and Long-Term Fulfillment 

George Leonard, Penguin/Plume, New York, 1992

https://www.abebooks.com/book-search/isbn/0452267560/ 

[&&]{**}[##]

Self-Mastery is the practice of having supreme control over your thoughts, feelings and actions. Though it isn’t the most popular of practices in today’s world, it holds some of the greatest rewards.

It requires control over your perceptions, with much meditation and mindful practice. It is a life long discipline, but will eventually grant you a life of ease and simplicity.

“He who conquers himself is the mightiest warrior” – Confucius

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsLzx5zk-OA 

[&&]{**}[##]

http://www.startofhappiness.com/wheel-of-life-a-self-assessment-tool/ 

[&&]{**}[##]

“What is called for here is not genocide, the killing off of the population of incompetent cultures, but we do need to think realistically in terms of phasing out of such peoples. Evolutionary progress means the extinction of the less competent.”

1/9/94, Newsday

 

[&&]{**}[##]

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Jon_Rappoport 

[##]

Investigative reporter Jon Rappoport warns of alarming future trends in the genetic engineering of human beings. Based on his contacts with several scientists over a period of 20 years, he’s concluded that human genetics research is basically a continuation of the Nazi eugenics program, and that medical research into genes as causes of human illness is simply a cover story.

Part of this secret agenda, he detailed, is to demonstrate that people have genetic predispositions to certain diseases like cancer, so in the case of lawsuits, this argument can be made rather than placing blame for illness on environmental factors like pollution. In citing the book Remaking Eden, Rappoport noted that author Lee Silver foresees a time when the “gen-rich” (genetically enhanced class) will account for 10% of the population, while “naturals” will work as low paid service providers/laborers.

Eventually, the gen-rich class and the naturals will become entirely separate species, with no ability to crossbreed, Silver continued, adding that the trend for genetic enhancement was inevitable. Rappoport had no doubt that some of this research was already underway, possibly under compartmentalized lab studies, so that scientists don’t even realize the significance of what they’re working on. “The best thing that could happen,” he stated, “is that recognized doctors and researchers stand up together, and say, this has to stop.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW-blCkQ2gw&t=17s [two hours]

Coast-to-Coast radio with George Noory

[##]

Center for Genetics and Society

http://www.geneticsandsociety.org 

[##]

The Ownership of All Life: Notes on Scandals, Conspiracies and Coverups

by Jon Rappoport

Dave Sielaff (Editor), Erica McGrath (Photographer)

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17019.The_Ownership_of_All_Life 

[##]

Remaking Eden – Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World 

by Lee M Silver

https://www.abebooks.com/book-search/isbn/0297841351/ 

[##]

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/11/17/the-illusion-called-medical-journalism-the-deep-secret/ 

 

human intelligence

human intelligence

Big Brother does not watch us, by his choice. We watch him, by ours. There is no need for wardens or gates or Ministries of Truth. When a population becomes distracted by trivia, when cultural life is redefined as a perpetual round of entertainments, when serious public conversation becomes a form of baby-talk, when, in short, a people become an audience and their public business a vaudeville act, then a nation finds itself at risk; a culture-death is a clear possibility.

— Professor Neil Postman

“… television is a “dream come true” for an authoritarian society.

Television isolates people so they are not joining together to govern themselves. As clinical psychologist Bruce Levine notes, viewing television puts one in a brain state that makes it difficult to think critically, and it quiets and subdues a population. And spending one’s free time isolated and watching TV interferes with our ability to translate our outrage over governmental injustice into activism, and thus makes it easier to accept an authority’s version of society and life.

Supposedly the reason why television—and increasingly movies—are so effective in subduing and pacifying us is that viewers are mesmerized by what TV-insiders call “technical events.” These, according to Levine, are “quick cuts, zoom-ins, zoom-outs, rolls, pans, animation, music, graphics, and voice-overs, all of which lure viewers to continue watching even though they have no interest in the content.” Such technical events, which many action films now incorporate, spellbind people to continue watching.

Televised entertainment, no matter what is being broadcast, has become the nation’s new drug high. Researchers found that “almost immediately after turning on the TV, subjects reported feeling more relaxed, and because this occurs so quickly and the tension returns so rapidly after the TV is turned off, people are conditioned to associate TV viewing with a lack of tension.”

Not surprisingly, the United States is one of the highest TV-viewing nations in the world.

Indeed, a Nielsen study reports that American screen viewing is at an all-time high. For example, the average American watches approximately 151 hours of television per month. That does not include the larger demographic of screen-watchers who watch their entertainment via their laptops, personal computers, cell phones, tablets and so on.

Historically, television has been used by those in authority to quiet citizen unrest and pacify disruptive people. In fact, television-viewing has also been a proven tactic for ensuring compliance in prisons. “Faced with severe overcrowding and limited budgets for rehabilitation and counseling, more and more prison officials are using TV to keep inmates quiet,” according to Newsweek. Joe Corpier, a convicted murderer, when interviewed said, “If there’s a good movie, it’s usually pretty quiet through the whole institution.”

In other words, television and other screen viewing not only helps to subdue people but, as Levine concludes, it also zombifies and pacifies us and subverts democracy.

Television viewing, no matter what we’re collectively watching—whether it’s American Idol, the presidential debates or the Super Bowl—is a group activity that immobilizes us and mesmerizes us with collective programming. In fact, research also shows that regardless of the programming, viewers’ brain waves slow down, thus transforming them into a more passive, nonresistant state.

