|
Have you ever wondered why modern science progresses so slowly
with all the wealth of resources and effort funneled into it in comparison to scientific developments of the past which seemed to require almost no wealth and were born of playful innovation rather than intense effort? This paper will identify a number of the major factors contributing to this inefficiency.
Every once in many months I receive an e-mail from an individual who expresses severe negative judgement of the information on http://www.earthtym.net/
on the suggested basis that it is totally unscientific. The pattern of the expression is so repetitive and predictable that it is easy to describe the perspective as follows:
- I, the writer am an expert;
- if I have any qualifications, I will not reveal them;
- if your information does not match my awareness, it must be totally wrong;
- if your findings are better than what I know, you must bully me to accept them;
- there is nothing new in the world as science has already discovered it all;
- some problems cannot be solved because science hasn't solved them;
- if you Really are a scientist, everyone already agrees with you.
EXPERTS.
If a person must intensely express fixed views while denying the source of their values and their findings,
what does it advertise about them? This communication pattern is somewhat typical of technicians who occupy many positions in the regulated and bureaucratized industry called science: they take and follow orders and procedures without question or evaluation. This is also true for many people, who by their imprinting, academic training, and Energy Blocks also find acceptance and validation by dependency on the status quo. What science has constantly revealed for the past 100 years is that what most people believe is usually incorrect. Mass indoctrination does not equal mass righteousness.
A value system which is based upon the worship of unquestioned findings, which may also be referred to as facts or laws, or truths, we often refer to as a religion. Yet such a value system is also parallel to that
of myths, magic, superstitions, spurious findings, and co-incidences ... because its faith is based on trust in minimal experience and a rush to conclusion. There is very little connection between the founding
spiritual ideals with their individually relevant expression and encouragement, and, the generalized, demanding, inflexible, and often individually irrelevant political (power of mass sanction) ritualization.
A more direct and constructive faith is based on experience that is questioned and extensive. That, takes motivation, commitment, courage, and openness. It demands a self-confidence that allows one to look beyond themselves with neither fear, dependency, nor paranoia. Is what we commonly call science a structure of belief based on some super-personal deity that answers our fears, enhances our social acceptance, and provides us with a sense of
crowd power?
The term "objective reasoning" is often utilized by would-be scientists as the god of their beliefs.
Yet such persons are careful never to define what such objectivity arises from. When we examine it more closely we find that it refers to generally accepted and taught concepts that represent the status quo --- an authoritarian system of political authority which sanctions honors, certificates, and grants jobs to those who pledge subservience to it. If you do and say what is expected by that group authority, you receive its blessing ... usually including social acceptance and financial security ... did someone say, power. What greater need does the personally insecure person have than power?
Science, as it was originally proposed, not so very long ago, has little to share with low self-esteem persons or with culturally organized value systems. I will refer to this alternate perspective here as Direct Science. A scientist never takes the position of an expert who knows all there
is to know about anything. A scientist assumes that there are always other factors or features or interrelatedness aspects about everything which can be discovered and appreciated. Anything less would be a closed mind. Anything less would be to assume the position of a deity. A scientist is humbled by the continual revelation of his or her discoveries and finds joy in the miracle of complexity and interrelatedness, rather than anxiety, confusion, and insecurity.
QUALIFICATIONS.
My qualifications are openly shared on Earthtym.net
Ultimately, it comes down to lots of relevant personal experience with little theory. I provide personal background detail as is necessary in any valid scientific approach, for without a history there is no relevant starting point which applies to any other subject. More academic and career based details are shared in the website documents: Mentoring and, References.
My evidence also includes some of the great challenges I have faced, and grown from.
A person who avoids challenge avoids the creativity and innovativeness demanded of science. The fact that I have been, and continue to be, successful in the resolution of problems is an outcome of my scientific
approach in never being afraid to ASK questions and express constructive criticism (how to improve something). The reality that this approach has introduced me to Spiritual Guidance and a Spiritual Perspective is
something I share with those Scientists most often acknowledged for their contributions after the death of their status quo critics.
I received training in the servicing and installation of mainframe computer systems in the late 1960s. I then worked through much of the 70s utilizing that knowledge to build an extensive experience and constantly improve my problem solving skills maintaining mini-computer systems. Unlike most technicians, I recognized that the "system" was composed of both hardware (machines), software (ritualized intelligence), and, people (operators, owners, salespersons). My success rate was notably high because I questioned, listened, and reflected before usually opening my toolcase.
Like the few others who took their job with a professional attitude, it always astounded me how so many others would rush out to a service call, rush through a service check with little or no communication with
the people involved, and, rush back to the office ... only to be called back, sometimes repeatedly. Their impatience, assumed expertise from their study and title, and lack of openness to the consideration of the
complexity of the whole cost themselves and the company a great amount of inefficiency and ineffectiveness. It takes self-direction and courage to ask the questions that others do not and to take the time to respect
the awareness of others.
