I should have titled my last post, "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly". Why?
As Ayn Rand stated "Ayn Rand
"Let there be no misunderstanding about me. If it is now the belief of my fellow men, who call themselves the public, that their good requires victims, then I say: The public good be damned, I will have no part of it!"
“The Moral Meaning of Capitalism,” For the New Intellectual, 98.
I believe that another's framing of your world is considered the "good" by in them and this is what makes it Bad. But, what is the Ugly?
The ugly is when our purposes are at odds and there has been no negotiation, which is oppression or tyranny. Or, there hasn't been an understanding of co-operative effort, which makes for conflict. And whenver conflict happens, there is ugliness!
Soms well meaning souls would think this an opprotunity to defy ugliness and rise above the base and senseless reality of being human.; of defying one's hopes and dreams for the "greater good" or "common will", or "God's will". These think that sacrificing oneself on the altar of another's hopes or dreams is what "love" is all about. This is what Christ did to redeem the world, after all. So, we should not begrudge the opportunity to DIE. No our lives are worthless apart from their sacrificial utility! Our lives are not valued in and of themselves. We were only born to die an untimely death for God or some public interest.
Most of the time when individuals are included in on the vision, or purpose of an organization, and one finds a place of belonging, then there will be co-operation, or a finalization of the relationship to the organization, as there are cross purposes, or conflicts of intersts. Understanding such realities is only good leadership principles.
So, I think that defining the 'good" for everyone else, becomes the bad, because it dismisses individual choice and value, and that is when things can get ugly indeed! People do not like to be pawns.
Friday, February 4, 2011
"The Good Is Really the Bad"
Ayn Rand
"Let there be no misunderstanding about me. If it is now the belief of my fellow men, who call themselves the public, that their good requires victims, then I say: The public good be damned, I will have no part of it!"
“The Moral Meaning of Capitalism,” For the New Intellectual, 98.
Men seek to subvert others in their pursuits of happiness (values and choice) because they deem it necessary to define the "good life" for you. And it also usually means that their interests supercede yours.
Using moral platitudes to undermine another's right to life and liberty is the oldest game in the book. It plays on man's false sense of responsibility, and guilt. Adults are made to frame their own realities and choose for themselves what defines their life, as to purpose.
Don't let anyone else control your mind and life.
"Let there be no misunderstanding about me. If it is now the belief of my fellow men, who call themselves the public, that their good requires victims, then I say: The public good be damned, I will have no part of it!"
“The Moral Meaning of Capitalism,” For the New Intellectual, 98.
Men seek to subvert others in their pursuits of happiness (values and choice) because they deem it necessary to define the "good life" for you. And it also usually means that their interests supercede yours.
Using moral platitudes to undermine another's right to life and liberty is the oldest game in the book. It plays on man's false sense of responsibility, and guilt. Adults are made to frame their own realities and choose for themselves what defines their life, as to purpose.
Don't let anyone else control your mind and life.
What Will the Future Hold for Man and Neuroscience?
The other night my husband and I watched a Nova special on brain science. It was fascinating, but I really started wondering what this would mean for society.
As brain science has found that every brain has unique characteristics, in fact, the brain is like an individual's fingerprint. Every person's transmitter's respond or react differently.
There was one abberation that was interesting. Those that see numbers or letters in color, even if they view a picture in black and white. For them, the numbers or letters are not black and white, but in color! Some see music. Now, I don't feel so "alone" in my physical experience of feeling emotion. Or how my thinking actually impacts my experience. In fact, I can't experience things without the thought process!
What will the future hold, though, if it is found that humans are basically their brain? Will the brain be "trained" to certain societal 'advantages"? Will brain surgury be as common as an apendectomy?
Not too long ago, psychiatrists treated mental illnesses with lobotomies. Will something similiar be in our future, in brain "formation"? Will our brains be understood as "just another computor". And will we understand the human brain as a controllable "substance"?
Is mind control something that de-humanizes man? Who will defend the right to one's brain? Or will the brain only be a collective assest or detriment? But, isn't this how we view men today, anyway? If someone thinks differently, then they are viewed with suspiscion. Social deviants are a detriment to society, or are they? What standards are being held to judge aberrant behavior? or ways of understanding or seeing things?
What does this mean to cultural diversity? linguistics? Is the brain a register of environmental impacts, or is the brain a self-determining entity, that innately "holds its own"? How are researchers determining which is which? As one researcher pointed out, there isn't a way for men to offer their brains for experimentation. So, is that to mean that experiments would be done unwillingly? Who will make that determination? Will all people be susceptible to the same experiementation? Certainly a cross section of society should be studied if there are to be checks and balances as to environmental impacts upon the brain.