As such, television watching today results in passive group compliance in much the same way that marching was used by past regimes to create group indoctrination. Political advisor Bertram Gross documents how Adolf Hitler employed marching as a technique to mobilize people in groups by immobilizing them. Hitler and his regime leaders discovered that when people gather in groups and do the same thing—such as marching or cheering at an entertainment or sporting event—they became passive, non-thinking non-individuals.

By replacing “marching” with electronic screen devices, we have the equivalent of Hitler’s method of population control. Gross writes:

As a technique of immobilizing people, marching requires organization and, apart from the outlay costs involved, organized groups are a potential danger. They might march to a different drum or in the wrong direction…. TV is more effective. It captures many more people than would ever fill the streets by marching—and without interfering with automobile traffic.

Equally disturbing is a university study which indicates that we become less aware of our individual selves and moral identity in a group. The study’s findings strongly suggest that when we act in groups, we tend to consider our moral behavior less while moving in lockstep with the group. Thus, what the group believes or does, be it violence or inhumanity, does not seem to lessen the need to be a part of a group, whether it be a mob or political gathering….

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/02/john-w-whitehead/tv-football-politics/ 

via

http://www.strike-the-root.com/ 

[&&]{**}[##]

http://www.drjohnm.dreamhosters.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Screen-Shot-2016-02-03-at-6.12.37-AM-216×300.png

“…. a new proposal from a group of medical editors is big news. The proposal would require that authors of studies share their raw data as a condition of publication in the journal. Medical researchers will have six months after a study is published to share the data.

This utterly disrupts the status quo. Currently, raw data has remained the property of either the scientists or the sponsor of the trial. It’s hard work designing a trial, collecting the data, and doing the analyses. Scientists, therefore, would often write many papers from the datasheets, sometimes over the course of years. These datasheets provided the gratification delayed for the grunt work of research.

Publications are the currency of progress in academics.

If this proposal is enacted, outside researchers, who had no connection to the study, can look at the data and do their own analyses. They can verify the findings, try to disprove the findings, or ask different questions. Think about that. Is it right that almost anyone with a laptop can benefit from the hard work of the original researchers?

Another issue here is the importance of honoring the patients who volunteered to be experimented on. These people are owed a great debt: to maximize the knowledge generated from the experiment. Would any patient consent to a study if their data was not used to advance science?

My essay on this was one of the toughest I’ve written. It took hours upon hours. I tried to see the proposal from both sides. An outsider sees obvious advantages, but researchers have serious concerns.

The title is linked below:

To Believe in Science Is to Believe in Data Sharing …”

http://www.drjohnm.org/2016/02/science-needs-data-sharing-like-sports-needs-doping-controls/

The author is “a cardiac electrophysiologist practicing in Louisville KY. I am also a husband to a palliative care doctor, a father, a bike racer, and a regular columnist at theHeart.org | Medscape

 

http://www.wahlbrinck.de/catcherintherye/images/rye.jpg

 

[&&]{**}[##]

Human Intelligence and Open Source Technologies

by Robert Steele on February 1, 2016

“… I worry about artificial stupidity being deeply embedded in bureaucratic and machine processes that take on a life of their own…. I was one of the first “digital innovators” for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). They built the Artificial Intelligence Staff in the Office of Information Technology (OIT/AIS) around me, so when I tell you I am worried about artificial stupidity being embedded in bureaucratic work processes, please believe me, I have seen a trillion dollars’ worth of waste in the last quarter century [average of $40 billion a year for each of 25 years]. Mostly secret, overwhelmingly technical, the investments in technology by the US intelligence community are predominantly useless in terms of creating a prosperous world at peace, a world that works for all…..

Singularity, apart from its obliviousness to true costs that sharply limit future growth irrespective of the advance of technology, firmly believes that machines will overtake humans, whose brains have been under development for millions of years.  It also blithely assumes that displacing human labor and engagement with machines – never mind the true costs – will not have social consequences including mass unrest and eventual violence.

As an intelligence professional – both a former spy and leader of analysts – I have watched the National Security Agency (NSA), one example within the trillion in waste I cite above, spend hundreds of millions of dollars in the past quarter century. NSA never been able to process more than 1% of the data they collect [and is even more paralyzed by data overload now that mass surveillance is the norm]. Nor has NSA been effective with the data they do process, for lack of human linguists skilled in Arabic and Hebrew, among 183 languages we do not speak well in the USA. Here is what James Bamford says in the very last sentence of his book, Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency  (Anchor, 2002):

Eventually NSA may secretly achieve the ultimate in quickness, compatibility, and efficiency-a computer with petaflop and higher speeds shrunk into a container about a liter in size, and powered by only about ten watts of power: the human brain.

I won’t belabor the limitations of computers, my latest article, Applied Collective Intelligence 2.0, forthcoming in Technological Forecasting and Social Change, addressed the realities that constrain machine intelligence. My purpose in this essay is to advance a concept for saving civilization by integrating human intelligence and a full range of open source technology and information. The idea is to deploy open source concepts across all man-machine domains, not only the information technology domain.

Why does human intelligence matter right now and going forward? Leaving aside the many limitations of computers, which are only as smart as their dumbest line of code and their smallest bits of data in combination; let’s start with the reality that over 80% of what we need to know is not in digital form. In fact the true figure is probably closer to 95% — I am being conservative – and because we only process 1% of Big Data that is collected, according to Mary Meeker, this means that the machine world is working with a tiny fraction–.002 to be exact–of the available relevant data.  If you add to that the fact that we are not doing zero-based economic analysis or true cost economics and currently do not have more than baby dosages of data, we end up with what Chris Hedges calls, in a book by this title, Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle .

