New discovery

[infamous]

What page is it on? I am not that great with computers yet.

post # 394

[peacegirl]

Not so Bio. any goodness that I may demonstrate comes from a much higher source than myself.

 

We are all part of this higher source we call God (the laws of our nature); that is why this principle works. No one is exempt, although there are many people have already been hurt by society. Even these people will not be able to hurt others the way they were hurt, once the principle becomes a part of the environment. In time, a new generation will be born and will not have the problems we experience today.

[Biochemist]

...Ego is a serious problem and the higher up someone is in a leadership position the more he will be threatened by new knowledge. This is unfortunate because it is preventing this knowledge from coming to light.

Maybe. But so far, you have not convinced anyone here that your position is rational. I suggest you not blame (yes, blame) the egos of the world leadership when the fundamental argument is not reasonable.

 

Besides, you would suggest the "egos" are only behaving deterministically aren't they"? Why would they not respond to the satisfaction model that you have described? If they won't, then aren't there are thousands of environment factors that will preclude uptake of the do-not-hurt model?

[peacegirl]

We are all part of this higher source we call God (the laws of our nature); that is why this principle works. No one is exempt, although there are many people have already been hurt by society. Even these people will not be able to hurt others the way they were hurt, once the principle becomes a part of the environment. In time, a new generation will be born and will not have the problems we experience today.

 

Oh darn, I answered the wrong post. You wanted #394 and I answered #384. hehehe Let me go back and read that post.

[peacegirl]

Maybe. But so far, you have not convinced anyone here that your position is rational. I suggest you not blame (yes, blame) the egos of the world leadership when the fundamental argument is not reasonable.

 

Besides, you would sugget the "egos" are only behaving deterministically aren't they"? Why would they not respond to the satisfaction model that you have described? If they won't, then aren't there are thousands of environment factors that will preclude uptake of the do-not-hurt model?

 

This is not about blaming them; it is just what is. It is upsetting to know that there is a discovery that is being prevented from coming to light because people have biases. That does not mean I blame them for this, but I am sad.

 

All the environmental factors will not match the principle of no blame once everything that strikes a first blow is removed from the environment. If someone is hurt first, he has justification to retaliate. Ego is a thought system that is a protection from feeling inadequate. When no one feels inadequate, no one will desire to take an accomplishment away from someone else. They will have their own accomplishments and no one will be judged inferior. But that's another discussion for another time.

[Biochemist]

...The causes of mental illness in general will no longer be present. ...

This is going to eradicate organic disease??? PG- I have to admit this now sounds like the drug induced philosophy of a 1960s teenager.

 

It is pretty tough to give this argument much credibility.

[Fishteacher73]

Very true bio...perhaps this might be a better place to pitch the utopia....

http://www.zendik.org/

[peacegirl]

This is going to eradicate organic disease??? PG- I have to admit this now sounds like the drug induced philosophy of a 1960s teenager.

 

It is pretty tought to give this argument much credibility.

 

I know there is a danger of me jumping around way ahead of myself. But I am stuck between a rock and a hard place. No one wants me to explain chapter Three which would clear a lot of things up. I did not say organic disease will be eradicated; but when all justification is removed to administer drugs that could be causing some illnesses, and when the emotional harm from an environment of judgment is removed, who knows? There is definitely a mind/body connection and this is not science fiction.

[Fishteacher73]

There is this thing called genetics too..

[peacegirl]

I must have missed this post earlier so I would like to respond to your claim that this is the first honest thing you have heard me say. I would really like for you to retract that comment as everyting that I have written was done in complete honestly. I really don't like being called a liar, maybe you meant something else? Please clarify your use of the word "honest". I will be happy to let this go if you can explain how you may have in some way misspoke.

 

I did not mean to imply you were a liar. You are giving me good feedback and I do retract that statement. Please accept my apology. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings.

[peacegirl]

There is this thing called genetics too..

 

I never claimed that this discovery would wipe out all disease; but it will certainly reduce illness to a large degree because of the factors I mentioned earlier.

[infamous]

I did not mean to imply you were a liar, I should have said 'relevent' maybe instead of 'honest'. Please accept my apology. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings.

Thank you for that apology, just one more thought; You won't hurt my feeling but if you choose the wrong words when describing someones character, you may hurt your reputation here at Hypography. Have a good one peacegirl.