Evidence of the common failures of technology abounds in our private lives (in industrialized and consumerized societies, like the North American). In the auto industry, there are always hundreds of thousands
of recalls. These are not notices of bonus updates and revisions. They are notices of critical failures that endanger safety and were overlooked in production by the lack of a scientific approach. Science demands testing and cumulative results. Marketing has come to demand sales on the promise of and appearance of results, with very little question or testing.
Here are two of many personal experiences which demonstrate the failure of the status quo perception of and implementation of science:
-
The Vega car model
was introduced by Chevrolet in the early 1970s.
It was heralded as the first car with an aluminum engine block.
This major part was described as having been extensively tested and all of its many technical advantages were well promoted. I was one of the early adopters of technology at the time and purchased one. My job entailed quite a bit of road travel. I became increasingly frustrated with the car when engine after engine failed, stranding me, or nearly resulting in an accident.
Although I had maintained the car well, Chevrolet maintained that the fault must be mine because, of course, the quality of their engine was without question. After having to have 3 engines replaced in 18 months, the issue became so widespread and repetitive that a class action suit was threatened of Chevrolet. Admitting their failure, they then agreed to the defectiveness of the design and agreed to pay for the cost of the replacement parts (minor), but not the labor involved (major). All technology grows from a base of science. The quality of the science is equal to the quality of the product.
-
I enrolled in a Sociology Thesis class in the early 1980s together with about 28 other students. The course director asked that we prepare an overview of what we were going to research, the question that we would seek to prove or disprove, and the method we would use. Each of us then were afforded a personal interview
for an acknowledgement and acceptance of our choice and a corroboration that our strategy and tactics would be well conceived.
My interview
seemed to go from introduction to anxiety to confusion to disbelief to confrontation to suppressed anger. The course director listened to my presentation. He then proceeded to tell me that it could NOT be done in
the way I had outlined because ... it was not conventional. I had wanted to provide a multi-dimensional description of the mystical reality with the hope of demonstrating that such a reality is VERY different from
the conventional physical reality. Direct communication of the more personal and abstract to the more public and physically centered was impossible because words were attributed to aspects of a singular physical reality only.
There was no word medium shared by mystics that could be understood by others. First, the mystic
community was tiny and the individuals often isolated from one another, even unknown to each other. Secondly, communication of the mystical reality might be possible by the use of a 4-dimension paradigm that I had used to explain and demonstrate the inter-relatedness of historical developments. My source was myself. I had experienced mystical reality on a number of occasions in my early teens.
My mentoring professor had a VERY different view of what I must do, if I were going to write a thesis while he was supervising. In order to be acceptable, I needed to TOTALLY revise my question, tactics and
strategy, and, do it as he would. It would have to be a totally word based report in which I would describe the mystical reality with the terms of the physical reality. Negotiation and compromise were not words in his vocabulary, even if such could have been possible.
His only exposure to mysticism was through the academic examination of writing attributed to mystics,
translated from other languages, and, philosophically embellished by imaginative rationalists. That is like believing the interpretation given by a animistic priest as to what a nuclear physicist does when he
adjusts the depth of the fuel rods into the core of a nuclear reactor. So, a person with no experience of and no relevant description of a reality was defining how I MUST present it to the regular population. Such a degree of Power and Control over my work would ultimately result in my thesis being a contribution to knowledge, or, a failure.
With the above restrictions on
innovation and creativity, including a total denial of the problem -- communication between two realities -- I could only fail if I continued, unless. If I denied my reality of experience, denied my integrity, became totally passive, and wrote the paper through the eyes and words of the director --- I would likely pass. This total surrender of self to the authority of the system would gain me the important distinction of Ph.D. I could not lie against my spiritual experience. I would not sell my soul for political sanction. I withdrew from the course.
Was my experience singular?
Before the end of the third week, all but 3 persons had withdrawn from the course. I spoke with one of the three who were continuing. She affirmed that her experience had been similar to mine. The course director had taken her proposition and presentation and totally gutted it. She would have to do what he wanted a thesis done on and according to how he THOUGHT it would best be done.
She said she felt used and beaten.
Yet, she could not drop this course and try to do it the following year when another professor would be the director. She could not afford the loss of time and the expense another year would mean. She did not want
to end her academic accomplishment without the Ph.D. designation --- which was so close, and, which was believed to be so important a sanction for future employment, tenure, security. She offered that it
was the same situation for the other 2 students who were staying. I sympathized, yet I would have to take the risks of no advanced degree.
Why had 24 other hopefuls left?
A few later shared their description of similar experiences. The reasons for most I will never know. Three years later, I was listening on my car radio as I drove back to the office. There was a call-in talk show
on. The subject was about students dropping out of university before completing their upper degree course, before getting a Ph.D. After all, they had spent all that time and energy to get that far. Could they not
somehow just squeeze in one more year? Caller after caller mentioned as the primary reason for their leaving being the morally compromising, and manipulation of scientific research experience similar to my own. The
moderator and guest speaker quoted a number of statistics about how often this abuse of power happened at such a potentially critical career point. Just how valuable is the science that is ALLOWED to be done?