A blind faith – that is, one that ignores the true costs in resources and process redesign – in AI and VR to suddenly illuminate our world is dangerous. Only with true-cost accounting, applied predictively to current trends, can we see how challenging are the problems our species –not just humans but all living creatures – face today in the face of resource limitations.

There is certainly a great deal to be said for augmented human intelligence through the use of machine-assisted processing and analysis. Striking that balance, what some call hybrid intelligence, does offer real opportunities for massive positive change. Some researchers, such as Google’s in house singularity maven  Ray Kurzweil, believe the machines will triumph and leave us behind; others including me believe machines will augment but never displace humans with their diversity, imagination, and mortality – it is mortality that underlies ethics.

This is an important machine “glitch” seems difficult to resolve: ethics are beyond the ken of a machine. We fool ourselves into thinking code can be written to manage ethical questions. A machine follows instructions, which may seem to be logically complete, but cannot account for novel issues. When AI is reported to make breakthroughs in intelligence, it is often the product of engineers falling in love with their inventions’ output instead of an expression of organic emerging intelligence.

In this specific regard – the domain of intelligence whether human or artificial – I advance three human-centric propositions for consideration.

First, brought forward from my invited 1993 lecture to Paul Allen’s INTERVAL think tank, I suggest

You must avoid at all costs any techniques or tools which isolate individuals or give them the false perception that they can exist remotely, or in their own “virtual” worlds. That is a narcotic and narcissistic vision, and like narcotics and the pool of Narcissus, will ultimately lead to death by overdose or death by drowning.

Second, if you do not embrace full employment (whether in labor or arts), you risk spreading a fatal social disease, one that could lead to social erosion so great as to topple any technical and bureaucratic towers. People seek meaning. Without work, they will find meaning in tearing down the institutions that reject their contributions.

Third and last, mindful that Homo sapiens is in theory supposed to both human and thinking, and with a bow to Micah Sifry’s book The Big Disconnect: Why The Internet Hasn’t Transformed Politics (Yet) , as well as my own Foreword to Stephen E. Arnold’s CyberOSINT: Next Generation Information Access, I would point out that we still do not have properly integrated and universally-available tools for information-sharing and sense-making.

Machine intelligence and complex systems integration is expensive and a work in progress. Now stir into that brew our ignoring the 95% or so of the information that is not digital and in a language not supported by today’s machine translation systems or our own loosely-education [?] population. We are operating at 2% of our potential, at best, and falling short as both man and machine.

The graphic below illuminates this idea of information being largely beyond the reach of existing machines and machines likely in the future. Video recognition is very poor. Language recognition outside a few languages is still not adequate for most used. Document recognition is poor with respect to handwritten and unconventional script documents. And so on.

Examine the legend on the image below. Roughly 1% of written scientific papers are published, and of those that are published, perhaps 5% are accessed by more than a handful of individual. One percent of five percent is .0005 – not one tenth of knowledge, or one hundredth or one thousandth, but five ten-thousandth of the published knowledge gain “traction,” and this generally in the English language. The unpublished knowledge may as well not exist at all.

Published and unpublished information in 183 other languages, of which 33 are major international languages and one of them, Arabic, includes eleven substantive modern variations, is generally not accessed effectively.  Similarly, “gray literature” or limited edition publications specific to localities, is even less accessible – one percent of one percent as a speculative calculation.

Finally, there is no global index of subject matter experts (especially those that do not publish but have priceless hard-earned local knowledge)…..

[snip!]

https://www.singularityweblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/access-to-scientific-papers.jpg

Let us now make the leap from the present infatuation with taking information technology toward the singularity goal of making humans redundant. Let us contemplate instead the wholeness of society – not just information society, but society across all physical domains. Imagine a world in which everything is open.

Most are familiar with the concepts of Open Source Software and Open Source Hardware. A few realize that these two concepts are insufficient to achieve anything resembling a singularity. Apart from the reality that a machine is utterly stupid without data, algorithms, and an audience, there is the small matter of civilization beyond the box — what else must be in being for society to advance?

Below is a starting point that I created with some help from Michel Bauwens, founder of the Peer to Peer (P2P) Foundation, and Marcin Jakubowski, creator of Open Source Ecology and the Global Village Construction Set.

https://www.singularityweblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Principle-Elements-of-Open-Source.jpg

In my view, if we are to achieve exponential growth and infinite wealth for all humanity, we must integrate three intellectual concepts across all domains from agricultural to water: Holistic analytics (everything is connected), True cost economics (embrace the truth), and Open source everything engineering (affordable, inter-operable, and scalable).

There is much to be said about Eco-Villages and Transition Townes, and some small enclaves are eco-hacking the future with over one hundred different open-source applications toward a fossil-free zero-waste society.  This is brilliant stuff, but it will not scale as quickly or, more pointedly, we can ask if it will even scale to any degree and in time so as to avoid the The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History .  However much singularity aficionados may cheer for nirvana, time is the one strategic variable we cannot buy nor replace.

It is Smart Cities and Smart Nations that represent the very grand challenge of achieving a prosperous world at peace, a world that works for all. Everything being done now, from the Climate Change agreements to Paris to the Smart Cities initiative in India, is poorly thought through, unaffordable, and unachievable at scale – at sustainable scale.