[peacegirl]

This is good PG. I personally think you should have put this in post #1, and skipped the remaing several hundred postsThis is the first non-sequitur. You are saying that people cannot be blamed for their actions, and yet, they have control over them. (And this is NOT mathematical- it is distracting to add that into the discussion). You are positing that people have control but not responsiblity. This would be characterized as an antinomy by most folks. Are you acknowledging this is an antinomy or are you suggesting this is a rational sequitur?This is experientially untrue. There are many instances where people either will not be blamed or feel they will not be blamed, and yet they still strike the first blow. This seems to be the core of your thesis, and yet it is very difficult to support.We have lots of examples of people that acted differently. Saddam Hussein. The spectators in the Roman Colliseum. Hitler's camp guards...But there are certainly people who see the decrease in "price" as incremental justification, not as a preclusion to aggression. The previous list comes to mind.(Emphasis added) I cannot make these two sentences make sense in English. You are saying that I cannot help myself, and that I can help myself. Explain please.Back to my list above. These folks seemed to actually enjoy horors too horrible for most folks to contemplate. Assuming they feel guit at all. Hussein? Hitler?We seem to have hundreds (thousands?) of historical examples of people that got significant positive personal feedback from causing hurt to others. Why would you contend this will go away?

 

You almost have it. I am saying that we are not responsible because our will is not free, but that is only half of the equation. The person about to commit the crime knows he is responsible. Nothing can make a person hurt another if they don't want to, because they have mathematical control over this. I had to use the word 'mathematical' because that is what it is; you can lead a horse to water but you can' make him drink. In other words, no on has the power, not heredity, environment, first causes or any other cause, to make someone do to another what they make up their mind not to do. What prevents him from desiring to take chances that hurt others or take advantage in other ways is the very fact that he knows the world excuses what he can no longer justify.

 

I do not know your terminology. What is antimony and what is sequitur? This absolutely works but I must repeat that this only works when the person knows IN ADVANCE that he will not be blamed because everyone knows he couldn't help himself since his will is not free even if they have to turn the other cheek; but knowing that he will not be blamed, even if he committed the most heinous crime, prevents him from desiring to move in this direction for satisfaction. In Chapter Three, you can easily see how careless accidents are prevented when this law is a condition of the environment.

 

You are comparing this world to the new world. First of all, people do things whether they are blamed or not because there has been no permanent change in the environment. The knowledge that they would be blamed by someone gives them justification to strike a first blow because they know they would be blamed and punished. Even if they were not blamed by their immediate friends or family, they know they would be blamed by society or the person they hurt, if caught. You have no idea how powerful this law is. It supercedes all manmade laws and brings conscience to a much higher degree. We are now at a 5 or 6; in the new world our conscience climbs to a 10. Once all justification to hurt another is removed, having an environment that does not judge or blame no matter what someone does, prevents the very acts of evil we are trying to remove through punishment and blame. This has not been the best deterrent but up until now but it is the only one we have.

 

Sadam Husein and Hitler and all the rest were not born this way. The environment created these dictators. But as the world changes, we will no longer see people growing up in the same set of environmental conditions that made them choose the course they took. As long as they can pay some kind of price, they can find justification to do what they are doing. But when the price is beyond reach, they cannot justify their aggression. The realization that everyone is moving toward greater satisfaction makes one realize that evil is not evil when seen in total perspective. Everyone's circumstances create the desire to move in a certain direction but, let me repeat, when all the hurt done to them has been removed, their desire to hurt others will also be removed.

[Biochemist]

...No one wants me to explain chapter Three

I think I can assert with pretty high authority that explaining chapter three will not help at all.

I did not say organic disease will be eradicated; but when all justification is removed to administer drugs that could be causing some illnesses, and when the emotional harm from an environment of judgment is removed, who knows?

Hmmm. You mentioned above that mental illness was going to go away. A sigificant fraction of mental illness is organic, and not caused by medication of any sort.

 

It sounds like you think most medications cause damage, versus treat disease. That is an odd point of view.

 

Could you tell me:

 

1) How old are you, and

2) If you have a degree, what is it?

[infamous]

I think I can assert with pretty high authority that explaining chapter three will not help at all.Hmmm. You mentioned above that mental illness was going to go away. A sigificant fraction of mental illness is organic, and not caused by medication of any sort.

 

It sounds like you think most medications cause damage, versus treat disease. That is an odd point of view.

 

Could you tell me:

 

1) How old are you, and

2) If you have a degree, what is it?

 

 

Yes, I would also like to know these facts.

[Smokinjoe9]

Could you tell me:

 

1) How old are you?

I would have to ask the same question?

[sanctus]

Just a suggestion PG: now that you got our interest, you could attach a file with the first three chapters you copied and pasted and then we read it and will understand better your reasoninig (send it to me by e-mail if you don't know how to attach it and I'll attach it for you)