If you are simply building and extending your reputation using the statements of others as your foundation, you may be replicating ignorance. How relevant is the information you have assumed to be correct? It has been researched and reported for over 15 years, increasingly, that more and more of the so-called scientific papers written in every segment of the scientific industry quote as fact other studies. In some cases, reports that have been printed as much as decades previous have been quoted as supporting evidence in thousands of other papers -- only to be eventually credited with evidence tampering, critically poor design, and other aspects of fraud. And so, for the sake of social and academic acceptance how much time and effort and
money has been wasted revering the lies?
Very often, a person of low self-esteem and the pride of authoritarian dependency, will deceptively express their conclusions with total confidence, inflexibility, and ownership. They make it appear that either they KNOW the answer because of WHO they are, or, that the answer they are expressing they have gleaned from some EXPERT.
The person of positive self esteem, an assertive person, would acknowledge their sources, acknowledge their confidence in a possibly incorrect or misinterpreted source, and acknowledge their own use or non use of the information together with the outcome. Of course, they would acknowledge their own experience and contribution, taking both the credit and the responsibility for it.
AWARENESS RELEVANCY.
Would you go to a farmer to have neurosurgery done?
Hopefully, you would not take such a risk of expecting the benefit of
much tried and successful experience from a person in such an unrelated
field, unless, the farmer had previously been a very successful
neurosurgeon.
Personal Experience can build awareness, skill, intuition, confidence, humility.
Yet such experience is time and resource intensive ... potentially
expensive in terms of risk, failure, and the inconsistencies of
challenge coping through creativity and innovativeness. Mass cultures
want, and demand, mass performance with a minimum of risk and a maximum
of efficiency. They often obtain their goal through the
institutionalization of knowledge: ritual.
How can you teach something to many other people,
if what you are teaching is constantly changing. To maintain this
degree of current enlightenment, a teacher would continually have to be
sending out updates, revisions, and additions to past and present
students. Given the nature of Authority and the nature of Dependency,
the latter is made increasingly fragile by the inconsistency of the
former. Mass performance can usually only be achieved through mass
persuasion ... mass confidence.
The more structured and authority based the culture,
the more often are the teachers and mentors simply mirroring what has
been taught to them. What if a society was organized in which most of
the knowledge believed in was composed of rationalized descriptions and
generalized approximations of real personal experience? In such a
situation, would not the basis of mass reality not be the illusion of
personal experience. The criticism most often expressed by the
self-righteous status quo hanger on is that what you are saying doesn't
match the status quo. If they will only accept more of the same of a
demonstrated failure of the status quo, the existence of the problem,
why are they even looking for an answer? Self-sabotaging?
Everyone could THINK that certain statements of experience would be true,
yet no one might have actually had the experience that is believed.
Like the situation described above in which thousands of students vying
for the title of expert, quote the statements of other would be experts
while totally lacking personal experience to support those findings and
not having critically examined those findings. One failing is that
generalities frequently are untrue in many real and practical specific
situations. The failing is that as long as a generalized truth is
accepted, without test or criticism, it stifles confirmation and the
personal commitment which comes from openness and sharing. Authority
becomes primary while content sinks to increasing irrelevancy.
Effectiveness is sacrificed for apparent efficiency.
I stress the multifaceted reality of my findings on Earthtym.net
Time and again, I mention preliminary history and factors which are
Relevant to the outcome. When I wrote about my experiences with toxic Dental Mercury Amalgams
I noted that I had previously been detoxing for about 10 years. I noted
that many of my other amalgams had been removed earlier. I noted that,
without specific routines and combinations of ingredients in
personalized doses, it was difficult for anyone to eliminate mercury
from within their system. Yet, I was still experiencing many symptoms
which are recognized the world over, excepting conventional North
America, as indicative of mercury poisoning. It was evident by the
immediate loss of and relief from dramatic symptoms, after the removal
of some amalgams that those amalgams must have been currently dumping a
lot of mercury daily into my system.
Was it possible for such a recovery to have been psychosomatic?
This is a favored criticism of anything that calls the status quo public
belief into question. If they don't understand it and don't want to
investigate the detail of the case, it is always easy to degrade it by
making it sound mythical. I did NOT expect such a recovery beforehand.
No one had told me beforehand that such was possible. I have received
thanks for my openness and sharing since by others with similar
experiences ... also belittled by status quo supporters. Is it not
mythical for the public to believe general statements of safety about
aspirin or dozens of other common medications ... while ignoring the
facts that hundreds of thousands die from these same SAFE medicines
yearly? I would rather rely on my critical experience than on public
authority.