What is missing from the local to global conversation – apart from honest governance —  is a shared grasp of how very important it is to integrate holistic analytics (for threats, policies,  demographics) with true cost economics (cradle to grave for all artifacts all the time), and open source everything engineering.

Below is a depiction I created to improve on an existing program in the United Kingdom that purports to represent the state of the art in Embedded Intelligence – it was lacking the three essentials shown at the bottom of the graphic.

https://www.singularityweblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Embedded-Intelligence.jpg

The technocracy has lost sight of the humanities – most of them have never read E. O. Wilson’s book, Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge  and have no idea why the sciences need the humanities, a question that is answered most ably in this book.

To create a truly Smart City or Smart nation it is not acceptable to limits one’s definition of the necessities to broadband access. We must design cities by keeping firmly in mind what Bionic City pioneer Melissa Sterry suggests, that when nature is designing anything, it comes without fraud, waste, or abuse. Every single artifact must achieve what Buckminster Fuller called “ephemeralism,” avoiding all forms of waste.

For many this will mean pressed brick shelters and the fullest possible use of the Global Village Construction Set being created by Marcin Jakubowski. It will also mean broad acceptance of Peer to Peer forms of culture, economy, governance, and society as defined so ably by Michel Bauwens.

I have published an essay on Saving Civilization, delivered a memorandum to the Vice President of the United States on the need for an Open Source (Technologies) Agency, and provided a white paper to the Secretary General of the United Nations, so I will not belabor the elements here. My life’s work and my ambition for the future of humanity, are summed up in the below depiction of how I believe we must achieve man-machine intelligence with integrity across the whole.

https://www.singularityweblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Education-Intelligence-Research.png

About the author:

Robert David Steele Vivas is a former spy, Marine Corps infantry officer, honorary hacker, past presidential candidate, and the top Amazon reviewer devoted to non-fiction, reading in 98 categories. He pioneered Open Source Intelligence (OSINT), teaching over 7,500 professionals from across 66 countries how to achieve decision-support (intelligence) with legal ethical methods. Author of many books and articles on intelligence and electoral reform, over time he morphed into a proponent for Open Source Everything Engineering (OSEE), publishing The Open-Source Everything Manifesto: Transparency, Truth, and Trust (Manifesto Series)  in 2012. A 2014 profile of him in The Guardian by Nafeez Ahmed earned 33,000 “likes” in three days and now stands at 68,000 “likes.” Learn more about him at http://robertdavidsteele.com.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha4L9fI1800 [must see!]

https://www.singularityweblog.com/human-intelligence-and-open-source-technologies/ 

via  https://solari.com/blog/ 

 

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12998524-the-open-source-everything-manifesto

 

The Open-Source Everything Manifesto: Transparency, Truth, and Trust

by Robert David Steele, Howard Bloom

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2vC2nKyXWU (55 minutes)

 

 

Yep. I bought the book, and two others:

 

Moving the Needle: Get Clear, Get Free, and Get Going in Your Career, Business, and Life!

and

Coach Yourself to a New Career: 7 Steps to Reinventing Your Professional Life

 

[&&]{**}[##]

 

Added 2/5/16 ca. 9 PM:

http://www.phibetaiota.net/2014/12/2014-robert-steele-answer-on-leadership-with-annotated-bibliograph-pbi-posts/ 

 

 

 

Children, Family, Individual, Mind, Society

Children, Family, Individual, Mind, Society

Those five words seem to comprise the theme that you will find explored below by a range of writers, artists, philosophers and psychology-oriented folk. 

Recently I’ve encountered two new web sites that seem refreshing, new, related (almost as if they are paired, or run by the same group of people). 

They are Zen Gardner and The MindUnleashed.

The first article in this listing offers important information I think everyone should have, learn and employ; I speak from experience.  The other articles are bundled here for your exploration and thought. 

I find them intriguing. Can millions of people be wrong about something?  

Read for yourself; make up your own mind. 

Respond there, or here, or to the universe, or in how you will change. 

[If, as Deepak Chopra says, your mind-body changes itself continually, then change seems unavoidable, but your genetic structure will simply build the new model to be just like the old model unless you instruct it differently. 

How do you instruct your DNA?]

 

Music video:

Father and Son

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXwR0JGUCFI (4:03)

 

#1)

“We as human beings have a very strong self-centered aspect (even if it may not be truly ‘real’) of our beings called the ego, and many problems arise when this aspect of the human experience goes uncontrolled. Manipulation has always been a favored tool of the ego in order to get what it wants.

This manipulation can come in either a physical form or it can be seen to work on the emotional level in order to break the psyche into meeting the manipulator’s desires. Properly identifying the ways in which people emotionally manipulate others can save us much suffering in the future when identified early enough…..”

 

More:

http://themindunleashed.org/2014/09/8-ways-spot-emotional-manipulation-free.html 

 

#2)

“… If eliminating the family is indeed an objective of the New World Order project, then it is by no means an easy objective to achieve. One would be hard-pressed to imagine an institution that would be more fiercely defended than the family, or to imagine a more painful experience than being separated from one’s children or parents. Any campaign to achieve that objective would need to fly under false colors, not advertised as a campaign to eliminate the family, but rather as a campaign aimed at protecting the rights and welfare of the child.”

http://www.zengardner.com/mind-control-orwell-huxley-todays-reality/ 

http://www.workingtogetheronline.co.uk/images/assessment_triangle.png 

 

#3)

“… in the overlords’ view the children of the world must be made to conform to a system as limiting and spiritually confining as possible. This will include drugging, mind control, restrictive false education in militaristic institutions, treadmill like jobs, mindless diversions and constant propaganda.”

http://www.zengardner.com/truth-psyops-awakening/ 

 

 

Bonus Material!!

