Comments on: Democracy Pow!er: The USCD and the Peoples’ Reignbow Coalition

By: Don Hawkins

Don Hawkins — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 22:15:40 +0000

Heck let’s give it a try. Hello this is Albert and am speaking from spacetime after world war II in 1949 is when I wrote what you just read and I saw it then and what I see now in 2010 is what I hoped would not happen. Talk about a process of deterioration what have you people done to yourselves in the name of progress? I ran the numbers as did many of your best minds and people you are in deep do do. So far your answer is to do the same thing and expect a different result do you know yet what that’s called. Your war’s for a few of you are now fought on a TV screen and again what happened to you? Your leaders perform in a manner that makes government seem like a mental health crisis center even more than in 1949. It appears you let the system get away from you and is now in control and the few who think they still are in control of it are sadly mistaken. Calm at peace nice game of checkers cup of coffee you do have the knowledge and still don’t use it. Good luck

By: Don Hawkins

Don Hawkins — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 21:13:17 +0000

It is only a slight exaggeration to say that mankind constitutes even now a planetary community of production and consumption. I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis in our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society. The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to his economic existence. Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society.
The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evil. (Albert Einstein, 1949)

as it exists today and what might Albert say about the system in twenty Ten?

By: bozh

bozh — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 22:52:20 +0000

So, religions are sciences. In which thinking starts from knowing all one ever needs to know. Jesus said everything i need for my life. Mohammed, moshe also posses eternal verities.
The method i gave for thinking in above post is really ab using the language more sanely. No, this alone wld not obliterate all of our problems but wld solve the problems that language misuse causes.
It wld lead to much fewer misunderstandings. Futhermore, distiguishing btwn descriptive and inferential utterances further adds clarity to one’s thinking.
Descriptive statements use actional language which decribes what happens, how s’mthing behaves, how one feels, etc., but are not the happenings themselves.

All labeling, concluding, wishing, cursing, name calling, guessing, theorising, condemning, blaming, praising, believing, etc., inferental knowledge, is much less reliable than factual knowledge.
That’s all folks. Try it! tnx

By: bozh

bozh — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 22:32:15 +0000

Don,
One can also think of science 1 [global-warming denying] and science 2 [global warming affirmers] as two distinct branches of one science.
A science 1 today is not gonna be science 1 in 2020. And science 2 of today is not science 2 2020.

Religions of today 1,2,3,4,5, k are also sciences 1,2.3,4,5,k of today and these are are not the same religious sciences of a century ago let alone 3kyrs ago and will not be the same in 3232 or in 100k.
Also a czech 1 is not czech 2 or man 1 is not man 2. Such use of language automaticly reminds us of both the sameness and the differences btwn people and events.
This seems to evoke the question: OK, they may be same or similar in some respects, but how do they differ?
The word american or italian sans subscripts seems to evoke only the same traits they share but not differences.
When thinking of jewish trolls, i think of troll 1, troll 2, troll 3, etc., which reminds me that they also differ from one another. And often quite strongly.
Thinking of religion 1 as a science 1 automaticly brings to mind the sameness of reilgion 1 and science two.
Thus we’d no longer compare an apple with an orange; the apple being religion and orange being the science; we’d now compare an apple with an apple or an orange with an orange.
So science 1 and science 2 deserve the same evaluation for validity. Now, is this what sanity demands! The sane thinking! And we have the method for sane thinking! tnx

By: Don Hawkins

Don Hawkins — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 18:36:57 +0000

So knowledge to be knowledge must be thought of as knowledge in-a-point of time. April 2nd twenty ten is that point of time.

By: bozh

bozh — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 17:36:48 +0000

Seeing, smelling, hearing, tasting, touching=knowing. Does it = believing? it depends how a person uses that word. To me, believing = guessing = not knowing.
Pious people use or seem to use the word “to believe“ as they use the word “knowing“.
One wishes thed`d be honest and tell us if that is so!
Using the 5 senses in gathering knowledge also takes time; so, knowledge in moshe`s time is not knowledge today and today`s knowledge is not gonna b eour knowledge in 7k.
So knowledge to be knowledge must be thought of as knowledge in-a-point of time. tnx