The adherent of mythical status quo science
typically speed reads and glances over the information only looking for
points of confirmation with their current ignorance, or, authoritative
dramatic statements of generality which would make any Direct Scientist
cringe. Missing up to 90% of the content of what he or she may have
read, it is then not surprising that they may write me that they believe
my findings are unscientific because recovery from mercury poisoning
can take a decade or longer. I can't force them to read. And they don't
have the integrity and self-discipline to do so, by their response.
ONLY BULLIES WIN!
Did you ever wonder
how some evangelical persons can be so totally committed to an idea or
belief and yet be hypocritical in their actions? They will yell and
scream for the merits of science, yet have little awareness of what
Direct Science
is, or entails, and, do not follow such basic directions themselves.
Did you ever wonder why some people can be totally sold on one issue
today and tomorrow be totally sold on an adversarial one? Are they just
gullible persons? Are they simply insincere? Are they mentally
deficient? I would often say NO to all of these assertions.
Persons who totally commit themselves
to ideas, beliefs, and positions with no or little relevant experience
or awareness often do so out of an emotional need to be wanted,
accepted, acknowledged. NEED is used here to denote an obsession arising
from a traumatic experience of Loss. The result is
Energy Blocked
behavior that may be intensified through social mentoring and
imprinting displays of those around them. Desires can be acted on with
temperance, awareness, openness, honesty, empathy, and compassion ...
and build trust.
Needs, through their compulsive intensity
... incorporate deception, manipulation, anxiety, fear, and
possessiveness. Total commitment is given, yet is unearned and can only
arise from the lack of self-respect that allows a person to enslave
themselves. Choice demands freedom and self-responsibility. Scientists
must always have choice. It is those who demean and distort science who
cannot abide choice. For them, assertion is the condemnation of choice
... the possibility of exclusion, of confrontation, of abandonment, of
loss.
Aggressive-Passive authoritarian patterns of perception, belief, and communication
leave simpler, more direct, and more self-esteemed persons confused and
frustrated. Why? Because the aggressive-passive pattern is taught in
our mass institutions and results in people NOT being honest, sharing,
or straightforward. Don't expect this to be a minor segment of modern
mass culture. Statistical studies for the past 6 years (since 1996) have
consistently revealed that most people lie to many of those they
interact with on a daily basis, and, the tendency is increasing and
endemic. The basis of this reaction behavior is imprinted and energy
blocked emotional immaturity.
The emotionally immature person does NOT want to hear the Truth
for they fear that such truth will point out their weaknesses and
errors. The fear is that you will abuse them by expecting an adult
response from them which as a child they were incapable of providing.
Having been emotionally hurt (traumatized) when young by others who held
power yet lacked awareness and respect for less developed persons, the
emotionally immature person now seeks to avoid any suggestion of a
similar confrontation. The only truth they want to acknowledge is the
truth that others have imposed on them, and, the truth of their
fantasies and personal superstitions.
The destructiveness of this communication and behavioral pattern
is that it leaves the person in a continual state of defence. In
extreme cases, a paranoia pervades with the expectation that anything
offered by another which is not totally congratulatory towards the
subject MUST be a negative, a put-down, an attempt to hurt. Always
defending against reality and self-responsibility, the emotionally
immature person finds security in their self-made prison of interaction
without involvement. They are talking but not listening to anyone but
their own fears.
An article on the Oral Character
can provide you with more insight into the aggressive-passive person.
Such persons seem unable to ask for what they want ... always expecting
that somehow others will read their minds, and, holding others
accountable for not doing what the aggressive-passive person expects
they should have done. As this attitude brings frustration, anger, and
defensiveness to the aggressive-passive person, those around them who do
not play this same communication "game" refused to be abused, and
leave. In other words, those persons and those outcomes which could be
the most constructive and sustaining for the aggressive-passive person
are rejected. In turn, the aggressive-passive person is abandoned
proving that the pattern is self-sabotaging.
The aggressive-passive person invests their commitment
wherever they receive the greatest degree of acceptance. Every
political deception has succeeded only because masses of people believed
that the STATUS of the leaders legitimized their commitment. The power
of money, of position, of the potential of physical force, of reward of
association, of social respect, of the majority ... has soothed their
addiction for acceptance. For them, catch words have more hypnotic
persuasion than the meaning of the words afford any context of
awareness. Hence, political linguistics shows that different individuals
can mean the opposite by the employment of the same word. I use science
to mean discovery and sharing. The narrow-minded critic uses science to
mean status quo allegiance and intolerance. Human imposition of
authority is a disrespect for others, and oneself. It expects that
safety is with numbers and that safety is more important than the Truth.
What does the aggressive-passive person require for a change of mind?