 

#4)

 

The Truth About Robin Williams

An hour-long video…. and read the comments too!

http://www.zengardner.com/truth-robin-williams-stefan-molyneux/ 

Very provocative and interesting, but a touch misogynistic?!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergamy 

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hypergamy 

The Greatest Gift in the Universe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArKPZyfZUFs (13:34)

It seems to me that blaming “the woman” [mother, wife] for one’s own weaknesses or failures is the inability to take responsibility for one’s own life.

 

 

#5)

 

Music video:

Daughters

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bp2bw87Rz2g 

(5:08)

 

 

 

On the other hand:

http://www.thefemininegift.org/2013/07/being-feminine-in-masculine-world.html 

http://media-cache-ak1.pinimg.com/736x/c0/30/7b/c0307b9da19088d62ca97b9ec30359fc.jpg 

 

#6) A similar web site to explore….    http://www.shift.is 

 

 

Music video:

Here in the dust

There’s not a trace of us

Everything is gone

But my heart is hanging on

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwMsHwEBbgo&index=14&list=PLoGa3M7vHdvxabdt4uBt51e3W5Dt0tvsu 

(7:06)

If anger is taboo, thought will starve to death.

con·form·i·ty –noun, plural -ties. 1. action in accord with prevailing social standards, attitudes, practices, etc. 2. correspondence in form, nature, or character; agreement, congruity, or accordance. 3. compliance or acquiescence; obedience. 

non·con·form·i·ty  –noun 1. failure or refusal to conform, as with established customs, attitudes, or ideas. 2. lack of conformity or agreement. 3. ( often initial capital letter ) refusal to conform to the Church of England. 

http://www.sivann.gr/pub/funnypics/posters/conformity.jpg

The Transcendentalists, especially Henry David Thoreau, appalled conforming to society merely for the purpose of “fitting in”. They advocated that society corrupted a person’s inner goodwill. They believed that by remaining outside of society’s influences a person could transcend the evils society tempted them with and achieve true peace. In his essay Civil Disobedience, Thoreau supported violating the laws set forth by the government if one felt that they were harmful. Thoreau practiced as he preached and refused to submit to the concept that slavery was morally acceptable. He attempted to enlighten others and bring them over to his side. He was shunned by many for his radical ideas. However, he ignored the protests and stood up for what he believed in. The definition of non-conformity is considered a failure to conform. However, Thoreau saw it not as a failure, but as a success;  a successful method of exercising ones intrinsic right to defend his beliefs.  “A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority.”-Henry David Thoreau.

“Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of our own mind.”-Emerson, Self-Reliance 

“Society is a joint stock company in which members agree for the better securing of his bread to each shareholder, to surrender the liberty and culture of the eater. The virtue in most request is conformity. Self-reliance is its aversion. It loves not realities and creators, but names and customs.”-Emerson, Self-Reliance

http://kartranscends.weebly.com/non-conformity.html

http://nickandzuzu.com/wp-content/uploads/2003/01/Inner-Peace-400×368.jpg

Quotes About Nonconformity

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/nonconformity

http://www.quotegarden.com/conformity.html

 

Nonconformity to Society as Source of Self Development – College

At studymode.com, this is one of those essays (writen in 2008) that appears to be something you can rip off the web and turn it or at least cite for some paper you were to be writing in a class about society and self-development.  Check the opening premise.. 

As human beings, no two of us are the same. We look, act and think differently from each other. However, man cannot live without community because it is the essence of social bond. Community binds one person to another, transforming aggregates of individuals into coherent social groups.”

The essay goes on to cite Hobbes and Durkheim, but I didn’t “register” so I could read the conclusion.  [Don’t need to… it’s playing out all around us day by day.]

And there’s a similar essay here: http://www.bookrags.com/essay-2005/11/2/24546/2305/ 

Summary: Non-comformity to society can have both negative and positive consequences. It can lead to personal disaster or to positive social change. The act of non-conformity is examined in two films, “Rebel Without a Cause” and “Remember the Titans,” as well as in the civil disobedience of Rosa Parks.

Non-conformity is an act of rebellion, opposing the expectations set by society. Non-conformity should be admired and admonished, valued and reproved, depending on the various situations it is applied to. I believe that non-conformity may have both positive and negative outcomes, ghastly consequences and excellent results. Those who choose not to conform either do it knowing it will result in an affirmative or negative outcome, or not knowing it what they are doing at all. In all fact, an act of non-conformity cannot be judged by it’s rebellious nature, but by it’s effects on the society or things involved. Acts of non-conformity can have both minute and immense effects on the environment that surround their occurrence, but either way they will definitely have clear consequences. In many forms of literature and entertainment, there are examples of non-conformity and their consequences evident, whether it be…”

“I’d really like to be normal and conform, because, at heart, I’m not a risk-taker at all,” said Grand Rapids, MI, high-school sophomore Christine Kornowicz. “But if I want to fit in, I have to be different. If you don’t stick out, everyone at school makes fun of you.”