It is certainly a fascinating subject. And the questions about investigating and the outcomes will need to be confined in some way, if we want to limit intrusive invasions to privacy. Will brain science be the end of "man", as an individual, or will it be the beginning of understanding man's individuality? Will the answer depend upon what is most important? Man or society? Is this the end of freedom as we know it, or just the beginning? It will be an intereting and challenging future, for sure!
As brain science has found that every brain has unique characteristics, in fact, the brain is like an individual's fingerprint. Every person's transmitter's respond or react differently.
There was one abberation that was interesting. Those that see numbers or letters in color, even if they view a picture in black and white. For them, the numbers or letters are not black and white, but in color! Some see music. Now, I don't feel so "alone" in my physical experience of feeling emotion. Or how my thinking actually impacts my experience. In fact, I can't experience things without the thought process!
What will the future hold, though, if it is found that humans are basically their brain? Will the brain be "trained" to certain societal 'advantages"? Will brain surgury be as common as an apendectomy?
Not too long ago, psychiatrists treated mental illnesses with lobotomies. Will something similiar be in our future, in brain "formation"? Will our brains be understood as "just another computor". And will we understand the human brain as a controllable "substance"?
Is mind control something that de-humanizes man? Who will defend the right to one's brain? Or will the brain only be a collective assest or detriment? But, isn't this how we view men today, anyway? If someone thinks differently, then they are viewed with suspiscion. Social deviants are a detriment to society, or are they? What standards are being held to judge aberrant behavior? or ways of understanding or seeing things?
What does this mean to cultural diversity? linguistics? Is the brain a register of environmental impacts, or is the brain a self-determining entity, that innately "holds its own"? How are researchers determining which is which? As one researcher pointed out, there isn't a way for men to offer their brains for experimentation. So, is that to mean that experiments would be done unwillingly? Who will make that determination? Will all people be susceptible to the same experiementation? Certainly a cross section of society should be studied if there are to be checks and balances as to environmental impacts upon the brain.
It is certainly a fascinating subject. And the questions about investigating and the outcomes will need to be confined in some way, if we want to limit intrusive invasions to privacy. Will brain science be the end of "man", as an individual, or will it be the beginning of understanding man's individuality? Will the answer depend upon what is most important? Man or society? Is this the end of freedom as we know it, or just the beginning? It will be an intereting and challenging future, for sure!
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Free Societies and Accountability
Free societies only remain free when the people hold leaders accountable. This is what the "tea party movement' is attempting to do.
American society can be restored by political activism and change of leadership. This past November demonstrated the "power of the people". It is only when leaders know that their power is only "entrusted" to them by the voters that they will maintain a stance of humility in the place of power. But, if political leaders ever get to the point where they do not fear the people, do not hear the people and their voice, and do not care to "serve" their nation's interests in the place of power, then the nation and its people will suffer.
Americans must remain diligent and awake as to their country's interests and attempt to make a difference in any way they can.
The Constitution must be upheld so that our country will be "ordered" by the "rule of law" and not people who vie for political power irregardless of proper procedure.
American society can be restored by political activism and change of leadership. This past November demonstrated the "power of the people". It is only when leaders know that their power is only "entrusted" to them by the voters that they will maintain a stance of humility in the place of power. But, if political leaders ever get to the point where they do not fear the people, do not hear the people and their voice, and do not care to "serve" their nation's interests in the place of power, then the nation and its people will suffer.
Americans must remain diligent and awake as to their country's interests and attempt to make a difference in any way they can.
The Constitution must be upheld so that our country will be "ordered" by the "rule of law" and not people who vie for political power irregardless of proper procedure.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Separation of Church and State and Individual Conscience
The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries.”
James Madison quote
"The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded upon the Christian Religion." 1797 the treaty of Tripoli, signed by President Washington, and approved by the Senate of the United States
"Almighty God hath created the mind free; all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments of burdens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in His almighty power to do." Thomas Jefferson, Acts for Establishing Religious Freedom in Virginia, 1785.
"I am tolerant of all creeds. Yet if any sect suffered itself to be used for political objects I would meet it by political opposition. In my view church and state should be separate, not only in form, but fact. Religion and politics should not be mingled." Millard Fillmore (1809-1865) 13th U.S. President (Millard Fillmore, address during the 1856 presidential election; from Albert Menendez and Edd Doerr, eds., Great Quotations on Religious Freedom, Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 2002, p. 70.)