Their allegiance depends entirely on their sense of security and
inclusiveness. They will stand and fight for their viewpoint on the
basis of the Power which was expressed individually, cumulatively, or in
fantasy ... to challenge their being a part of something with the risk
of ostracism. Unless you can counter that Force with greater Force,
there will be no persuading them. The only way that you can counter a
Force that was applied in a Bully fashion against a child-like
emotionally behaving person is to be a Bigger Bully. If you respond with
great intensity, with threats, with persistence ... the previously
bullied person will either walk away in retreat, engage in a play of
"Whose Will is Stronger?", or, accept your position as the more
powerful. The only predictable point is that if You want to play their
game, your participation is Only acknowledged if you play by their
rules: Greatest Bully Wins.
Scientists don't bully and dislike being bullied.
Scientists are strong enough within themselves to appreciate their own
efforts and make the self-judgement of whether their choices are best
for them or not. Constructive criticism they love as a means to extend
and improve their discoveries and the truths that have been revealed to
them. They have little tolerance for childlike intellectual temper
tantrums voiced by insecure persons trying to defend their ignorance.
SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY.
There are at least annual examples of scientific theories and laws being overturned,
even reversed. In the early 1900s, electrical associations sought to
provide a common understanding of electricity so that a unified approach
could be taken for research and teaching. Initially, the dominant
theory was that "holes" moved between the electrodes. Yet in the North
American materialistic biased culture, it became difficult to preach the
abstraction of moving holes to the masses, who were not abstract
thinkers. So, after a few years, the theory was reversed and expressed
as finite electrons moving in the opposite direction as the holes were
to have been moving.
Electronics realities and science challenged the old electron theory
during the late 1960s such that design criteria and guidelines in some
of the Japanese semi-conductor resource books of the time began to write
of hole movement again. Integrated circuit (IC) operation was much
better understood, by the abstract thinking circuit designers, from the
position of hole movement. Japanese electronics development has been
ahead of the rest of the world since.
In a form of hypocrisy of ritual,
the electron theory of electricity has continued to be taught to the
masses to this very day (2002). History has demonstrated that the more
accurate explanation is irrelevant, if politically, it is easier to
convey authority and certainty by catering to the perceptual level of
the masses. Massive change, even for the purposes of accuracy, better
relevancy, and truth ... are revolutionary ... and political leaders
lose their power and authority in revolutions.
The creativity and innovativeness
of most individuals whose concepts and ideas eventually advanced the
understanding of society with revolutionary advances in every field of
experience and experiment were originally considered insane and
ostracised. The status quo, and the armchair critic, content in their
narrow-minded certainty imprison those who would make humanity more
healthy, more content, more peaceful, more joyful, more self-sufficient.
The more archaic the rigid person and society becomes, the more it
encourages treason and terrorism for the abuse of unwarranted
confinement sponsors strivings for freedom. Why else would it sometimes
take the threat of death for an individual to break the bonds of
convention and release truths that have always been available: truths
that work.
PROBLEM DOMINANCE.
Humans who play God never tire of telling others that certain things cannot be done.
The obverse is that they tell us that some things CAN be done which are
scientifically known to be impractical for the foreseeable future.
Impractical if we continue to deny reality and work totally in our
imagination. To the extent that we look on such people as mentors, they
disable us. To the extent that their social or physical power draws
respect from us, we are deceived. To the extent that society imposes the
values and standards of other individuals and institutions upon us, we
are manipulated and brainwashed to respect the authority of other humans
as replacements for God. Choice in such circumstances is withdrawn,
perverted, or denied. To what end?
When I was young I had severe environmental allergies.
Medical and social authorities told me that allergies could not be
escaped and that I MUST take pharmaceuticals to control the symptoms so
that I could participate in society. I did. And when an adult dose would
not control the symptoms, I was mentored to increase the dosage. I did.
And so for half the year, every year, for more than 15 years I consumed
double the adult dose advised on the box. This was an early, crude,
strong, over-the-counter antihistamine that is still available today,
called Pyribenzamine.
My grades at school increasingly came into conflict with
marks that required recall of information in the exact form as the
original. Such rote memory failed me. Essay type questions and exams
were usually worth top marks, for me. Only I recognized this problem.
Throughout my later teens and throughout my 20s, I took every speed
reading and memory course I could find. No improvement resulted in my
recall. My understanding and memory were very good, but not my recall.
Scientists discovered,
and it was reported to the public, briefly, in the early 1970s (in my
early 30s), that taking the REGULAR dose of this antihistamine for
extended periods WOULD lead to a killing off of brain cells contributing
to the function of memory, and specifically recall. It was never a
reality that I did not understand what I studied or experienced, nor
that that information wasn't somewhere in my brain. I just could not
access a lot of it when I wanted to. To counter this disability, I
developed superior organizational skills ... NOT a strength of my Basic
Personality. Following the status quo expertise of lay scientists and
sanctioned scientists had deprived me of a socially advantageous skill,
recall.
I found that allergies could be eliminated when I released my energy blocks.