“I’ve started wearing all black, painting my nails, and shaving my head, just to fit in,” said Jonathan Auger, a Binghamton, NY, high-school junior. “You can’t understand how hard it is for a young person not to make waves these days.”

http://www.theonion.com/articles/nonconformity-linked-to-peer-pressure,783/ 

http://designyoutrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2159-650×866.jpg

Notoriety: Outrageous Appearance & Personal Behavior as a Social Art Form

Lady GaGa

the entire Kardashian complex

Brittney Spears

Miley Cyrus

Justin Bieber

Lindsay Lohan

http://static.tvguide.com/Includes/newsletter-images/blog-images/kardahsian-embed2.jpg 

Study: People Are Biased Against Creative Thinking

Posted by samzenpus on Monday December 09, 2013 @08:07AM

from the you-are-all-individuals dept.

An anonymous reader writes

“Despite how much people might say they like creative thinking, they don’t, at least according to studies. ‘We think of creative people in a heroic manner, and we celebrate them, but the thing we celebrate is the after-effect,’ says Barry Staw, a researcher at the University of California–Berkeley business school who specializes in creativity. ‘As much as we celebrate independence in Western cultures, there is an awful lot of pressure to conform,’ he says.”

 

http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Aug-09/RutterFig-3_SlimeMold_context-ladder.jpg

Coercion and Social Cohesion

December 26th, 2013

(by Adam Elkus)

Reader PRBeckman left a very great comment on my “Legibility at War” post, placing the WWI draft effort in perspective:

The federal government wanted to conscript millions of eligible men, but it had no information about those men and it lacked the institutions and money to gather that information so it depended upon private, voluntary organizations to fill the gaps. This is where the culture of voluntary associations reveals its dark side. The army’s estimate suggested that perhaps 3 million men never registered at all. This illegibility was a great dilemma and that’s where voluntary associations came in. Americans of this era are famous for their prolific creations of associations of every kind. You would think that would be a good thing except that they too often veered into vigilantism. These organizations were populated by people who weren’t themselves eligible for the draft, but they saw it as their duty to ensure that those who were eligible weren’t shirking. Organizations were formed all over the country, the most prominent being the American Protective League which counted 250,000 members. In 1917 and 1918 the APL and these other organizations, in collaboration with federal, state & local gov’ts, ran “slacker raids” to try to find those men who were eligible but who hadn’t registered. The accounts of these raids are frightening. The raids varied in size but they culminated in a massive operation in New York City on September 3-5, 1918:

“The APL later estimated that somewhere between twenty thousand and thirty thousand men participated: city police, government agents from the Department of Justice, more than two thousand soldiers and one thousand sailors, and thousands of American Protective League operatives. For three days they scoured the city’s streets and public places interrogating somewhere between 300,000 and 500,000 men. A man who lacked a draft registration or classification card found himself escorted by these self-appointed authorities to the nearest police station.”

They surrounded the “exits and entrances of every train, ferry, subway” station, “cordoning off whole blocks and interrogation men on the street. Later they raided theaters, saloons, billiard parlors, and boarding houses. Sailors wandered through the city’s restaurants moving from table to table inspecting the cards of diners.”

All the consequence of trying to achieve ’legibility’. And it would have an impact on concepts of citizenship, changing how citizens interacted with their government. The WW1 period was the transition era from the “illegible,” “wild and unruly forest”-era of citizenship to one that has taken on “a more legible shape.”

It’s worth pondering this when we hear endless appeals from pundits about how if our politicians and partisans were only forced to abandon their substantive political differences and get together, if our populace was regimented by a peacetime draft unconnected to urgent military danger for the purpose of social cohesion, we would somehow be a more perfect union. John Schindler rightly dispenses with these ideas:

A Swiss-style mass reserve force would make a great deal of sense if the United States worried about actual invasion from Canada or Mexico, something which even Sheriff Joe Arpaio doesn’t think is a realistic threat. Otherwise, not so much

Moreover, what would the U.S. military do with all those people? Since, unless you want to replicate the worst features of the pre-1973 draft, when flimsy exemptions abounded that privileged the privileged, the Selective Service system would have to direct millions of young men (and women too? how, in gender-equal 21st century America, could they be excluded?) into the forces. Even allowing that a high percentage of young people would be kept out on grounds of rising obesity and general idiocy that are spreading in wildfire fashion among American youths – many place that number at seventy-five percent unfit for military service these days – the Pentagon would need to find lots of make-work work for many big battalions of teenagers.

I don’t hear anyone suggesting a draft period of two years, as it was before 1973, so we’d be talking about a one year – twelve months – service period at most (Austria is down to six months coerced service, as a reference point, which has limited functional utility for the active forces.). Which would mean the U.S. military would have to invest in a vast training system resulting in lots of units filled with half-trained troops plus many others counting the days until they get out. It’s not difficult to see why you hardly ever meet career military types, of any rank, with any enthusiasm for restoring peacetime conscription.

Schindler acribes this to the utopian dreams of pundits that never had to endure military discipline themselves but want someone else’s sons and daughters to do it. However, even this is actually too charitable. I wrote and scrapped a column for War on the Rocks that analyzed this at length (it was getting too dense for a typical op-ed format) and I came to the conclusion that there is actually an strong element of authoritarianism in this.

The idea is that, in essence, with a regimented body of Americans we have cohesion again — cohesion, however, defined by the pundit’s own views about what politics America ought to have. What Dana Milibank’s column (which Schindler’s column rebuts) amounts to is the idea that a regimented America is one that will be more likely to agree with his own subjective political beliefs. Key is his sentence at the end that the ultimate goal of this would be to do undo the damage of “self-interested leaders” and the fact that the shutdown was the impetus for his column:

It’s no coincidence that this same period has seen the gradual collapse of our ability to govern ourselves: a loss of control over the nation’s debt, legislative stalemate and a disabling partisanship. It’s no coincidence, either, that Americans’ approval of Congress has dropped to just 9?percent, the lowest since Gallup began asking the question 39 years ago.