"There is not a precept in the New Testament to compel, by civil law, any man who is not a Christian to pay any regard to the Lord's day, more than to any other day, and is without the authority of the christian religion. The gospel commands no duty which can be performed without faith in God. `Whatsoever is not of faith is sin' but to compel men destitute of faith to observe any Christian institution, such as the Lord's day, is commanding a duty to be performed without faith in God. Therefore, to command unbelievers, or natural men, to observe in any sense the Lord's day, is antievangelical, or contrary to the gospel." Alexander Campbell, Founder of Disciples of Christ Church Memoirs, Vol 1, pg 528.
"When religion is good, it will take care of itself. When it is not able to take care of itself, and God does not see fit to take care of it, so that it has to appeal to the civil power for support, it is evidence to my mind that its cause is a bad one." Benjamin Franklin, Statesman, Inventor, Author, Letter to Dr. Price.
"To discriminate against a thoroughly upright citizen because he belongs to some particular church, or because, like Abraham Lincoln, he has not avowed his allegiance to any church, is an outrage against the liberty of conscience, which is one of the foundations of American life." - Roosevelt's letter on religious liberty.
James Madison quote
"The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded upon the Christian Religion." 1797 the treaty of Tripoli, signed by President Washington, and approved by the Senate of the United States
"Almighty God hath created the mind free; all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments of burdens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in His almighty power to do." Thomas Jefferson, Acts for Establishing Religious Freedom in Virginia, 1785.
"I am tolerant of all creeds. Yet if any sect suffered itself to be used for political objects I would meet it by political opposition. In my view church and state should be separate, not only in form, but fact. Religion and politics should not be mingled." Millard Fillmore (1809-1865) 13th U.S. President (Millard Fillmore, address during the 1856 presidential election; from Albert Menendez and Edd Doerr, eds., Great Quotations on Religious Freedom, Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 2002, p. 70.)
"There is not a precept in the New Testament to compel, by civil law, any man who is not a Christian to pay any regard to the Lord's day, more than to any other day, and is without the authority of the christian religion. The gospel commands no duty which can be performed without faith in God. `Whatsoever is not of faith is sin' but to compel men destitute of faith to observe any Christian institution, such as the Lord's day, is commanding a duty to be performed without faith in God. Therefore, to command unbelievers, or natural men, to observe in any sense the Lord's day, is antievangelical, or contrary to the gospel." Alexander Campbell, Founder of Disciples of Christ Church Memoirs, Vol 1, pg 528.
"When religion is good, it will take care of itself. When it is not able to take care of itself, and God does not see fit to take care of it, so that it has to appeal to the civil power for support, it is evidence to my mind that its cause is a bad one." Benjamin Franklin, Statesman, Inventor, Author, Letter to Dr. Price.
"To discriminate against a thoroughly upright citizen because he belongs to some particular church, or because, like Abraham Lincoln, he has not avowed his allegiance to any church, is an outrage against the liberty of conscience, which is one of the foundations of American life." - Roosevelt's letter on religious liberty.
On Freedom
Ayn Rand
"There is no such thing as 'the public interest' except as the sum of the interests of individual men. And the basic, common interest of all men—all rational men—is freedom. Freedom is the first requirement of 'the public interest'—not what men do when they are free, but that they are free. All their achievements rest on that foundation."
“The Fascist New Frontier,” The Ayn Rand Column, 111.
"There is no such thing as 'the public interest' except as the sum of the interests of individual men. And the basic, common interest of all men—all rational men—is freedom. Freedom is the first requirement of 'the public interest'—not what men do when they are free, but that they are free. All their achievements rest on that foundation."
“The Fascist New Frontier,” The Ayn Rand Column, 111.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Selfishness Wins the Day in America!
Hurrah for the recent decision by a Reagan appointee about the universal healthcare mandate! His argument was right from our Revolution! America was founded on the understanding that power must be balanced in government. Absolute power without accountability to the people will run rough-shod over liberty and justice.
His argument was about Britian forcing the colonies to buy tea, an illegal tax, because it was done without representation. And he correlated that argument with mandating individuals and their choice about healthcare.
I imagine this seems to be so immoral to those that are alturistic. But, our country was not founded on alturistic claims about men, but based on knowing that human nature needed accountability and responsibility. Americans were to be self-governing. So, government was to be limited, not the overseer of virtue!~
Government will grab as much power as the people will allow. And this is NOT good for America or the People! Long live liberty!
His argument was about Britian forcing the colonies to buy tea, an illegal tax, because it was done without representation. And he correlated that argument with mandating individuals and their choice about healthcare.
I imagine this seems to be so immoral to those that are alturistic. But, our country was not founded on alturistic claims about men, but based on knowing that human nature needed accountability and responsibility. Americans were to be self-governing. So, government was to be limited, not the overseer of virtue!~
Government will grab as much power as the people will allow. And this is NOT good for America or the People! Long live liberty!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