Working with other people, and with Balancing Therapy
in the various stages of my refinement of it, I found that others could
also become symptom free. This side effect of releasing energy blocks
was one of the realities which encouraged me to adopt a Spiritual
Perspective and enough self-esteem to acknowledge
Direct Science
in conflict with the status quo and go beyond previous frustrations, anxieties, and enslavement.
I was told by many specialists (1975 - 76) that I would never recover from my first whiplash injury.
I recovered.
I was told by many specialists (1987 - 1988)
that I would never recover from hypersensitivities ... because science
as known by the medical and alternative health field establishments did
not know how to understand it or to cure it.
I recovered.
For 15 years, I have assisted others.
I was told by a medical specialist (1996)
that I could not have a severe parasite infestation, because, North
Americans didn't have parasites unless they were tapeworms. To ensure
the dogma, I was prescribed tests which I discovered that science
considered inconclusive and largely inaccurate in result. The doctor
refused to refer me and could not answer about my symptoms.
Following specific spiritually guided dosages of herbs and supplements, I recovered.
The parasites were expelled. I saw them.
There are many more examples I could note.
It is always easy for the Slave to believe the errors of the Master than
to acknowledge the findings that prove the too often reality that Power
does NOT make Right or Truth. Human recorded history is a long-term
record of thousands of leadership decisions taken by appointed or
assumed human leaders which resulted in catastrophe. Yet the public
never learn the significance and continue to stumble on, supporting
those who LOOK the part rather than those who ARE the part of a wise
leader.
Direct Scientists refuse slavery
at the risk of danger, ostracism, poverty, even imprisonment. The
degree of our collective Inability to be self-directed, self-assertive,
self-motivated, and self-actualizing is paced by the ever expanding
population of poor, sick, homeless, depressed, abused, and conflict
ravaged.
The supporters of mythical science
will seek to make the Scientist responsible for Their inability to
think in a wider context. They want the simplistic and self-centered
answers they have always been fed by their social, religious, and
political authorities. Why is it the fault of the Scientist that they
have never had the self-esteem, willpower, persistence, and
self-discipline to learn how to search, examine, test, critique,
negotiate, play, create, enjoy, and have knowledge revealed to them? Yet
each would have the Scientist defend his or her position by giving them
a personal course in the development of such skills while quickly
digging in their heels with a mantra of either, "That takes too long,"
or "That is too complicated," or "That isn't what everyone else says!"
They would rather Fail, like their peers.
There is a comfort in numbers, even if the numbers are dying. There is a
comfort in numbers as one does not have to risk being acknowledged as
anything more than a number, a participant in an existence of monotonous
acceptance -- untested, unchallenged, unfrustrated in their passivity.
They would rather try to enjoy the temporary events of life as an
antidote to the fears and anxieties that a Direct Science
approach could forever resolve. How much better enjoyment is when you
are content ... but you will never know that until you have experienced
it. And I can't do that for you. If you want off the treadmill, YOU have
to make the effort and take the risk: Earn the Result.
I have been told, by many people,
that what I have been able to do with the resources available to me,
was categorically impossible. Yet, if Spiritually Guided to head in that
direction, and, IF willing to choose to follow the Guidance received, I
have always succeeded in doing my part.
Society and the individual are both hugely exploited
by perceptions of science as authoritative, definitive, unchanging,
all-powerful, inflexible ... god-like. The payment for such human pride
is a HUGE increase in the numbers of chronically ill persons in highly
structured societies, like the American and Canadian. The payment is
social disintegration of personal relationships, marriages,
institutional systems ... through an inability to halt the increase in
energy block generation and begin reducing it society-wide. The cost is
in the hundreds of billions of dollars each year ... and verges evermore
on political disintegration and species challenge.
Is it time for a Direct Science
awareness, perspective, and approach ... yet?
Direct Science is interested in best
guess theories to encourage awareness and promote critical advancement.
Most of all, a true scientist is ever searching for practical results
that solve problems longer-term, regardless of whether everyone agrees
with the expression of meaning put forward by the innovators or the
teachers. When will YOU offer an example of an impossibility that you
have proved, by practical personal experience, to be wrong? Why try and
discredit someone else for doing what you haven't had the courage to
try?
The PERILS of being a Scientist.
Whether the following are Perils, Challenges, Benefits, or
merely social reality is simply a matter of perspective. Direct
Scientists have a high tendency of sharing the following:
-
Encountering many failures, accidents, disappointments.
Scientists have inquiring minds, great curiosity, an appreciation for
the great diversity of the reality around them, yet, an ability to focus
on one topic at a time while still maintaining an association mentally
to the details of other topics. This ability to inter-associate allows
for their revelations of innovation and creativity. They would be the
first to say that the answer just came to them, rather than gush pride
and rationalize, often illegitimately, that they THOUGHT the answer out.
Yet social structures everywhere seek to magnify the individual and
accentuate his or her Ego of personal worth rather than appreciate the
Scientist and Science for what they are. This mythologizes both making
each a god for others to worship, or, vilify.