If partisanship is what regimentation seeks to cure, than the unspoken assumption is that a drafted public is one more likely to share Dana Milbank’s view of American governance. Let us be direct: his view of governance is one that conflates ideological disagreement (combined with the particularities of the US system) with pettiness and flaws of character. And the implication is that regimentation, authority, and discipline will reduce disorder and make American politics legible to him and other observers — like the China-fetishizing New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman.

Don’t get me wrong, I found the shutdown disturbing too. I dislike partisanship as well. I think that the shutdown was also a failure of American governance. But it had complex structural causes,  not some sudden and simplistic deprecation in the character of Americans raised on butter instead of guns. Structure, particularly when combined with ideology, matters. And we should start being very careful when an intellectual avoids existing structural analysis, warns of societal decadence , and declares that we must regiment ourselves and quash disagreement to save the polity. We should particularly be concerned when said intellectual creates a mono-causal explanation for a complex set of social problems and declares we must regiment ourselves and quash disagreement.

In any event I’d rather have vigorous partisanship and democracy (even if it results in gridlock and partisanship) than the kind of America Milbank seemingly wants to build. And knowledge of history should make us very cautious about the constant of the intellectual proposing coercion for the sake of order, cohesion, and discipline in society. Diversity builds robustness and strength, and centralization and regimentation can have substantial costs.

Posted in intellectuals, theory | 3 Comments »

 

http://www.newscorpse.com/Pix/FoxNews/foxnews-nudge-squad.jpg

There is a fine line that separates conformity from nonconformity, and both of them from intelligent decision making.  Although the distinction may seem clear, I believe the difference is far more complex than most people are aware of.  Why?  Because an accurate measure of conformity or nonconformity is based exclusively on an individual’s true understanding of a subject.  It doesn’t matter what decision a person actually makes, or if someone else has made a similar decision.  What does matter is the reasoning behind the decision.

Many people believe conformity is tied solely to the act of following the masses.  This viewpoint is inherently flawed.  Let’s keep this ridiculously simple.  The circular tire is one of the most commonly used tools in existence.  Am I conforming because I use 4 of them on my automobile?  The answer is no.  I use them because I have fully evaluated the circumstances and concluded that circular tires get the job done right.  Would I be a true nonconformist for trying another shape of tire?  No, I would be practicing nonconformity for the sake of nonconformity with no value added, and actually spoiling my productivity in the process.

Conformity is not just about following the masses.  True conformity involves following the masses without first evaluating why the masses are doing what they are doing.  Many times the masses are correct.  If you properly evaluate the circumstances and conclude that the masses are indeed correct, you would be foolish to run the other way, or practice any form of nonconformity.

This brings me to my next point.  Nonconformity for the sake of nonconformity is conformity.  When people try too hard to be different, they usually end up being just like everyone else who is trying to be different.  Don’t conform to nonconformity for the sake of it.  Mindfully evaluate the circumstances. Once you fully understand your options, make the decision that works best for you…..

http://www.marcandangel.com/2007/09/05/how-to-avoid-the-pitfalls-of-both-conformity-and-nonconformity/

 

http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/calvin-on-rights2.jpg?w=422&h=400

NON-CONFORMITY, MY ASS; 

OR WHY WE’RE ALL A BUNCH OF POSERS

“… I encourage people to question society, their parents, their boss, and themselves. And to question, of course, authority.

Since a young age — since, I don’t know, around the age of 6 — I’ve always questioned things. In high school, I was one of those grunge/punk kids that rebelled against “the system” (until I dropped out due to boredom, that is). I eventually went to college and dropped out of that, too. Not because I was lazy, but because I never intended on getting a degree. I chose to go to classes that I was interested in, instead of following core requirements and a major program. I’m not trying to downplay the value of diplomas, or degrees, but the path of self education has always felt the most right for me. (See: becoming a raw foodist, Jeet Kune Do, blogging, drumming, writing, web design, and reading at least one book a week.) I commend those that follow the traditional path of education deliberately (instead of doing it because they’re told it’s a good idea). It just wasn’t for me, personally.

So anyway — back to the story: During my short-lived high school days, I wanted to disengage from the machine. So I became “anti-everything.” I rejected popular notions, traditions, belief-systems, religions, and anything classical, formal, or institutionalized.

Now this was something I was really proud of back in the day. It was everything street cred and a serious symbol of how “real” you were. It was a seal of renegade pride to not wear anything with a label or brand name. If you were a true non-conformist, you didn’t listen to music that was on the radio. You read books and listened to music that were considered “underground,” and often admired artists simply because they were unknown. We called this being real.

If you want to meet a real non-conformist (hell, the title of his blog is The Art of Non-Conformity. Helloooo.) I suggest you check out Chris’s blog. He also has a really badass free ebook called A Brief Guide to World Domination. You won’t be disappointed. Plus you can’t be even if you wanted to. It’s free.

Before I talk about the pitfalls of this approach, I’ll say a bit about the reasoning for questioning authority and all things popular.

See, if you’re really down, if you’re really with it, then you know that the whole reason for non-conformism is to not live unconsciously. It’s to get in touch with who you really are and express your own individuality. This is wonderful. This is beautiful.

While it doesn’t happen all the time, I occasionally get criticized for admonishing other people to follow their own path and rejecting the mainstream. Following your own path, for the sake of being different, isn’t very smart when you’re trying to reinvent the wheel.

That’s because modeling the success of other people is often one of the quickest ways to become successful. I have nothing against this. I don’t think it’s wrong, but it only makes sense if that’s really a deliberate choice.

We’re all a bunch of posers.

 

If there is anything the nonconformist hates worse than a conformist, it’s another nonconformist who doesn’t conform to the prevailing standard of nonconformity.

—Bill Vaughan

We all live our lives within a giant melting pot of borrowed ideas. Our beliefs and views about ourselves and the world are nothing more than a collage of things we’ve heard from other people, or ideas we’ve picked up and patched over our existing mesh of ideas along the way. We can pick up new ideas, new beliefs at any time and shed the old skin of what we no longer identify with.

So yes, in a way, nothing is original. Nothing is unique. We all have the same DNA, just arranged differently.

We’re all saying the same thing, in different tones. We only perceive it as different because we’re reorganizing the notes on the ledger. A musician may play the notes at different lengths, in different time signatures and varying progressions and keys. But they’re all the same notes.

Studying martial arts and Jeet Kune Do has led me to see that conformity to systems of fighting doesn’t make much sense. Placing your attacks and defenses into set patterns leaves you fixed and immovable when real life happens. Fighting, like real life, is alive. It’s dynamic. Bruce Lee was known for rebelling against all styles because he said “We all have two feet and two legs. How can there be any other style of fighting, unless you have three feet or three legs?”

In the same way, we’re all living life with the same stuff. We all work, sleep, and eat the same way. Though we might have different expressions of these things, we all put on our pants the same way.

So yes, blindly rejecting the mainstream is pretty stupid. Non-conformity for the sake of non-conforming is still conformity.

Rejecting all patterns and styles blindly is still a pattern.

Do I think that rejecting everything because it’s popular is conformity masked as some rebel badge of “with-it-ness” or a sign of how “real” you are? Yes, I do. I think it’s just as unconscious as blindly following trends. But I also think that questioning is a deeply sacred part of life. Yes, it can become lame when questioning everything becomes an institution in and of itself. But I think it’s a better alternative to some other traditions (see: not questioning a book written over 2,000 years ago).

So yes, I’m a conformist. And I encourage you to be one, too. After all, non-conformity can be quite ugly taken to the extreme. You wouldn’t want to chop off all your limbs or stop wearing pants for the sake of being different, right? I didn’t think so.

What this all comes down to is…

Living deliberately.

If you want to wear chucks and cardigans as a badge of your indie-ness, go right ahead. If you like rules, routines, and detailed plans, do that. Follow trends or boycott them. Avoid all cliques or be a scenester. Embrace the system or rage against it, but do so consciously and deliberately. And remember, life is dynamic and you’re alive, and therefore subject to change. If you rejected something because you thought it was trendy and you found out later that you really did like it, be honest with yourself and accept that.

Free spirit or group-think, express yourself authentically. Accept that who you are now and what you believe now may not be the same in 5 years or 5 minutes.

Embrace your aliveness. Embrace that you might not recognize who you were yesterday and that’s okay. As you grow and change, so will your dreams and desires. The good news is that your integrity never changes. It’s always nudging you to accept what you really feel. It doesn’t differentiate between what’s popular and what’s not. It just knows what is. Call it intuition, your conscience, whatever you like; it’s probably a good idea to listen to it. When I do, things just seem to work a whole lot better than when I resist and try to “rebel” against things because of their homogeneity.

You might also be wondering: if I really don’t think that mainstream ideas are evil, why do I continually write posts in a way that comes at things from an unconventional angle? Why do I write articles with titles like “Productivity is a Waste of Time” and “If It’s a Good Idea… Don’t Do It”? Is it because I think that unconventional ideas are better? No, I don’t.

I just happen to get bored reading the same things all the time. I like to explore uncommon, lesser seen angles to view things from. Everything conventional is already being said, anyway; why would I want to repeat the same echo?

The whole unconventional, counter-intuitive thing is my style. It’s the way I like to do things, but it’s just my flavor. It’s nothing different, really.

It’s just my way of rearranging the notes.

http://paidtoexist.com/non-conformity-my-ass-or-why-were-all-a-bunch-of-posers/ 

 

http://blog.lib.umn.edu/huber195/psy1001spring12/conformity3.jpg

“… Many people are becoming successful because they chose to become both conformists and nonconformists. So, for an individual like you, there is a great chance for you to become successful and happy by choosing to be a conformist and nonconformist.

Further readings on Conformity and Nonconformity:

I recommend you to read the great and inspiring book of Chris Guillermo: ”The Art of Non-Conformity“, that shows you how to make you life an adventure, find your life’s meaning and purpose – and earn a good living.”

About the author: Michael Newman is the founder and the author of this psychology dedicated blog. He is a psychologist leading training sessions, an expert in NLP (neuro-linguistic programming), transpersonal psychology and Eastern philosophy.  Email

http://www.freud-sigmund.com/understanding-the-concept-of-conformity-and-nonconformity 

 

http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/social-exclusion.jpg%3Fw%3D500%26h%3D268 

Source of image: http://filipspagnoli.wordpress.com/category/law/human-rights-violations/causes-of-human-rights-violations/ 

“To think deeply in our culture is to grow angry and to anger others; and if you cannot tolerate this anger, you are wasting the time you spend thinking deeply. One of the rewards of deep thought is the hot glow of anger at discovering a wrong, but if anger is taboo, thought will starve to death.” ~ Jules Henry

Google+: View post on Google+