Scientists encounter many challenges by being proactive and aggressive
in their hunt for new awareness. It is that new awareness that brings
new knowledge. That awareness is often the result of making hundreds,
even thousands, of attempts, a great effort. People who succeed every
time take little awareness of the meaning of that success and have no
motivation to be aware of which solutions would be more relevant in
different situations. Winning occasionally allows one to evaluate one's
options and their influence and become more aware of the peripheral
influencing factors that contribute to the whole.
Each attempt to solve or resolve a problem
necessarily results in failure until success is reached. Such
persistence demands a strength of will yet also a high degree of
self-discipline. All Direct Scientists are pioneers. They must be their
own leaders and managers and utilize great freedom and independence if
they are to go where no one else seems to have successfully returned
from. The many persons who do not have the patience, perseverence, or,
have too much uncontrolled anxiety, fear, or insecurity ... will pounce
on the quick, simple, and often short-term success, long-term failure
options. Superstition, spurious associations, the magic of
self-deception, denial, and subservience to human authority systems are
their avenues for escape, and, security.
The massive effort of the professional hunt for answers requires sacrifices
in areas where the great majority of society spend much of their time.
The scientist finds such Joy and Mystery in the Search and Discovery
missions they work on that often socializing, family, politics, and
intimacy are placed in secondary priority. Yet the public tend to
interpret this personal reverence for all as an obsession that is
peculiar for its anti-social nature. The reality is that the public,
with their misunderstandings of science, force the scientist to often
take a self-exclusionary role from society so as to avoid abuse and
retain freedom.
The Direct Scientist encounters many failures because they seek them out.
They know that discoveries do not come from doing what has always been
done. They know that trying new alternatives can, and likely will,
result in failures. They also know, often from personal strivings, that
improvement only comes from learning and learning only comes from making
mistakes. The more mistakes made, and learned from, the more
improvements can be made. Eventually, those improvements equal success.
The Direct Scientist is not afraid of errors, or, of what others will
think of him or her for trying. They know that all those Others have not
helped them and don't have a constructive answer.
-
Being socially separate from the Public.
Any Direct Scientist will be able to recount dozens, perhaps hundreds of
incidents, in which friends or relatives or managers have discouraged
them and excluded them. On the intellectually stimulated point of
nearing a great discovery, they will hear remarks of why not just set it
aside and go to the game, or a party, or eat, or rest. For the
scientist, this is like being close to orgasm and then being told to
just roll over and forget it.
This is just how dramatically different the perceptions are of the two parties.
The public person is only thinking of himself or herself and whether
they will be included in the group activity suggested. The Scientist is
thinking of how they can resolve a problem, often at their own expense,
which will ultimately offer benefit to many other people, including
themselves. Their ability to delay gratification for the abstract goal
of success centered on a finite and practical conclusion is much at odds
with the socially dependent person who looks for immediate
gratification for the obvious goal of acceptance centered on a illusory
myth that agreement and participation with others will equal personal
acknowledgement.
Scientists also often hear statements of how impossible it is
whatever they value or seek or what they have found. A waste of time.
Who's time? The scientist values their time according to achievements
that go beyond the ordinary. The socialite values their time by how many
groups they are members of, how many people know them, how much they
are respected by the co-dependency of others, and, by how much better
off they are, materially, than their peers and those who don't rate as
their peers. Our cultures speak loud and clear in the collective
ignorance and pride of the enslaved and obedient majorities: However bad
things are and however unjust society is, just do as you are told,
follow orders, and play the game (of deceptions and illusions).
-
Being manipulated and deceived by others.
It is unfortunate but all too often the result that scientists have
their findings used for mal-intents by the masses. Especially where
technology is concerned, very little public support contributes to the
creative and resolution processes unless they are motivated by fear and
rage under the manipulation of their leaders. It is always easiest to
obtain funding for any scientific development if a military use can be
found for it. Peace is a much more difficult sell. Why?
How do you convert a populace into a force for love
when they are sexual failures with suppressed anger and rage supported
by low self-esteem and co-dependent addictions? Check your cultural
statistics. How much of your culture's surplus resources are put into
educating the populace in more constructive coping and parenting skills
relative to the amounts spent on marketing co-dependency and financing
armaments and wars?
Love takes strength, awareness, humility, positive self-esteem, self assertiveness.
Culture has always promised to deliver these. Yet the human example,
through 99% of history, is that culture creates co-dependent (weakened),
self oblivious, proud, low self-esteem (needy), passive-aggressive
deceptive communicators ... who by passing on their energy blocks, and,
using their own to create new ones in their charges ... provide an ever
weakened society.
Scientists spend their energies and resources in finding solutions.
They are frequently more doers than talkers. To the public, they
frequently refuse to diminish the Reality and Risks that they
personally know to provide the deceptive sizzle for the sale. The
depressed Public, seldom experiencing the emotional joy of individual
achievement and discovery, are predictable in their rush to buy the
promise without testing the claims. Microsoft has built the
microcomputer industry on this principle. If mainframe computers had
ever been built, serviced, and sold in a similar manner, the directors
and executives of such companies would have been jailed for fraud and
endangerment.
Like inventors and artists,
scientists are often given the option by those with more materialistic
aims and finances ... to allow for the mass merchandising of their
product at the expense of quality. Scientists facing poverty and
material responsibility, for themselves and their families, make easy
targets for conversion to the market philosophy that if it sells, it is
Good. Drugs, guns, pornography, and gambling are all Big sellers. Who
would pay for the development of self-experience and empowerment,
conflict resolution strategies, healthy sex mentoring, and positive
esteem programs that accentuate constructive problem solving? Certainly
no institutions have. They are busy running hypocritical distractions so
that the more profitable enterprises can ensure our continued
enslavement.
The hypocrisy of the public
is well demonstrated when catastrophes happen and the scientists
involved are blamed for the unscientific results. Yet what option for
social survival has the public given through their purchasing habits of
ignorance and their naive belief in the stories circulated by power
concerned groups in the government and the media. Why should scientists,
as people, be expected to be so oblivious to materialism and ostracism
when most members of the public make their choices according to how they
can gain the most material wealth and find the greatest social
acceptance? Our history is intoxicated with the examples of scientists
who weakened by the demands of a materialistic society sacrificed their
integrity, to the greater downfall of all humanity.
-
Experiencing Success as a constant Joy.
They understand that most learning and awareness comes from failure, so,
they take joy from many of their failures. It signifies to them that
they are closer to ultimate success. Some people who have worked very
close to me never seem to be able to understand this concept. The fact
that I have Joy every time I can assist someone else to diminish or
eradicate their hypersensitivities, their chronic illness, or their
otherwise troubled life is foreshadowed by them with the trauma they
know I have had to experience to find the answers. Like the status quo
myth that intelligence can be simply absorbed from a book and a mentor,
they expect that answers to Real problems can be solved without Real
contact.
Direct scientists do not run from problems.
When I have been ill, I did not give up just because everyone else had. I
did not feel sorry for myself and get chronically depressed and
anxious, frustrated and dependent. I took action. I sought answers. I
took what was available and questioned why it did not work. I accepted
that rational approaches were really only relevant 50% of the time, not
the myth of almost perfection. I tried what others hinted might work.
When I found a dependable process for discovery without error beyond
that of my level of skill in using it, I was not afraid to speak of it:
Spiritual Guidance.
Those who wish to remain helpless and ignorant
make assumptions rather than ask questions or read. Their assumptions
are the extensions of their fears, their insecurities, their fantasies
and their obsessions. After all, that is all they have to build on if
they refuse to interact. They just want to be cared for, as they have,
or haven't been in the Past. Either way, over-care or abandonment, the
result is usually passive self-direction. Look around you. How many
people could be self-sufficient today in mass societies, if their life
depended on it?
The co-dependent Public react to failure with horror
and the hope that no one finds out their error. They don't want to try
anything new or different, in case it fails. Failure to them stands for
the ostracism and abandonment they have often experienced from same
gender peers, parents and mentors and now foist on others. Scientists
only experience chronic depression when they try to buy into the
illusion that materialism sells that acceptance and love is only a
self-denial away. If your integrity is for sale, how can you be worthy
of trust, by anyone, except those who know they can manipulate you?
-
Facing Reality as constantly changing, unpredictable, yet manageable.
Direct Scientists, from their experience and their discoveries, know
that there are few certainties in life. They know that what ever you may
have materially today may be taken away tomorrow by fire, theft, flood,
sickness, unemployment, persecution, death. Accepting those as
realities eliminates one's fear of them and allows for a relevant
valuation of the material compared to the unchangeable qualities of
experience, integrity, sharing, and love. Life continues with Joy and
sadness along the way.
The Public have been taught to believe
that whatever they save up or accumulate will somehow magically escape
all of the possible mishaps that can diminish them. By some miracle,
those actions will only happen to others. By the illusion of their crowd
rationality, such bad things only happen to other people, people who
are not as good as they are. They are doing everything that someone else
has mandated that they are SUPPOSED to do. That makes them Special.
That gives them sanctions, power, opportunities, acceptance. Until that
fateful day, mandated by their slavery, when their simple cause-effect
mindedness results in their exclusion to the poverty of loss.
Denial of Reality ensures that Reality will often smother us.
Maybe those clear expectations will always escape us. Maybe we will meet
those expectations and find they do not provide the security or
happiness we have been promised ... by those who would manipulate us.
Maybe the fact that we could get well, could have a good relationship,
could accomplish something spectacular, could experience Joy often ...
will be suggested by the success of someone else.
But then there is a challenge!
If they can do it, why not us? Will we seek for the reasons why we cannot and others should not, or will we seek for the reasons of how we can also and why and if others can hope for the same?
|
